The Problem With Diversity

On The Takeaway (also NPR, it was a long drive) today some elitist “experts” were discussing a recent poll on diversity and affirmative action.  They made absolutely no sense.

For one, they were genuinely perplexed that although a majority of Americans are in favor of diversity on campus, 75% are not in favor of affirmative action, as if they were the same thing.  Their apparent assumption was that “diversity” meant exact proportional representation. One of them smugly put it down as “liking sausages, but not wanting to see how they are made.” They said that people who thought race was the deciding factor in affirmative action decisions were confused.

HELLO! If race isn’t the deciding factor, how is it affirmative action?  And if two equally academically qualified people are decided between by race, how is race not the deciding factor?  Idiots.

What these “experts” didn’t understand is that Americans expect their educational systems and workplaces to be meritocracies. That means they want people of all races to be considered on their merits.  Diversity plus meritocracy will never mean exact proportional representation. Apparently it means more Asians and fewer of everyone else… I’m fine with that.

One of the women went on to say that Americans value diversity because they know the best education occurs in diverse environments where students are exposed to people with “a variety of experiences and ideas.” LOL! As if today’s college classrooms weren’t echo chambers that forbid any ideas other than far Leftist dogmas to be uttered. It reminded me of a line from a movie: “We have both kinds of music, Country and Western.”

Clueless.

Fear Fans Hypocrisy

On the NPR program 1A this morning, one of the segments had Bob Woodward as a guest and he had some interesting things to say about his new book, Fear, and the Trump administration.

I trust that Woodward has gotten the story 95% right although I distrust anonymous sources, like anonymous accusations.  He has a long and reputable track record writing about nine presidents and he stresses that he corroborates information that makes it into the book (although presumably with more anonymous sources). I also thinks he plays up aspects of the book that will sell it. Thus only 95%.

What occurred to me, though, is that many of the Trump-deranged people praising Woodward and touting this book as gospel today are the same people who called him a “hack” a few short years ago for using anonymous sources to claim Hillary Clinton had an ugly side to her personality and headed up misogynistic efforts to discredit Bill’s “women” as “nuts and sluts.”

I am so glad to be off that carrousel…