UCLA Liberal Students for Racism
By Garin K. Hovannisian
October 7, 2003
On Wednesday, October 1, a group of vivacious students gathered in
UCLA's Bruin Plaza to hold a demonstration opposing Proposition 54,
which calls for an end to California's classification of students,
contractors, and employees by race.
The rally began when a student approached the microphone and yelled,
"We don 't got the money like Ward Connerly and all the Republicans
in Sacramento, but we've got the power of our voice." Then, one of
the leaders of the rally began, with a sizeable audience following, the
extended chant, "We are what diversity look like! This is what
diversity look like!"
But the arguments against Prop 54 that the demonstrators presented were
not well-articulated and were completely obscured by their emotional
rants and by digressions into unrelated topics. A one-page handout
entitled "NO to the Information Ban" that was being distributed by
my picketing peers better encapsulates the four main reasons given to
reject the Racial Privacy Initiative.
The first reason is "Health"-"Information on healthcare is
critical for healthcare professionals to understanding who is most
affected by certain diseases". True, but we must remember that Prop
54 is only against government's use of race as a category, not a
private hospital's or a healthcare provider's. In any case, the
initiative explicitly states, "Otherwise lawful classification of
medical research subjects and patients
shall be exempt from this section." The first argument is grounded
in either a misreading or a fabrication of the text of the Initiative.
The second reason is "Education"-"Statistics show that the state
falls short of providing a sound, quality education to all children
without regard to race, color, or national origin." Putting aside
the valid case against a state-sponsored education system, this
statement is also true. Nevertheless, its union with the anti-Prop 54
crowd is rooted in a blatant conceptual contradiction. If a student
should be accepted to a college
"without regard to race, color, or national origin" (as the flyer
puts it) then "race, color, and national origin" should not be a
factor in admission board judgments. Only when the evaluator does not
know the applicant's race will the possibility of racial
discrimination be eliminated.
The third reason is "Safety"-"Statistics are essential to law
enforcement and community groups in fighting hate crimes." Sure, the
only way that discrimination by police (I personally don't believe
this is a rampant
problem) or criminals can be curbed is by collecting racial data. That
is why Proposition 54 plainly states, "Exemptions include: law
enforcement descriptions..."
And finally, the fourth reason is "Employment"-"In the year 2000
alone, more than 27,000 reports of employment discrimination were filed
in California-race being the number one basis of discrimination."
Here, it is essential to note that the classification of a given person
by race will lend no more credibility to the employment discrimination
reports than they already have. The only effect of racial categories
is the increase of discrimination in that race can potentially (and is,
under affirmative action) a factor of employment.
If the demonstrators were to stick to the factual battle-plan, they
would have been dead wrong. But by turning the demonstration into a
disgustingly political issue, the organizers crossed the boundary of
civilized taxonomy. The demonstration, in fact, was the nexus of
anti-American, anti-recall, pro-union, and Leftist opinions dressed in
the guise of "diversity." One of the speakers concluded her speech
with, "No on Prop 54 and no on the recall." Another led the
participants in a song: "We are the union; mighty, mighty union."
Still another voiced her depleted view of America. And yet another
claimed that "[minority] access to higher education will be
impossible". And, finally, in an irritated tone, "Prop 54 says
that race doesn't matter!" At that point, the objective observer
would know that this was not a clash between two political groups but
rather a debate between two worldviews-a debate between anachronistic
victimizers and Americans.
The opponents of Proposition 54 reflect a social vision in which color
takes precedence over character; race over intelligence. It represents
a world in which, as one of the speakers would have it, "Race would
matter." The opponents to Proposition 54 believe that race is
important in college admissions and employment. This is what the
plantation owners thought.
Thirty minutes into the presentation, I noticed a lone student,
standing toward the back of the stage, holding up a sign that read,
"Yes on 54. No to bigotry." Then, slowly, two demonstrators,
carrying a bigger sign-prettier too, I admit-that read "Vote no on
Prop 54" besieged and covered the lone student and his ordinary
hand-made banner. It makes you wonder how they can claim, "This is
what diversity looks like."
.
|
