The Racism of "Diversity"

Anti-Subversion, Inc. ^ | March 24, 2003 | Peter Schwartz

[Lando Lincoln]

A departure from my usual posts. Had to break away from Iraq for awhile. A good, logical piece, I think.

Lando

[Mears]

Nice post! I just call it the "D"word it's become so overused.

[kcar]

Exactly what is "Diversity" and who authorized it as a legitimate priority in education, above reading, writing, and mathmatics? It sounds like recognition of biological collectives over the real diversity that respectfully occurs when people are individually free. Maybe the diversity programs should be referred to as biological collective presumptions and grudges that persist and are harbored by vote-gatherers for a very long time, while they think of other ideas that might actually qualify as ideas?

[MIgramma]

One could only wish!
President Bush did mention the "soft rascism" (or something like that) of low expectations. It seems to me that is relevent here.
To automatically grant someone special priviledges because of their race or sex is to scream that they are incompetant to achieve on their own.

[hollywood]

What school of ideas or specific thoughts can be attributed to just one race? If someone could prove that one race is the only race that can solve x, and that another race is the only race that can solve y, then there may be a case for diversity. However, since problem solvers come from all races, no one can say that diversity of thought and ideas is needed to spread ideas across races.

[hollywood]

My second sentence sounded better in my head than how I typed it. It should read: "However, since x and y have been solved independently by more than one race, no one can say that 'diversity' is needed to spread ideas and thoughts across races." No cross-trainers needed. (Sorry, Nike.)

[Reactionary]

Thanks for posting this.

[Travis McGee]

What be "x"? Who be "y"?

[Texas_Jarhead]

Yes, good piece. Diversity Bookmark

[hollywood]

I figured you would reply in that vein. As always, your ebonics be flawless. However, I'm serious. I would like my abstract logic to be debated by the "agents of change", or in front of the Supreme Court in this case. (At the least, here on FR.) I'm sure the diversity proponents would try to deal more with feelings and cultural differences (food, music, dress, etc.), but that is not what forced diversity is all about: it's the ideas, they always say. Here is an argument against that tenet.

[Varda]

A good piece and he is right on. Racism is the belief that culture is inate. Diversity says that just because someone decends from a different ethnic group; he has a different culture. Enforced racism on campus makes college worse for minorities not better.

[hispanarepublicana]

Bookmarking

[Cosmo]

The supreme court should define diversity as religion, and thusly claim its disseminaion in the public sphere unconstitutional.

[oyez]

Its time to dump the race criteria. Diversity is the movement designed keep the country Balkinized and erase the country of it Eurropean & Judeo-Christian root. (As if we didn't already know that here at FR)

[Wavyhill]

The authors of the Michigan enrollment policy are no different from the Muslim who killed his fellow soldiers with a hand grenade.

[hollywood]

Perhaps x can only be solved by one race, and y only by another. Maybe the diversity proponents know this, but are ashamed to admit it, as it would be the end of the equality mantra. This is not my position; it is just the other side of my logic presented above. My overall point is; prove one side or the other to maintain or eliminate forced diversity.

[hollywood]

BTTT

[hollywood]

BTTT.

[FreeSpeechZone]

bump

[hollywood]

Bumpity-bump.