You don't say! So discrimination against one race and for another is good for us, eh? Apparently so, say the diversifiles. Via discriminations: Inside Higher Ed discusses yet another study finding that eliminating affirmative action would be bad.
"... even if there are some dubious benefits to the use of racial preferences, they are overwhelmed by the costs: It is personally unfair, passes over better qualified students, and sets a disturbing legal, political, and moral precedent in allowing racial discrimination; it creates resentment; it stigmatizes the so-called beneficiaries in the eyes of their classmates, teachers, and themselves, as well as future employers, clients, and patients; it fosters a victim mindset, removes the incentive for academic excellence, and encourages separatism; it compromises the academic mission of the university and lowers the overall academic quality of the student body; it creates pressure to discriminate in grading and graduation; it breeds hypocrisy within the school; it encourages a scofflaw attitude among college officials; it mismatches students and institutions, guaranteeing failure for many of the former; it papers over the real social problem of why so many African Americans and Latinos are academically uncompetitive; and it gets states and schools involved in unsavory activities like deciding which racial and ethnic minorities will be favored and which ones not, and how much blood is needed to establish group membership.
Rosner’s response to the above? An attack on ... the Bush administration.
Lawyers have long been advised to argue the law if their facts are weak and to argue the facts if their law is weak. Now we have what might be called the Liberal Corollary to that sage advice: When your argument is weak, attack Bush."
Read the whole thing, but I like the way John sums it up in the end.
