tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post4814946889928372642..comments2024-03-18T22:21:33.261-07:00Comments on The Debate Link: The Desegregation Opinions: Blogs and Media ReactDavid Schraubhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04946653376744012423noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post-90458054420647714272007-06-29T09:12:00.000-07:002007-06-29T09:12:00.000-07:00The harm isn't exactly the same: Linda Brown had t...The harm isn't <I>exactly</I> the same: Linda Brown had to go miles away to go to a <I>segregated</I> school. Joshua had to go miles away to go to an <I>integrated</I> school. That's a serious distinction. But now I'm curious--are you seriously in favor of race-specific scholarship and incentive programs? Carleton seeks to improve the flow of minority academics through its Mellon-Mays Fellowship, which is given to students of color who wish to pursue a social science Ph.D.. These would be violations of the color-blind norm as well, but you seem to think they're alright.David Schraubhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04946653376744012423noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post-31825683336319443052007-06-29T06:26:00.000-07:002007-06-29T06:26:00.000-07:00No, I'm not saying that the state is legally barre...No, I'm not saying that the state is legally barred from integrated schools -- I am saying that the state is legally barred from making school assignments based upon race for the purpose of creating integrated schools.<BR/><BR/>Now there is a way to achieve integrated school by incentivizing enrollment by members of different ethnic groups at schools where they are under-represented. Whether this is done through scholarship programs or some other mechanism is subject to debate, but a student cannot simply be treated as a pawn to be moved around the board to create a racial pattern pleasing to the powers-that-be.<BR/><BR/>Take one of the cases from yesterday. Mom seeks to enroll her son in school when she moves to a new neighborhood, and is told that the local school has reached its enrollment cap so she has to choose another school. She picks a school under its enrollment cap less than a mile away from her home, but her son is denied admission because of his race and is instead told he will be subject to a bus ride of 45 minutes to an hour each way to a school where he will fit in according to the district's racial color guide. That child has suffered a harm no different than that suffered by little Linda Brown did in Topeka, Kansas -- and it does not matter that in this case there is a benign motive for the discrimination (though I'm sure that the school board in Topeka though its plan was best for the most students, too).<BR/><BR/>Now, if the district were instead to have offered an incentive to the mother to voluntarily enroll her son at that other school, there is no harm done because it is an action of voluntary choice by the family.<BR/><BR/>Oh, and by the way, the Seattle Public Schools proves that they don't really believe that diversity is beneficial to student education by maintaining a separate African-American Academy with a 99% black enrollment and policies designed to limit non-black enrollment. If diversity is so important, how can such a program be justified? <BR/><BR/>Also, under their program a school that is 31% white and 69% black (or 51% white and 49% black) is diverse while a school that is 20% white, 20% Hispanic 30% Asian, and 30% black is not due to the dearth of white students. If that does not indicate the program is fundamentally flawed, nothing does.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post-5823024394082363102007-06-28T21:07:00.000-07:002007-06-28T21:07:00.000-07:00That's fine. If you're saying that the state is le...That's fine. If you're saying that the state is legally barred from integrated schools, I'm quite willing to describe the clash as between those of us who think the state can integrate schools and those of us who think it can't.<BR/><BR/>And I do think that the state, through subsidized housing loans and other color-conscious policies (affirmative action for students who attend integrated schools is a favorite of mine) can try and push back against <I>de facto</I> housing segregation. It can't say "you're white, you can't live here", but it can try and reshuffle the incentives so that whites and blacks choose to live near each other in matters beyond simply getting rid of outright discrimination.David Schraubhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04946653376744012423noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post-53287690736762433212007-06-28T19:12:00.000-07:002007-06-28T19:12:00.000-07:00I'd like to put a finer point on your interpretati...I'd like to put a finer point on your interpretation of my comments -- it isn't integration <I>per se</I> that is unconstitutional, but rather that <I>de jure</I> integration is unconstitutional in precisely the same way as <I>de jure</I> segregation is unconstitutional. If we are to have equal protection of the law (you know, like the 14th Amendment calls for), then government cannot distribute benefits and burdens based upon race.<BR/><BR/>Taking this out of the realm of schools and into another contentious area, government has every right to act to put an end to legally mandated racial segregation in housing, but has no place determining who can or cannot buy/rent a home to ensure the "proper" racial balance in the neighborhood.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com