Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
TOP NEWS   LeftArrow - Townhall.com   RightArrow - Townhall.com  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
Monday, July 17, 2006
Mike S. Adams :: Townhall.com Columnist
The Associate Vice Chancellor of White Guilt
by Mike S. Adams
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
 
Poll
Who should John McCain pick as his running mate?














My university recently announced the appointment of Dr. Tamra Minor as our new Associate Vice Chancellor of Institutional Diversity. Dr. Minor said her appointment illustrates that the entire university leadership is now serious about the commitment to diversity and the promotion of a “culture of inclusiveness” at UNC-Wilmington. I respectfully take issue with her socially constructed interpretation of reality.

As a preliminary matter, this Associate Vice Chancellor of Institutional Diversity position is not actually a new position at all. The name of Dr. Minor’s old position of Director of Campus Diversity was simply changed to sound more important. Her previous salary of $84,000 hasn’t changed either. She’ll do the same job for the same money despite making this grand statement in a university press release:

“(M)y major focus will include identifying strategies to enhance the culture of UNCW by assisting students in developing the intellectual, social, emotional, cultural and civic capacities essential to lead in a global economy.”

Dr. Minor’s statement that she will help students develop the “emotional capacities” that are “essential” to lead in a “global economy” could not be further from the truth. Directors of “diversity” - or even “institutional diversity” - always have the opposite effect on minority students. Without fail, they encourage minority students to be hypersensitive and, thus, deprive them of the emotional maturity needed to function in any economy, global or otherwise.

In my experience, the more money a school spends on “diversity initiatives” the more minority students complain. And, sadly, this also causes non-minority students to walk on eggshells around them. This, in turn, produces a form of accidental segregation, which only serves as a supplement to the university’s intentional segregation. In fact, this intentional segregation is one of exactly three unstated goals of the diversity movement:

1. To promote racist discrimination.
2. To promote non-racist discrimination.
3. To promote racial separatism.

I am fairly certain that every reader knows the meaning of racial separatism. But the distinction between racist and non-racist discrimination is not widely understood. The former is any initiative that seeks to increase minority presence on campus by lowering standards for minorities, usually blacks.

For example, in a recent press release, UNC-Wilmington made reference to Dennis Carter - an associate vice chancellor for Academic Affairs - who has been instrumental (in the school’s opinion) in supporting efforts on behalf of minority students at UNCW through programs such as “Great Expectations.” Often, when diversity initiatives make mention of “great expectations” they are simply concealing the fact that the initiative actually sets lower expectation for minorities. I classify these initiatives as “racist” forms of discrimination because they so often reinforce notions of black intellectual inferiority. This is both tragic and counter-productive.

But other forms of discrimination have nothing to do with racism in the purest sense. For example, initiatives that seek to retain minority faculty members - by paying them much more than whites – do not reinforce truly racist stereotypes. But this minority hush money does prove that affirmative action is no longer necessary.

Remembering these three goals of diversity helps achieve insight into why Dr. Minor was hired for this “new” position. It wasn’t because she is bright (though she is). It wasn’t because she is a nice person (though she is). It wasn’t because she’s attractive and skilled socially (though she is both). She was given this job simply because she is black. Continued...

1 2
| Full Article & Comments | Next >
Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Mike Adams is a criminology professor at the University of North Carolina Wilmington and author of Feminists Say the Darndest Things: A Politically Incorrect Professor Confronts "Womyn" On Campus.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to receive Mike Adams' column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Subject: You're Next!
Think that thought-crimes can't affect you? Think again.

The art of politics in a democracy is as much illusion as reality. Hate crimes legislation represents a boondoggle. Hell, even Sen. Hatch supports a federal hate crimes law. Why? CALCULUS.

Supporting thought crimes legislation is a no-brainer. No one really cares if low-lifes who commit such crimes don't get a "fair" trial. There is no "constituency" that opposes thought crimes. One would think that universities would be the exception. But speech codes prove the inverse. And what about conservatives?

The level of outrage among conservatives over hate crimes legislation is hard to gauge. Many other issues vie for attention. There is also a sense that punishing hate crimes proves that the rest of the left's race agenda is gratuitous. A public willing to prosecute racists cannot be racist, right?

There are too many upsides to supporting hate crimes laws, especially for politicians. So why did President Bush oppose such laws in Texas, despite withering criticism?

Because he is a man of integrity and principle. As his execution of the war on terror proves, Bush sees farther than most. Bush knows that hate crimes laws are not only gratuitous but dangerous to America. George Bush's stance on immigration has hurt his status among conservatives. I would offer up his stance against hate crimes laws as a counterpoint. A person of Bush's proven courage and integrity should not feel abandoned during time of war by his own constituency, especially over an issue as complex as immigration.

The article by Mr. Adams is on point. He recognizes that the war for the American mind must be fought one word at a time. Also that behind much of the posturing over discrimination are persons whose reputation and power are fed by the racist myth.

I applaud him.
http://brainsnotchains.blogspot.com/

Vice Chancellor of White Guilt
I predict the Hispanics at UNC-Wilmington will try to assassinate Mike Adams, that's how they promote their diversity.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone: