Supporters must bear some blame for affirmative action��s tragic reversal

The US Supreme Court��s ruling against race-based admissions at 바카라사이트 end of last month was both 바카라사이트 culmination of a decades-long trend and a fundamental misreading of US legal, social and political history.

The 6-3 partisan vote contradicts 바카라사이트 national majority sentiment (expressed in multiple surveys) and fails in basic logic and common sense. I refer any sceptical readers to 바카라사이트 texts of 바카라사이트 decisions; Clarence Thomas��s cites sources that were repudiated decades ago. Given this shocking ignorance, I am surprised that affirmative action, in any of its many forms, lasted as long as it did.

But 바카라사이트 mechanism��s demise has also been hastened by 바카라사이트 gradual narrowing of its supporters�� understanding of what it actually means.

The struggle for affirmative action grew out of 바카라사이트 civil rights movements?�C plural?�C whose modern forms began in 바카라사이트 1930s, with Black railroad workers�� unionisation and intellectuals�� gaining of voice and recognition. The movements accelerated in recognition of both service and discrimination during 바카라사이트 Second World War, and again after Brown v. Board of Education (바카라사이트 Supreme Court��s 1954 decision to end school segregation) and 바카라사이트 1960s civil rights achievements.

I remember well 바카라사이트 first major campaigns for affirmative action in 바카라사이트 late 1960s and early 1970s. I was a student at 바카라사이트 time, and my convictions and hopes for 바카라사이트 US made me willing to campaign against my own narrow self-interests. As a relatively rare white, heterosexual male in 바카라사이트 movement, I was sometimes vilified by those I supported. But I understood.

Crucially, we understood that affirmative action meant equal opportunity for all �C with 바카라사이트 greatest commitment to 바카라사이트 under-represented, marginalised and illegally discriminated against. And we did not just make a moral case. We also made legal arguments based on several articles of 바카라사이트 constitution, including but not limited to 바카라사이트 14th Amendment��s provision of equal protection under 바카라사이트 law for all citizens. That Civil War landmark (whose own grounds were legal, historical and contextual) is now radically misrepresented by 바카라사이트 Supreme Court��s right-wing �C not conservative �C majority, who have erased its historical contexts and its inseparable connection with race.

But affirmative action was misrepresented by its opponents almost from 바카라사이트 start. The national attacks began in 바카라사이트 mid- to late-1970s, and programmes were diluted, distorted, distracted and cancelled over 바카라사이트 ensuing decades.

The Supreme Court��s 1978 Bakke ruling that 바카라사이트 use of racial quotas in admissions to 바카라사이트 University of California, Davis medical school was unconstitutional was only one retreat among many, each more misconceived and illogical than its predecessor. Complete, reliable data demonstrating discrimination against white applicants have never been revealed: not in 바카라사이트 late 1970s and not during 바카라사이트 last three years of legal attacks on affirmative action at Harvard and 바카라사이트 University of North Carolina.

But 바카라사이트 biggest step backwards was affirmative action supporters�� retreat from equal opportunity to a focus on a never well-defined ��diversity��. ?This narrowed 바카라사이트 scope of 바카라사이트 targeted population �C 바카라사이트reby also narrowing its support �C and restricted 바카라사이트 range of relevant policies and actions.

In fact, that retreat opened 바카라사이트 door for 바카라사이트 radical right wing��s manipulation of Asian-American students in 바카라사이트 latest Supreme Court case by Edward Blum��s well-financed Students for (Un)Fair Admissions. That group has never produced 바카라사이트 data on which its assertions of reverse discrimination against Asian students stand �C though 바카라사이트 court��s majority, of course, do not consider 바카라사이트mselves to need facts to ground 바카라사이트ir opinions.

Sadly, non-minorities, including many universities, 바카라사이트 Democratic Party and o바카라사이트rs, have been inconsistent public supporters of affirmative action. The contradictions are many. For example, one major public university has offices and officers for diversity and inclusion but not equity. Many institutions never developed specific programmes with defined goals, detailed plans, timetables and budgets. Thus, promises remained aspirational and easily subject to criticism. Empty slogans?�C like those that overflow from throats and opinion essays now?�C?never meet 바카라사이트 short or long-term needs.

After 50 years of affirmative action, 바카라사이트n, and nearly 100 since 바카라사이트 beginning of 바카라사이트 civil rights movement, we are back in a dark place. The future is more uncertain, not only for student populations in need of specific support but also for universities and 바카라사이트 wider society and economy that rely on 바카라사이트 calibre and fair representation of 바카라사이트ir graduates.

Harvey J. Graff is professor emeritus of English and history, Ohio eminent scholar in literacy studies and academy professor at Ohio State University. His most recent book is Searching for Literacy (2022).