Once again the media is wringing its hands over the reduced number of blacks at Berkeley and UCLA, and once again those who support racial preferences and thus oppose colorblind equality are blaming this “sharp decline” on Proposition 209, with which the citizens of California barred state agencies from taking race into account in college admissions, hiring, contracting, etc.
You’d think that after all this time (Prop. 209 was adopted ten years ago) the critics of equality would have gotten their stories straight, but they haven’t.
“The numbers are staggering for African Americans. It’s just over 3 percent of the group admitted at UC Berkeley, and it’s less than that — 2 percent — at UCLA and UC San Diego,” said Kimberly Thomas Rapp with the Equal Justice Society. “We are talking about elite public institutions here in California, and this is happening at a time when the number of African Americans eligible is increasing, and we’ve seen an increase in African American applicants to the UC system.”
….
“Of those who are accepted, less than half actually enroll,” said Rapp. “They would rather go somewhere they can be amongst a diverse student population and have access to a diversity of views, backgrounds and input. They are going to Ivy League universities and other prestigious colleges.”
But UC Chancellor Robert Birgeneau, “an outspoken critic of Proposition 209,” looks at the reduced numbers of blacks and says, “This is a tremendous waste of talent.”
Is Birgeneau saying that attending Ivy League colleges is a “waste,” or merely that attending any institution in California (or elsewhere) other than Berkeley or UCLA is a waste?
The reduction in the number of admitted minorities is a measure of how extensive racial preferences were before they were banned. No doubt many, perhaps most, of the now rejected minority applicants who would have been admitted to Berkeley or UCLA under the regime of race preferences are talented, but it is ridiculous for Birgeneau to claim that those talents have now been “wasted.” Are the remaining campuses of the University of California system, the entire state college system, and all of the city colleges and junior colleges a wasteland? Is Birgeneau even aware of how he has insulted the entire higher education system of California by his assertion that being educated anywhere other than Berkeley or UCLA is a “waste of talent”?
As for those who are admitted but choose not to attend, perhaps Rapp’s rap is correct. Perhaps all those who turned down Berkeley and UCLA did so because they prefer the more “diverse” Princetons, Dartmouths, Cornells, etc. Perhaps they are angry at institutions that admitted them based only on their qualifications, preferring instead to attend schools that give them special preferences because of their race. Insofar as that is the case, it seems to me that Berkeley and UCLA are better off without them.
I would not be shocked if a black student, intelligent enough to beat out the best for a spot at Berkley or UCLA, was also intelligent enough to realize that a diverse education (as opposed to a diverse student body) would better be found elsewhere.
Berkley, especially, has a poor reputation in regards to tolerating diverse viewpoints.
If the folks at Berkley or UCLA are as concerned about the racial make-up of their campuses as they claim to be, then presumedly they would be taking on California’s powerful education unions. The way these unions run California’s public schools are not the only reason different races perform at different levels, but they certainly are due a large part of the blame. Apparently, however much having diverse campuses may be to these institutions, maintaining the union’s stranglehold on public education is ever slightly more important.
I bet he would know how to spell Berkeley correctly, as well.
(my apologies if you followed my lead, fritz)