Race not determining factor for diversity

Friday, May 15, 1998

Race not determining factor for diversity

DIVERSITY: Admissions based on skin color don’t sufficiently
benefit intellectual community

By Patrick Vincent

Proposition 209, which ended affirmative action in public
institutions, will, by all estimates, result in a massive decline
in minority student representation in the fall freshman class.

While reactions to the admissions statistics have ranged from
disappointment to rage, most concerns have centered on the reality
that UCLA will soon be a less ethnically diverse environment. Carol
Peterson, special assistant to the chancellor, summed up the
sentiment well: "The academic community is greatly distressed at
these low numbers. The excellent progress that has been made in
achieving a diverse student population is now being hindered by the
fact that fewer students (of various races) are coming to
campus."

Questioning the relative importance of racial diversity,
measured against such other factors as academic integrity and
reverse discrimination, is not an undertaking to be relished. To be
sure, no rational person would hold the view that racial diversity
is bad. Yet, an obsession with ethnic representation has developed
in some quarters, and it is rooted in presumptions for which no
proof has been offered.

For many academic courses of study, the racial composition of
the students under instruction is clearly irrelevant. There is, for
example, no unique Latina perspective for solving differential
equations. There is not a particular "Irish methodology" used to
make sense of inorganic chemistry, nor is a generalized African
American approach to beam stress analysis known to exist. In
mathematics, the pure sciences, the engineering disciplines and
many other technical fields, ethnicity is inconsequential to the
learning process.

One might rightfully respond that there is more to an education
than math, science and engineering. What of the social sciences?
What of law? What of history? Won’t the students in these subjects
benefit from exposure to persons of varying cultures, ethnic
backgrounds and racial viewpoints?

The answer is, of course, yes – provided that the forces which
effectuate this beneficial environment do not generate even greater
concomitant negative consequences. Again, the conventional wisdom
should be reexamined.

Consider, for example, History 147A, "U.S. Civil War and
Reconstruction," which examines, among other topics, the
anti-slavery crusade, the war years and the reconstruction period.
The question is: Would this material be better learned and
appreciated by students if their classmates were from ethnically
diverse groups? The reflexive answer is "of course." Yet the
sweeping forces and great ideas examined in a study of this period
of American history include freedom, justice, human rights and the
power of government – concepts that are race-independent. To be
sure, throughout history, various races have enjoyed or have lacked
freedom and rights; various peoples have been used for good, or
have been victimized by, the power of government. Nevertheless, the
philosophical ideas themselves transcend skin color and
language.

Consider, as a second example, the School of Public Policy and
Social Research course M202C, "Urban Affairs." This course examines
aspects of government housing subsidies, market discrimination,
rent control and problems with housing supply. Suppose, as a
thought experiment, that all the students with confirmed
enrollments are middle-class whites, with one open spot remaining.
Two students apply for this last seat in the class: one African
American and one additional white person. The instructor, who has
authority to select the final student, has decided to choose the
student who will best enhance and contribute to the learning
environment, given the topics under consideration. Which student
should be chosen? Suppose the African American applicant is the
daughter of two doctors and the white applicant is from a poor
inner-city neighborhood. Now, does the answer change?

Consider, as a final example, History 10A, "Introduction to
Civilizations of Africa. " Is there any logical reason to suppose
that an African American student, whose ancestors may have departed
the African continent 10 generations ago, possesses some special
insights and critical sensitivities concerning African history,
based solely on his skin color? Of course, the presence of this (or
any other) hypothetical student may greatly enhance the course, but
such contributions will be manifestations of his intellect, not his
skin pigmentation.

The post-affirmative action admissions statistics for the
incoming undergraduate class casts doubt upon whether UCLA has ever
in the past managed to obtain peer diversity. It would appear that
in the days prior to Proposition 209, different intellectual
standards were applied to different applicants based solely upon
their race. If the goal of the diversity crusade is to enhance
appreciation of different cultures, it is hard to see how this
cause is helped by bringing together diverse ethnic groups that
greatly differ in their intellectual capabilities. Will "Group A"
necessarily gain a better appreciation of "Group B" if the
objective, measurable intellectual powers of "Group B" students are
a full standard deviation below those of "Group A" students?

Ultimately, the benefit of diversity must be weighed against the
upshot effects of the policies necessary to achieve it. In the
past, diversity, which we all desire, was achieved by
discriminating against whites based solely upon their skin color –
an action that we all detest. The courts of law and public opinion
have ruled that the state may not discriminate against an
individual based on his race, unless an overriding compelling
societal interest exists – and even in that eventuality, there are
restrictions attached.

Proponents of affirmative action have yet to even begin making
the case that there exists such a strong overriding interest in
achieving diversity, that the government is justified in barring
from UCLA a highly qualified white applicant who has worked hard
and played by the rules, simply because he is white. Instead of
reasoned arguments, proponents spend time offering feel-good
slogans and, for the recalcitrant, insults. They declare that
affirmative action to achieve diversity is good because … well,
because they say it is. But I will disagree.