Diversity Without Divisiveness, Solution for Affirmative Action

Author: Stephen Clarke

Having read many opinion pieces on affirmative action and studied the topic from a legal point of view, I believe that there are two key myths that must be dispelled before I can fairly discuss the case for affirmative action.
Myth One: The debate over affirmative action is about fairness. In matters as emotional as race and racism, few people are actually concerned about fairness. The more pressing concern for the majority of people in this country is that favoring racial minorities in university admissions seems to grant minorities a "privilege." Though many believe such a leg up is necessary to compensate for the oppressive effects of both past and present discrimination, a broader and whiter majority feels that minority applicants who are unfairly favored threaten their chances for admission to university. As a result, the debate over affirmative action is driven by self-interest rather than by questions of fairness.
Myth Two: Diversity has no effect on our education. By pursuing affirmative action policies, universities across America have attempted to create a "critical mass" of racial and ethnic minorities on their campuses. Though this does not represent a hard quota, a "critical mass" is generally agreed to be around 10 percent minority enrollment. If you believe that this talented tenth adds nothing to Middlebury's campus, I would advise you to attend this spring's RIDDIM show and take a long hard look around the room. Then ask yourself how different this college would be if every single face in that room was white. Would we even have a dance group such as RIDDIM? If the Supreme Court strikes down affirmative action and swift measures are not taken to promote diversity through means other than race, minority enrollment at Middlebury could easily decline to around two percent or less.
I, for one, have difficultly imagining what Middlebury would be like if it became more racially white than it already is. Unfortunately, my fears about Middlebury's future do not instantly make me into a supporter of affirmative action. It is difficult to prove in a court of law that diversity is in fact a compelling state interest that justifies the use of race as a factor in admissions. In the cases currently before the Supreme Court, the University of Michigan has argued that students perform better academically and take greater interest in their studies in a diverse classroom environment. This is due to the fact that racial diversity leads to a diversity of opinion because of the way in which one's race shapes one's personal experiences. However, as an appellate court judge noted, such arguments "walk a fine line in simultaneously arguing that one's viewpoints are not determined by one's race but that certain viewpoints might not be voiced if students of particular races are not admitted in significant numbers." Due to the self-contradictory nature of the argument in favor of diversity, I believe that diversity is not a compelling state interest in the field of higher education and that the legal case for affirmative action is fundamentally flawed.
Nevertheless, this does not mean that I believe we can afford to lose the racial diversity that we have worked so hard to create. Instead of using race as a factor, colleges could use a mix of other factors that would not only target specific races, but would target all students unfairly disadvantaged within our society. Institutions of higher education could easily promote diversity by favoring students from lower socio-economic backgrounds, failing school districts or urban areas. This is because a hugely disproportionate number of minorities attend failing schools, are from lower socio-economic backgrounds and are from our nation's inner cities. By aggressively working to promote diversity without using race, colleges and universities could maintain their diversity without causing whites to fear that they are losing out because of "reverse discrimination." Moreover, well-qualified racial and ethnic minorities would be free from accusations that they gained admission by means of their skin color. As a result, I hope that the conservative majority on the Supreme Court strikes down affirmative action and forces institutions of higher learning to create diversity without creating the divisiveness that results from using race as a factor in admissions.

Stephen Clarke is a history major from Barrington, R.I. He is currently studying abroad.