July 11, 2007

Finally -- a definition of "critical mass"

In light of the recent Supreme Court decision outlawing Seattle and Louisville "diversity" plans for public schools, Ward Connerly highlights the illogic of the diversophiles ... and finally brings to light just what that "critical mass" is that University of Michigan administrators argued for in their 2003 affirmative cases:

"Critical mass" means that it is important for a sufficient number of "minorities" to be enrolled on campus so that they not feel "isolated." When the number of blacks dropped at UC Berkeley following the passage of 209, the opponents of 209 argued that the drop in black enrollment created a "hostile environment" for those enrolled. "Critical mass" theory also means that the remainder of the student body needs to see enough black faces so that they can benefit from "diversity."

As Connerly points out, this didn't seem to be necessary for James Meredith, the first African-American admitted to the Univ. of Mississippi. Nor, would I add, does it seem to be necessary for any non-black student currently attending an Historically Black College.

Connerly highlights Justice Clarence Thomas' line in the recent SCOTUS case which stated "If our history has taught us anything, it has taught us to beware of elites bearing racial theories." Indeed. "Critical Mass" is one that we should "beware" of since there is little to no impirical scientific evidence to support it -- much like the theory that "diversity equals [academic] excellence."

Posted by Hube at July 11, 2007 09:32 AM | TrackBack

Comments  (We reserve the right to edit and/or delete any comments. If your comment is blocked or won't post, e-mail us and we'll post it for you.)

I note that our country was built on the principle of diversity -- how much more evidence does one need?

Each merging group and religion, from all over Europe and Asia, have managed to meld in, while preserving some of their native cultural values. This has been the ideal, and has met with great success, for all except for our African slaves, here for well over 300 years. So to our glory must be added our shame.

Granted, the reasons for our continuing discrimination against our black Americans are complex with failures on both sides. Do we now throw in the towel?

Of course there have been some examples, like James Meridith and even Justice Thomas, and many others of talent, fortitude and determination, but by and large the average black has been condemned to a ghetto life with little hope for better times. Not only squeezed from above by a rather low glass ceiling, in recent years they are now being squeezed from below by illegal immigrants. A drive through any big city (Wilmington included) impoverished ghetto is more proof of this problem than anyone needs to see to internalize it.

The most viable solution for black Americans, which unfortunately many have not even yet bought into, is quality education and a culture that absorbs it. By whatever method, efforts must continue to provide this opportunity for our black citizens and our impoverished populations.

Of all the people who should acknowledge the need for quality education for the impovrished, that should be Clarance Thomas. He doesn't, so do not too many others who should know better.

Posted by: Perry Hood at July 11, 2007 10:11 AM

Perry -- your initial premise is wrong, rendering the rest of your commentary irrelevant. Our nation was built on the principle of liberty, not diversity.

Besides, as my minority students regularly point out, being serious about a quality education is "acting white". You wouldn't want to destroy their diversity by forcing the white man's education down their throats, would you? That would be cultural imperialism! [/sarcasm]

Posted by: Rhymes With Right at July 11, 2007 10:41 AM

My premise was poorly worded, you are correct, Hube, about liberty too.

Let me restate my premise: Our country has a history and culture based upon diversity, I daresay more than any other nation in history. What follows from that (see above) is now relevant.

One more correction: Justice Clarence Thomas is against affirmative action, not quality education for the impovrished as I inaccurately stated. http://volokh.com/posts/1182098837.shtml

Posted by: Perry Hood at July 11, 2007 05:19 PM

Hube? Sorry, that's Rhymes With Right, who has his own website, too. He and I don't comment under fake names ... like you sometimes do, right, Perry?

Posted by: Hube at July 11, 2007 06:37 PM

Is Hube a fake name? Would I find Rhymes with Right in a phone book. I only went to my pseudonym when my posts were not being accepted by your site, Hube, during your golf outing. Fess up! You are seriously fearful of free speech. Moreover, how many of your responders here have the fortitude to use their full names in order to stand fully behind their opinions? Not even you, Hube!

Posted by: Perry Hood at July 12, 2007 08:48 AM

Perry: Your comments were always accepted, if not occasionally edited b/c you didn't follow our rules. Don't start playing games again or you WILL be banned from here, got it? Rhymes With Right is a long-established weblog -- as a matter of fact it was HE who helped Rhodey and I SET UP Colossus two years ago. "Hube" is my common nickname. I always post/comment under that name, as does Rhymes With Right. You, however, played games with a recent pseudonym, b/c ... well, who really cares why.

Free speech, Perry? Until you actually can comprehend its meaning (which you can't yet, obviously) stay away from calling others out on it.

Posted by: Hube at July 12, 2007 10:33 AM

And all you have to do to find my full name would be to google my first name (available on my website) and the name of the website to find ourt both first and last name -- the latter of which "rhymes with right" as I tell my students.

Posted by: Rhymes With Right at July 12, 2007 11:16 AM