With the Supreme Court to rule on affirmative action this session—Fisher v. University of Texas—and our university to design a new Diversity Plan—our previous plan expired in ’08—I thought it appropriate to take a look at the idea of diversity as tied to ethnicity and address its misguided and racist nature. It’s a touchy subject and I really hope that I can have an open conversation with individuals about the topic. Feel free to comment on the article online or send me an email at snemcek@wisc.edu.
First of all, let me start by acknowledging that society says I am a White, Anglo-Saxon, Protestant, a WASP. I am in the “majority” demographic and people who also identify with these characteristics statistically vote conservatively more so than other ethnic groups. As such, WASP is the group that many leftist news commenters and feminist bloggers love to pick on.
CNN recently ran an article admonishing white representatives in the federal government. The Huffington Post wrote that the GOP is, “almost shockingly—un-Americanly—white.” The feminist blogging site Jezebel ran an article the past Tuesday evening railing against white men, stereotyping us as a group that voted for Mitt Romney because he “looked” like a president, implying that we are all racist. A recent post on the blogging site Tumblr asking, “do you ever wonder why WASPS exist?” had nearly 10,000 shares. And on a personal level, I’ve spoken with individuals in my political science courses who have wondered aloud why it’s fair that white men are a majority in congress.
So, let me just state my personal view on this rhetoric and the idea of grouping people by skin color first and then I’ll get into the specifics about the University of Wisconsin-Madison’s new diversity plan and my opinions on that. There are a couple issues that need to be addressed.
First and foremost, I am a human being. People that society labels as African-American, Asian, Hispanic, etc. are also human beings. America is a culturally diverse place, a melting pot of individuals, and our rights are bestowed upon us because we are human. Our rights come to us as individuals, not as groups. We are each endowed by the same chromosomal count as other humans and there is no difference between me or anyone else of a different race that is solely due to skin color. Any differences in rights based on skin color are long gone from our society.
However, it is true that remnants of past harms linger. The socio-economic status of minorities is often different than that of whites. I will fully admit this, and the only way in which we can alter socioeconomic outcome is to wait and ensure that all people are given the freedom to work and move their way in their socioeconomic status, if they so wish.
The problem comes into play when an entire “color” of people is stereotyped as being interchangeable. Are all minorities poor? Are all whites rich? Do all whites vote the same way? Do all minorities vote the same way? The answer to these questions is, of course, no, and when we stereotype people based on a completely irrelevant factor such as skin color, we are entwining racialized rhetoric and thought into our society. These actions slow societal progress because when we unfairly group people, we do not look at them as individuals.
If we are to move beyond the sins of the past, we must look at people as unique individuals with unique backgrounds and unique stories to tell. Policies such as affirmative action do the opposite; they make broad claims about a person based on their ethnicity that simply may not be true in today’s society. Does every minority need preferential treatment because there is a correlation with poverty in minority groups?
We can answer this question with another: Is every minority poor and underprivileged? Of course, modern-day arguments for affirmative action bring up the need to have “diverse” student bodies, citing studies that show that having individuals of different ethnicities in the classroom enhances learning. But we’ve already answered this point. If all people are equal, regardless of skin color, how can an African-American student or an Asian student or a Hispanic student automatically be any different than me solely based on skin color? If we’re all equal, how does having a different color skin affect learning in any way?
If you want to make the argument that mixing students with different socioeconomic backgrounds enhances learning, fine, make that argument. That’s inherently not what is going on when admissions officers examine the box we checked to identify our ethnicity. There are already means on collegiate applications where an individual can tell his or her life story and any extenuating circumstances he or she may have faced growing up. In these sections, students can write about their struggles with poverty and the admissions committee can take these factors into consideration. Why is that ethnicity box necessary? What does skin color or ethnic heritage mean if we are truly all equals and if we want to view each other as such?
The Office for Equity and Diversity states that it “promotes, integrates and transfers equity and diversity principles to nurture human resources and advance the mission of the University of Wisconsin-Madison.” Due to our shared-governance philosophy at the university, this organization will be working with students, faculty, ASM representatives and staff to develop a new Diversity Plan for this university. When they do, I would encourage them to consider whether or not an individual’s skin color means anything at all.
When the university looks to promote equal access to all individuals, it should look to a person’s economic opportunity, not his or her skin color. When the university looks to promote diversity, it should look to an applicant’s essays or activities, not his or her ethnic background. There exists diversity among all people, not just among people of different skin colors, and any dismissal of this obvious claim is offensive. When we group people and give them opportunities solely based on their ethnicity and race without looking at the individual, it is racism. We can give opportunities to economically disadvantaged students and we can provide a diverse student body without looking at ethnicity and I would encourage the planning committee to look into ways in which they can codify this ideal. We are not defined by the color of our skin and the university should not seek to define us in this way.
Please send all feedback to opinion@dailycardinal.com.
