Wednesday, June 24, 2009

Vicious Academic Liberals

Walter Williams on diversity, colorblind admissions in colleges and the consequences. At the University of California's nine campuses, Asians comprise over 40 percent of the student body, this after the system started admitting the top 12.5 percent of California's high school graduating class. The shocking thing about that top 12.5 percent is that it is dominated by Asians who actually study. That, according to Williams' account of teh UC Regents reaction, makes them boring.

Forgive me, but I thought college was about an education and all that other stuff was "extra-curricular" including things like sports, clubs, activities, etc. Williams makes this analogy:
To deal with the Asian "menace," the UC Regents have proposed, starting in 2010, that no longer will the top 12.5 percent of students based on statewide performance be automatically admitted. Students won't have to take SAT subject matter tests. Grades and test scores will no longer weigh so heavily in admission decisions.

This is simply gross racial discrimination against those "dull" Asian students who "study, study, study" in favor of "interesting" black, white and Hispanic students who don't "study, study, study."

This is truly evil and would be readily condemned as such if applied to other areas lacking in diversity. With blacks making up about 80 percent of professional basketball players, there is little or no diversity in professional basketball.

Even at college-level basketball, it is not at all unusual to watch two teams playing and there not be a single white player on the court, much less a Chinese or Japanese player. I can think of several rule changes that might increase racial diversity in professional and college basketball.

How about eliminating slam dunks and disallowing three-point shots? Restrict dribbling? Lower the basket's height? These and other rule changes would take away the "unfair" advantage that black players appear to have and create greater basketball diversity. But wouldn't diversity so achieved be despicable? If you answer yes, why would it be any less so when it's used to fulfill somebody's vision of college diversity?
A fair question.

No comments: