by Benjamin Kepple
I must say that I have actually gained a measure of respect for the often-bashed (admittedly, by myself and my organization) Women's Issues Commission of the Michigan Student Assembly (MSA). As this goes to press, the Affirmative Action Symposium is just beginning, with all the attendant bells and whistles. I've been privy to a small part of the planning, and I must say that the Commission's intentions were actually above board, and that they did a great deal of hard work in planning the whole shebang. Of course, they are at the tender mercies of a Michigan Student Assembly whose sick machinations would, instead of funding something useful to the student body, fund numerous lobbying trips to Washington and Lansing and God knows where else on the North American continent ("Ooooh! Look, Erin! A student government leadership conference in Puerto Vallarta!" "Gosh! Everyone will be there ... and we can do so much information sharing ... hook us up!").
But as usual, I fear that the Affirmative Action Symposium shall fail to do any good. While there are some on the Assembly who have the unthinkable arrogance and gall to assume the student body "knows nothing about" affirmative action -- you know who you are -- there are others who generally care and would like to hear what the student body has to say. However, since the Assembly, as (do suppress the urge to vomit) "the official student voice on campus," has already decided to support the University's affirmative action policy, they will most likely suppress this strange urge to listen to the student body. It is no surprise, for it would be rather embarassing for a referendum to occur on affirmative action completely refuting the Assembly's position. I would not be surpised if this same denial of a referendum on that issue will be carried out in the manner affirmative action was supported: with a weak-willed resolution typical of that vacillating, spineless, no-account so-called governing body. MSA, which has again proven itself to be the embodiment of mediocrity, elected by a vast 10 percent of the student body, would do well to keep silent on the entire issue, lest they be accused of not only being irrelevant, but also be barbecued alive by sharp-tongued pundits and activists from within and without the University.
So if the affirmative action symposium fails to bring true debate, and the Michigan Student Assembly has no debate, who then shall be the standard bearers of the affirmative action debate? Who shall lead the assembled armies of activists and propel themselves, a la South Park, against the very buildings housing the evil and corrupt belligerents on the opposing side?
BAMN MEMBER: We shall defend affirmative action by any means necessary! WE SHALL TOPPLE THE WHITE MALE PATRIARCHY! FREE MUMIA! The people shall feast upon the bones of the evil right-wing racist conspirators! The blood shall flow with the streets of the unbelievers!
REVIEW EDITOR (outside office): I'm sorry?
BAMN MEMBER: AHA! You're one of the conspirators! (to other BAMN member) Look! He's one of the conspirators! Quick! Give him many pamphlets and stand outside the door of the Review's office! We can watch as he opens the mail! He must be doing something evil! OH NO! He has a copy of ... The American Spectator! They get it in the mail! You FASCIST BASTARDS!
REVIEW EDITOR: Hey! Keep it down out there! (to phone) I'm sorry, you were with ... Roasted Spleen records?
This is what it comes down to, really. Angry, irate opponents of affirmative action on one side, with angry, irate proponents of affirmative action on the other. Of course, the failure of the proponents to present a coherent argument free of logical flaws is somewhat troubling. After all, we don't want the arrogance of MSA representatives to prove correct, even when we are dealing with a great many students who do support affirmative action. However, for those of us who are gleefully cheering on the Center for Individual Rights in their lawsuit against the University, it is somewhat pleasing. Allright, immensly pleasing.
And given that, let's take off the gloves. There are rather a lot of annoying half-truths, outright lies, and other muck circulating about affirmative action, and ninety-eight percent of it is floating around in the form of weakly formulated defenses of affirmative action.
ONE. Today's latest defense about using race in admissions is that "it is one of a variety of factors." This is supposed to, ladies and gentlemen, make it all better, but I digress. Have you ever noticed how no one ever mentions what weight is given to these variety of factors? And furthermore, aren't GPA and SAT/ACT scores also factors?
In fact, when you look at the patently illegal (declared so last year, dear readers) "index" system that the University now uses to deny students, you will find that race is given by far more weight over curriculum, whether you are an alum, or what not. It is given so much weight that those little extras matter nothing when it comes to admittance. So what does this in effect do? It creates a newly-formulated grid system, in which lesser qualified minorities are admitted over more qualified whites. This has been shown. The University documents prove it. Need we say more? Just because you substitute one form of racism for another does not somehow justify it.
TWO. Scrapping affirmative action will lead to resegregation of higher education.
Oh, for God's sake.
First off, how anyone that defends a system embracing racial quotas can somehow then turn around and claim that rampant resegregation is going to occur is simply mad. They are off their rocker. The elevator doesn't go to the top floor. Quite frankly, when we do scrap affirmative action, the one group that will gain the most will be the Asian population of the nation. In fact, at many of the major California universities, more qualified Asians were rejected in favor of less qualified whites and other minorities when affirmative action programs were in place. Would the affirmative action proponents kindly explain how this is going to somehow solve racial discrimination, when Asians have arguably endured as much or more of it during the post-Civil Rights era?
Furthermore, black and Hispanic students are not going to be shut out of the realm of higher education. Qualified individuals should have nothing to fear, no? Every few days now, there is some kind of news story about how Virtually No Minorities are entering this law school or that graduate program. However, where are they entering? Just because they don't enter into Harvard doesn't mean that they are suddenly forced into the Working World, now does it? No one seems to look at the numbers of minorities enrolling in second and third tier schools where they will receive a fine education as well.
THREE. The evil right-wing is conspiring against people.
There also is a lot of disinformation being spread about those of us who support affirmative action, and I am going to hope that people aren't believing any of it. To proclaim that those of us who happen to support racial equality through the universal application of merit to collegiate admissions are some kind of Nazi spawn bent on restoring a fascist-esque system of higher education, not to mention in society itself, is absolutely ridiculous. I truly hope that no sane-minded, free-thinking individual would believe such utter bunk.
So now that my two cents have been thrown into the realm of public debate, I hope it will at the very least cut through some of the carbuncle and rot being perpetuated. Whether this will do any "good" is a matter for debate of course, but that, along with every other subject known to man except for affirmative action, seems to be a debate that can be argued in a civilized manner.
Benjamin Kepple is Editor-in-Chief of the Review. He is a Senior majoring in History. You can e-mail your praise or nasty, snide remarks to him personally at bjkepple@umich.edu, or praise and/or complain about him to the Review as a whole at mrev@umich.edu.