Government Sanctioned Racism at American Universities

Lewis Loflin

Rice University in Houston, Texas is proud of its achievements in racial diversity. The student population has been reduced to only 43% white as racist' quotas and anti-white racism has become the norm. Instead of relying on qualifications, colleges now resort to a number of tactics to lock out high-achieving whites to make room for less qualified blacks and Hispanics.

To quote the New York Times June 13, 2011,

" applicant's racial identification can become an admissions game changer. This can be especially true during the 'committee round' in early spring, when only a few dozen slots might remain for a freshman class expected to number about 1,000."

The question is how to deal with mixed race students. A Mr. Munoz vice president for enrollment at Rice since 2006 who heads Rice' racist diversity quota system tells it like it is:

"From an academic standpoint, the qualifying records, the test scores, how many AP courses, they may all look alike. That's when we might go and say, 'This kid has a Spanish surname. Let's see what he wrote about.' Right or wrong, it can make a difference..."

"If a kid is unsure, I say check multiple boxes. If they're Caucasian and African-American, I'd let them know that it would probably be beneficial to put yourself down as African-American or multiracial. I'd be giving them information, not saying, 'Do this,' wink, wink."

What if they really don't "look alike" and they need to fudge the figures to make affirmative actions quotas? To further quote the New York Times, making sure the student isn't stupid enough to put down white or Asian,

" Rice, the chances that a multiracial applicant might be admitted have climbed over the last five years to 23 percent this year. (By contrast, the admission rate for the freshman class as a whole this year was about 19 percent.)"

This kind of blatant racism was supposed to have been outlawed with the Regents of the University of California v. Bakke case in 1978. But liberal racists have resorted to a number of ways to cheat white students on admissions to colleges. Instead of going by grades and merit, they use subjective criteria such as extracurricular activities, recommendations, and membership in organizations. One can bet membership in a Latino organization will carry a higher rating than the 4-H Club will.

This of coarse allows the bias and politics of the overly left-wing faculty to disqualify whites for almost any reason. Because many diversity departments are loaded with non-whites (sanctioned none the less by self-hating white liberals that are often behind this), the future of qualified white students are held hostage to idiots like this. This falls heavily on working class, rural, and poor whites whose culture and values are viewed with hostility in our left-wing college system.

The Department of Education under President Obama "started requiring universities this past school year to comply with a broad federal edict to collect more information about race and ethnicity." They want to make sure the racial spoils system can be further expanded with so-called mixed-race students. The New York Times further asks,

The new options have forced colleges to confront thorny questions, including how to account for various racial mixes in seeking diversity on campus. Is a student applying as black and Latino more desirable in terms of diversity than someone who is white and black? Or white and Vietnamese? Should the ethnicities of one's distant relatives be considered fair game, or just parents? And what should be done about students who skip the race question altogether - a sizable number of whom, some studies have shown, are white, and do so either in protest or out of fear that identifying as merely white could hurt rather than help their chances in this new environment?

Why the hell are we even considering race at all in what is supposed to be a post racial society? They claim affirmative action "is designed to help disadvantaged minorities." But how are exactly are they disadvantaged when it's these people that operate the system? Liberals operate the school systems, so what's the problem? The Journal of Blacks in Education in 2005 noted the following and that's the real problem:

In 1976 The College Board published an analysis of the racial differences in scores of the Scholastic Assessment Test (SAT). At that time the average black score was about 240 points, or 20 percent, below the average white score. When The College Board next examined the racial scoring gap in the early 1980s, the gap had shrunk to 200 points. Black scores were then 17 percent lower than white scores. By 1988 the black-white SAT test scoring gap was down to 189 points. The trend was distinctly encouraging. Many specialists in the educational community predicted that in time the racial scoring gap would disappear altogether.

But after 1989 progress in closing the SAT gap stopped abruptly and later it began to open up. For the five-year period between 2000 and 2005 the gap between black and white scores on the SAT test expanded.

In 2005 the average black score on the combined math and verbal portions of the SAT test was 864. The mean white score on the combined math and verbal SAT was 1068, 17 percent higher.

In 1988 the combined mean score for blacks on both the math and verbal portions of the SAT was 847. By 2005 the average black score had risen only 17 points, or about 1.4 percent, to 864.

Despite the small overall improvement of black SAT scores over the past 17 years, the gap between black and white scores has actually increased. In 1988 the average combined score for whites of 1036 was 189 points higher than the average score for blacks. In 2005 the gap between the average white score and the average black score had grown to 204 points.

Not only are African-American scores on the SAT far below the scores of whites and Asian Americans, but they also trail the scores of every other major ethnic group in the United States including students of Puerto Rican and Mexican backgrounds. In fact, American Indian and Alaska Native students on average score more than 104 points higher than the average score of black students. On average, Asian American students score 227 points, or 19 percent higher, than African Americans.

And those are the blacks that managed to even graduate high school to even take the exam. But it gets even worse. They try to claim income is the factor, but that claim doesn't hold up either:

But there is a major flaw in the thesis that income differences explain the racial gap. Consider these three observable facts from The College Board's 2005 data on the SAT:

Whites from families with incomes of less than $10,000 had a mean SAT score of 993. This is 129 points higher than the national mean for all blacks.

Whites from families with incomes below $10,000 had a mean SAT test score that was 61 points higher than blacks whose families had incomes of between $80,000 and $100,000.

Blacks from families with incomes of more than $100,000 had a mean SAT score that was 85 points below the mean score for whites from all income levels, 139 points below the mean score of whites from families at the same income level, and 10 points below the average score of white students from families whose income was less than $10,000.

So even if we setup a system that relying only on academic merit and income alone and reject race all together, whites/Asians would still overwhelm low achieving blacks and Hispanics. And the fact that Asians are often banned from affirmative action throws the entire claim of racism on the rubbish heap. The simple fact is black/Hispanics for whatever reason as a group can't compete based on merit.

So what do they do? Quoting The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education June 25, 2011:
In an effort to increase diversity in the student body, the UCLA administration adopted a new admissions model that followed a "holistic" approach which looks at academic merit in the context of a student's position in society. Under the new plan, a student of any race who comes from a low-income family and attends high school in an inner-city school district that has a poor record of sending kids on to college may be viewed in a more favorable light by admissions officials than a student with slightly higher academic credentials who grew up in an upper-middle-class family and attended high school in a wealthy suburban district.

This new admissions formula was highly successful in increasing black enrollments...

This never would apply to poor white students and they know it. By flooding the college system with often less qualified non-Asian minorities, we waste valuable resources as these students either drop out or are marginal workers. We lose talent as millions of qualified white students in this country simply never attend college due not only to racist' admissions standards, but also lack of income.

This will become even more critical as even college degrees are returning less and less on their high costs. Yes it's worth more than just a high school diploma, but a student needs to consider cost vs. outcome. This racist' admissions system not only ratchets up racial tensions and waste resources, but makes all minority college graduates suspect. Did they really earn that degree or was it given to them simply to support affirmative action?

College SAT scores by Race.

Ref. On College Forms, a Question of Race, or Races, Can Perplex
New York Times June 13, 2011.

The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education 2005. banner.

Female victims of black violence.


Lewis Loflin


Lewis Frog

Web site Copyright Lewis Loflin, All rights reserved.
If using this material on another site, please provide a link back to my site.