Discriminations

Supporters of racial preferences often attack their critics as “divisive.” In fact, just about everywhere nothing is more “divisive” than governmental preferences based on race or ethnicity or religion. That’s why, as I argued at some length here, our Constitution wisely banned religious preferences, and should be interpreted to ban racial and ethnic preferences as well.

Evidence for the above proposition abounds, such as this just in from Malaysia:

More than 30 years after it was launched, Malaysia's national development policy to promote Malays risks becoming a flash point that splits the politically dominant Malays, unsettles racial peace and weakens the economy.

Discontent is growing as years of affirmative action have left a trail of failed Malay tycoons and struggling Malay-managed conglomerates.

At the same time, Malays - the policy's target group - continue to constitute the poorest group in Malaysia. The economic costs are mounting: foreign investment is falling as investors baulk at rules that keep strategic assets either in Malay or government hands.

Malaysia has also lost some of its best and brightest as non-Malays kept out of universities by racial quotas move to Singapore and other countries....

In the past, affirmative action created a Malay middle class and made millionaires out of Malay fishermen's sons.

But many Malays say that over the last few years, the policy has strayed from its original aim of fostering competition among the group and mainly enriched only a small elite, while many rural Malays still live hand to mouth in wooden huts.

Malays, also known as bumiputras (sons of the soil) gripe that well-connected businessmen - rather than deserving candidates - have been handed billions of dollars in state contracts....

Malaysia may have to forsake affirmative action or risk having its economy lag behind.

This is a debate that, as I recently pointed out here, famous former NAACP Legal Defense Fund attorney Jack Greenberg would like us to have, since such a debate would be inevitable if the quotas he supports were introduced. It would no doubt be an interesting debate, as suggested by Greenberg’s own comments about “the effect of the rising Hispanic and Black middle class” on the continuation of affirmative action:

Although civil rights organizations from both communities have worked together, he said most Hispanics don’t have the moral argument that arises out of the history of slavery that Blacks have.

“But they do have the argument that society will prosper to the extent that Hispanics are given the opportunity to fully contribute their abilities to society,” he said.

Greenberg was not quoting as explaining why Hispanics need discrimination in their favor in order “to fully contribute their abilities to society.”