Posted on 03/02/2003 4:06:14 AM PST by sarcasm
Sometimes it helps to take a look back and see just how far we've come.
In a response to the Brown v. Board of Education decision ordering the nation's public schools desegregated, William F. Buckley Jr.'s guidebook to conservative thought, National Review, declared the following in the summer of 1957:
"The central question that emerges -- and it is not a parliamentary question or a question that is answered by merely consulting a catalog of rights of American citizens, born equal -- is whether the white community in the South is entitled to take such measures as are necessary to prevail, politically and culturally, in areas where it does not predominate numerically? The sobering answer is yes -- the white community is so entitled because, for the time being, it is the advanced race . . .
"National Review believes that the South's premises are correct. If the majority wills what is socially atavistic, then to thwart the majority may be, though undemocratic, enlightened . . . Universal suffrage is not the beginning of wisdom or the beginning of freedom."
In those days blacks were frozen out of the mainstream of American life, routinely turned (or shoved) away not just from public schools, but from hotels, restaurants and movie theaters, from most trades and professions, from polling booths and hospitals, from even the semblance of a shot at equal opportunity.
To be black was to be condemned to an environment of perpetual humiliation. My father swallowed his journalistic aspirations and lived out his life as an upholsterer. The Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., cruelly harassed to the very end, was widely derided as "Martin Luther Coon."
That was not so long ago. So in some sense it's remarkable that by the end of the 20th century so many battles against racism had been won and a broad national consensus in favor of a more tolerant, more inclusive society had been reached.
The task in the 21st century is to build on those victories and that consensus. Which brings us to affirmative action.
A glance at the challenges to affirmative action in higher education would show little more than the fact that a number of white applicants have asserted in court that they were illegally denied admission to college or law school because of preferences given to racial or ethnic minorities.
That is their right, supported by many principled people.
A closer look at these challenges, however, would show that they are largely being driven by a huge, complex and extraordinarily well-financed web of conservative and right-wing organizations that in many cases are hostile not just to affirmative action but to the very idea of a multiracial, pluralistic America.
A new book by the Institute for Democracy Studies in New York -- "The Assault on Diversity: An Organized Challenge to Racial and Gender Justice," by Joe Cokorinos -- documents this effort to roll back a proud half-century of progress toward social justice and a more inclusive society.
The driving force behind the Michigan University cases, for example, is the Center for Individual Rights, a right-wing outfit that in its early years, as Cokorinos noted, received financial support from the Pioneer Fund, an organization that spent decades pushing the notion that whites are genetically superior to blacks.
We need to see this picture more clearly. There's a reason so many mainstream individuals and groups, and some of the nation's largest corporations, have filed briefs in support of Michigan's effort to save its affirmative action programs. The United States is a better place after a half-century of racial progress and improved educational opportunities for racial and ethnic minorities and women.
We have all benefited, and voluntary efforts to continue that progress, including the policies at Michigan, are in the interest of us all.
Justice Lewis Powell, who wrote the controlling opinion in the Bakke case in 1978, eloquently addressed the matter of campus diversity when he said "a robust exchange of ideas" is of "transcendent value to us all."
An unchallenged right-wing war against the very idea of diversity will turn us back in the direction of the noxious beliefs spewed out by National Review in 1957.
Bob Herbert is a columnist with The New York Times. Copyright 2003 New York Times News Service. E-mail: bobherb@nytimes.com
Good point- sad though it is.
What people (pro-AA) have forgotten is that this statement by Dr. King, while giving minorities opportunities they did not previously have, also infers a responsibility, namely to be judged purely on their merits rather than racial factors.
Good point- sad though it is.
As much as I hate to admit it, the almighty dollar is almighty amongst whites too. While this may be because we seem to bear the bills for all this affirmitive action, it still remains true. The dollar is almighty amongst all ethnic races.
Only a few elderly, extremely religious people seem to be able to see differently than the masses.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.