The "diversity" spoils industry

...among mostly middle class suburbanites, Hispanic surnames, and in some cases particular ethnic profiles—not demonstrable racial prejudice or even legitimate ongoing collective grievances—earn affirmative action consideration for everything from federal jobs to college admissions. And this new generation (one that will be paying our debts off despite a “normal” 10% unemployment rate) suspects further that someone like the assistant principal, Miguel Rodriguez, who sent the flag-wearing boys to the office, cannot tell them why, for example, a third-generation Mexican-American student would be entitled to special consideration, but a first generation Punjabi-American or Lebanese-American would not. Surely affirmative action is not based on comparable distance from being “white,” ongoing racial prejudice, or claims of past unfairness. In other words, I fear we will see more Live Oak “moments” as those of the Obama (who once called for more “oppression studies”) generation cannot quite figure out the labyrinth of a now fossilized “diversity” spoils industry that allots preferences and rewards contrary to the entire spirit of the original civil rights movement—by accentuating rather than deemphasizing racial and ethnic difference.

***

Ninety-five percent (95%) of those who work in the private sector think companies should be allowed to require their employees to speak English on the job, a view shared by just 69% of government employees.

Over 80% of whites, blacks and those of other racial and ethnic backgrounds agree that requiring people to speak English is not a form of racism or bigotry. These groups also agree by similar percentages that such a requirement is not a limit on free speech in this country.

Eighty percent (80%) of voters believe that those who move to America should adopt American culture. Again, this level of support has remained largely unchanged for years.