Just like a three-year-old defiantly staring down a plate of overcooked Brussels sprouts, I told the world I was not going to write about race stuff this month. I even promised my 16-year-old son that no matter what, I was not going to be The Rake’s resident “spook by the door,” spewing endlessly about skin color. However, that was all before president Bush ordered his Justice Department minions to prepare a brief opposing the University of Michigan Law School’s affirmative action plan before the United States Supreme Court. (I am a graduate of that law school—go Blue!)
In 1978, a pre-med student named Allan Bakke convinced the Supreme Court that the University of California gave his spot to a “less qualified” minority student. According to the Court, affirmative action, if it meant setting aside spots for certain kinds of people, was bad. However, taking race into account was still okay. Now “W” says it’s not okay.
The Bushies don’t understand two crucial points. First, the term “affirmative action” is a misnomer that does not convey the duplicity of our legal system in perpetuating racial discrimination. Second, Bush does not seem to understand that making sure Americans of all hues get into our nation’s universities adds value because it enhances the education of all students. That’s a goal to be achieved in itself.
Lyndon Johnson was one of the first to use the word “affirmative” when, as he signed the 1965 Civil Right Act, he challenged America to actively reverse the legacy of government-sanctioned discrimination. I think LBJ would have done us all a favor if, at the time he signed the bill, he had said something like the following: “My fellow Americans. We are taking certain corrective measures because our society screwed over black people in a very big way. This ‘corrective action’ we are taking should be considered a ‘settlement in lieu of a lawsuit.’ We all know America stole hundreds of billions of dollars in free labor from our fellow African Americans. We raped their women and lynched their men. If they were to get together and sue us over slavery and its aftermath, it would beggar us.
“In fact, if there was ever a case for reparations, this brutal treatment would be exhibit A. However, there is not enough money in the world to compensate them, so we are going to make sure that our Negro citizens have places in our nation’s colleges, universities, and professional schools. We are going to do it to make up for the hell we put them through and because it enhances the education and training of all Americans to make sure that black people sit at the educational table, too. We are not giving them anything other than the opportunities that slavery and Jim Crow robbed them of. And, unlike Reconstruction—which was done half-heartedly and was undermined by unrepentant Southern whites—we as a nation are going to do this thing right. It will take some time—generations.”
Words like this from the beginning of what we now call affirmative action would have made it clear that America was finally taking responsibility for what American society had created. With the University of Michigan litigation, “W” has a golden opportunity to do the right thing by reminding Americans that we still have much to do. Bush could use the Michigan case as a teachable moment by emphasizing that higher education will best fulfill its mission by having racially diverse classrooms where students teach each other how to thrive in a multiracial society. Instead, the Bushies exploit “affirmative action” and “race-neutrality” (the current phrase of choice) to conjure up images of black people getting something they do not deserve, while at the same time eviscerating constitutional safeguards against discrimination.
Finally, as the University of Michigan fully understands, there is no better way to correct the ravages of past discrimination than to ensure that our nation’s universities contain black and brown Americans. Our presence at the country’s top schools adds value to the education of all students. As long as Michigan can demonstrate that race alone does not give one a spot in its law school and that, once there, all students must meet the same standards, then “W’s” cries of reverse discrimination are exposed as the shrill, race-baiting taunts they are.
Leave a Reply Cancel reply