Attaining Diversity in Higher Education

Below is my letter as published online today in the Boston Globe advocating for a different way to determine college admissions. (The paper version in the Sunday Ideas section has a different but similar title.) The foundation for this letter is Chapter 9 of my book Overcoming the Lie of Race: "Understanding Merit and the Need to Replace 'Affirmative Action.'"

BOSTON GLOBE, SUNDAY, AUGUST 19, 2018

COLLEGE DIVERSITY ISN’T JUST ABOUT MAKING AMENDS FOR THE PAST

While I applaud the revealing of the terrible impact of past racism and the eugenics movement on higher education, I disagree with the point, “The pursuit of diversity now can help universities make amends” (“Diversity in higher ed is about making amends for past sins,” Ideas, Aug. 12). The pursuit of diversity is needed not so much to amend for the past but to counteract current discrimination.

Current discrimination is contained in the tests that universities rely on to determine admissions. Test scores do not and cannot indicate who has the qualifications to make contributions to the well-being of society. The testing environment itself has no relevance to such qualifications. That environment requires each test-taker (1) to work alone and (2) to find the right answers (3) to isolated questions.

In the real world, people rarely accomplish anything without collaboration with others. Complex problems usually have more than one right answer. Real problems affect other problems, so an answer to one may impact the answers to others.

Diversity in university admissions is vital because, regardless of test scores, those who have succeeded in spite of discrimination may have more socially beneficial skills than those with less to overcome.

John L. Hodge

Jamaica Plain

John L. Hodge. a retired health care lawyer and a former professor of philosophy at California State University East Bay, writes frequently about democracy, ethics, and human rights.

Attack the Myth of “Race” and Keep but Modify Affirmative Action

The Chicago Tribune columnist Clarence Page, on May 5, 2013, noted the absurdity of the question on “race” contained in Question 9 of the U.S. Census: “How to update census’ race question.” (See image of Question 9 below.) In addition to checking “white,” or “black, African Am. or Negro,” or “American Indian or Alaska Native,” there are several additional choices that are Asian nationalities or ethnicities. (The term “Negro” will be dropped.) The question not only confuses “race” with ethnicity and nationality, it also implicitly affirms the false idea that “races” exist as biological entities. This lie is not something that the U.S. Government should be perpetuating.

Mr. Page begins the column by noting the confusion of a woman who considered herself “white” but who recently discovered that she had an African-American ancestor. Was she “white” or “African-American”? Her dilemma was published on TheRoot.com. That website also published a short article linking to Mr. Page’s Tribune column: “The Census Race Question Isn't Working.”

While Mr. Page criticizes the old “race” boxes, I did not think his critique went far enough. Thus, I posted the following comment to TheRoot.com article:

Yes, the Census form question on “race” makes no sense. But it needs more revision than you suggest. Genetically, there is no such thing as a “race.” (Even if they existed, most Americans are mixed with one thing or another--as the young “white” woman discovered.) “Races” are not biological realities but are mythical social constructs that falsely impose rigid categories on a continuum. It is a very powerful and harmful myth that we must expose as nothing but a myth. (This does not mean that “affirmative action” has to be ended--the harm that the myth has done needs to be remedied.) Thus, the census question should not ask about anyone’s “race,” but instead should ask, “What ‘race’ or ethnicity do others generally consider you to be?” That gets the information needed to monitor discrimination without affirming the myth. 
--John L. Hodge (author--JohnLHodge.com) 

A reader replied to my comment by noting the harm of affirmative action programs. This is my reply to his reply:

. . . affirmative action does not have to be based solely on color. It should take into consideration other factors and shift its focus to impoverished backgrounds regardless of color, but still address the past adverse effects of racism where appropriate. AA needs to change but not be abandoned.

As I argued in Chapter 5 of my book, How We Are Our Enemy--And How to Stop, the concept of affirmative action should not be abandoned. We cannot ignore the immense harm the false concept of “race” has inflicted on us. It is wrong to close our eyes and just say, “Too bad, but there is nothing we can do now.” Nonetheless, a shift needs to be made from a purely “racial” or gender-based affirmative action to focus more on remedying the effects of poverty and poor education regardless of the color, ethnicity or gender of the victims.

The point is that we can attack the myth of “race” and at the same time find ways to address the immense harm that the myth of “race” has caused and continues to cause.

The parenthetical statement in my comment, “Even if they [races] existed, most Americans are mixed with one thing or another,” is based on a book, DNA USA: A Genetic Portrait of America by Bryan Sykes .

Here is the absurd Question 9 on the U.S. Census Form:

Also see my previous post,  It’s Past Time to Relegate “Race” to History .