Saturday, September 24th 2005
New Politics of Race
Inside Higher Ed has an interesting article entitled, “New Politics of Race at Berkeley“:
Berkeley has had a lot of Asian American students for years, but never so many as now. Last year, according to the Office of Student Research, Asian, Asian American and Pacific Islander students made up just over 40 percent of the student body. This year’s freshman class was just under 48 percent Asian, a record high, according to admissions officials, who said that, once the final tally of registered students is completed, the number of Asian and white students on campus will be nearly the same…
Students from some of the underrepresented groups on campus have taken notice. Jacquelynn Thomas, a black third-year student who works in the Black Recruitment and Retention Center, is not thrilled that, of the 23,000 undergraduates on campus, the number of black students has been stagnant between 800 and 1,000 in recent years. Thomas did say, however, that she felt it is sometimes easier to be on a campus where the massive number of Asian students means there are fewer white students.
Last year, Thomas took part in a “Black Out” protest, where black students dressed in black and silently blocked hallways as their way of protesting their lack of a voice on campus. “Caucasian students were more vocal against us,” Thomas said. “Like the Berkeley Republicans, they’re a strong group, but it’s all Caucasian. It’s easier to cope [as a black student], the Asians are more apathetic, less hostile.”
Dude, I don’t even know what to say to this. Interesting article, nevertheless.
I feel it’s somewhat easier to be on campus where the massive number of Asian students means there are fewer black students.
It’s easier to cope [as a white student], the asians are more apathetic, less hostile.
Hmmm…
I especially like the comparison between strong groups such as Berkeley Republicans or Caucasian students. But Caucasian students is all Caucasian.
Comment by Beetle — 9/25/2005 @ 2:54 am
Asians, the new, less-scary whites!
You’re right Pat, I don’t even know what to say to that.
Comment by funsize — 9/25/2005 @ 1:17 pm
So Thomas is saying that Caucasians spoke out against blacks? And that’s why she likes Asians better? Because they didn’t say anything? Or didn’t care? I would think that getting noticed and being opposed would be better than being ignored. But hey, maybe that’s just me.
Comment by Veronica — 9/25/2005 @ 10:49 pm
Victor Davis Hanson wrote an article recently on this topic: http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110007319
“Finally, there is Robert J. Birgeneau, the new chancellor of the University of California, Berkeley. Upon arriving in the Bay Area, he quickly vowed to solve the problems he had found. Surprisingly, these had nothing to do with a decline in academic standards, deterioration in the quality of Berkeley’s key departments, or a state funding crisis. Instead, the chancellor complained that Berkeley has fewer Native American, Hispanic, and African-American students enrolled than it should–the campus was only 3% black, 9.5% Hispanic, and 0.4% Native American, in contrast with about 45% Asian-American and about 33% white. (The California population comprises 6.5% blacks, 33% Hispanics, 0.92% Native Americans, 11% Asian-Americans, and 45% whites.) Mr. Birgeneau is obsessed with racial diversity, as determined by percentages and quotas. But as we shall see, the numbers, under closer examination, may make him regret pandering to the diversity industry.
Chancellor Birgeneau blames the apparent statistical injustices on Proposition 209, the 1996 California ballot initiative that forbids the use of racial criteria in state hiring; it passed with the support of 55% of the electorate. In his view, however, democracy ought to defer to elite opinion; thus, to this Canadian academic the state’s voters were obviously misguided: “I personally don’t believe that most of the people who voted for 209 intended this consequence.”
One can learn a lot about the pathologies of the contemporary university from what its presidents say–and don’t say. A close look at the data suggests a different picture from the one implied by Mr. Birgeneau’s gratuitous lamentations about the lack of diversity. Whites, for instance, are underenrolled at Berkeley: They amount to around 35% of undergraduates versus 45% of the state’s population. Given this fact, why doesn’t the Chancellor complain about the shortage of whites on campus?
He is oddly quiet, too, about the more explosive issue of the Asian-American presence. This group constitutes almost half the Berkeley student population, even though Asians make up only about 11% of California residents and 4% of the general U.S. population. Why doesn’t Mr. Birgeneau admit that achieving his racial utopia would require deliberately reducing the enrollment of Asian-American students–presumably by discounting meritocratic criteria and test scores and instead emphasizing “community service” or other nebulous standards designed to circumvent Proposition 209? But because the new chancellor is obviously a sensitive sort, he cannot say what he apparently means: something like, “We have too many Asians, almost five times too many, and I am here to impose a quota on them and other suspect races.” Instead, he worries about “underrepresentation” of some, while denying the logical corollary of “overrepresentation” of others. The same logic applies to gender, by the way. UC campuses enroll thousands more women than men, very much out of proportion to the general population, and yet Mr. Birgeneau does not decry the “overabundance” of women.
Remember, too, that Asians have suffered a particularly long history of discrimination in California. Despite everything from immigration quotas to forced internment during World War II, they have the highest high-school graduation rates in the state, while blacks and Hispanics suffer the lowest. What, then, could we learn from the Asian-American experience that seems to render past hurdles to achievement irrelevant to present academic performance? Don’t expect Chancellor Birgeneau to take the lead in asking this question.”
Glenn Reynolds, AKA Instapundit writes about the growing underrepresentation of males. Do you think that there will be sympathy in affirmative action for men, even though 135 women get BAs for every 100 men? Not a chance.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3395977/
Comment by Zach — 9/28/2005 @ 2:24 pm
This is probably the most racist post I’ve seen in a while. This assumes Asians are willing to cave in to black people’s demands like more affirmative action that will shrink Asians to 1/4 their normal/natural numbers on the Berkeley campus.
Comment by Anonymity — 10/14/2005 @ 7:48 pm