Dennis Byrne, writing for the Chicago Tribune, recounts a incident in the South in 1967. When the former teacher told a class of mostly black students they could be anything they wanted to be, a student expressed a sentiment probably typical in its day: Yeah, right!
It was the middle of the civil rights movement. Fast forward to 2008. The nation just elected its first black president. Such was unimaginable 41 years ago.
“This towering achievement begs us to honestly and humbly reconsider affirmative action,” Byrne writes.
He posits that Barack Obama gained office without the lowering of standards associated with race preferences. Obama’s victory wasn’t just symbolic. It is very real. In order to achieve the kind of “unity” Obama spoke of during his campaign, perhaps it’s time for America to rethink race preferences policies.
Byrne asks the question many anti-preferences folks ask: “For how long is discrimination against one race required to compensate for past levels of discrimination against another?” Discrimination against one group in an effort to “catch up” another group is sloppy thinking and unsound policy. I’ve said many times that if the government starts discriminating against blacks once again, those who support race preferences will not be able to make a consistent and logically sound argument why it’s wrong.
Bryne calls for a “rational and calm re-examination” of race preferences in light of the new regime in Washington. Good luck with that!
In the 2005 Supreme Court decision Grutter v. Bollinger, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor contended that “affirmative action” would be unnecessary in 25 years. Why 25 years as opposed to 10 or 50? It’s difficult to determine how she came to that number. If having a black president in the White House isn’t enough to convince people it’s time to do away with this odious policy, what will?
Bryne’s op-ed is worth reading, as are reader comments that follow.
Comments on this entry are closed.