Mr. Mayor and Council,

I wished to comment upon the recent endorsement by City Council of "diversity" in the New Hanover County school system, discussed at last week’s Council meeting.

To encourage racial, social and economic diversity, which are undefined in the resolution, is to go against the valued traditions of the United States—the hallmarks of this country and its people are freedom of association, and free enterprise. Those hallmarks encourage citizens, regardless of color, to work hard and enjoy the economic advantages that come with success. This was the view of the great Booker T. Washington.

Diversity has become the reason to bless giving members of one race reference over another, and as William Graham Sumner has rightly observed, "an immoral political system is created whenever there are privileged classes." The goal of diversity is not found in the United States Constitution and was invented by those who believe that racial balance is more important than race-neutral standards. Their view is that the end justifies the means, that is, having a specific number of ethnic students or employees. This socialist viewpoint is based on the belief that society prospers overall when goodies—be they jobs, or college admissions—are distributed to all groups in society, regardless of ability or merit. This is not a system that belongs in a free republic, and free citizens, and it robs high achieving students of a quality education, given instead to someone on the basis of skin color.

There is no doubt that in today’s political and social environment, diversity actually means uniformity.

We have much local experience with "diversity" at UNC-W, which has a full time Office of Diversity, and it has demonstrated the real intent behind diversity in the speakers and events it brings to campus. The local campus is no different than other public universities today that show a widespread and pervasive bias against Christian and conservative groups—despite having full-time offices of Campus Diversity. To demonstrate the type of diversity UNC-W engages in, an Association for Campus Entertainment spokesperson stated in March, 2003 that the infamous rapper Ludacris was invited to perform on campus “to promote diversity.” Mr. Ludacris commonly uses racial slurs, denigrates women and makes references to violence in his lyrics. Due to his offensive music, Pepsi pulled a national ad campaign featuring Ludacris and national news shows have called him a thug. This same office in Sept. 2004 announced three speakers invited on campus, one Puerto Rican, one Gay and one Indian. One will look in vain for a non-ethnic minority, religious or conservative speaker who was invited by the college, though this would usually spark unrest from the student population, conditioned to appreciate "diversity."

What "diversity" means to higher education today is Orwellian speech codes, cultural audits, sensitivity training, racial preferences and racial climate assessments to determine if diversity goals are being met. Diversity of opinion is not tolerated, and everyone is inculcated with identical sanitized opinions which shows that the ultimate goal of diversity is uniformity. This is a system where no one is encouraged to excel, but to be "equal" in all respects, thoughts and endeavors—this is not the American tradition, and this is not a university of free inquiry and thought.

We know that the future leaders of our community will not come from a dumbed down and leveled school system—they will come from the ranks of those children who today are free from the intellectual fascism of the diversity movement, and most likely from private or home schools. The most important aspect of the latter’s education will not be a forced "diversity" to numb their minds, but an encouragement to excel academically regardless of who they are sitting next to. And a rigid discipline in the classroom, free of thugs and drug-dealers will enable those future leaders to listen, learn and achieve high academic honors.

Regarding the real need for "diversity" in schools, George C. Leef, Director of the Pope Center for Higher Education in Raleigh, has recently stated:

“Diversity is virtually nonexistent at what is called Historically Black Universities and Colleges (HBUC) where there is little or no effort to recruit a “diverse” student body, hire a “diverse” faculty, or create a “diverse” curriculum. Are the graduates of those institutions handicapped in some way by the lack of “diversity” around them as they go about their studies? Does a Shaw University graduate necessarily have trouble dealing with whites, Asians, Hispanics and others differing from him in countless other ways? The answer to that question, I believe, is a strong “No.”

It’s the great conceit of modern liberalism that if good things are to happen, then they have to be arranged by government. The diversity movement is just the latest variation on that theme: if we are to have a harmonious society, government needs to engineer schools so that they replicate society in miniature. Diversity initiatives have become the badge of honor among education administrators, but if they abandoned them and went back to basing decisions on merit instead of factors that supposedly make schools diverse, they’d be making the right move.” Rightly stated.

Simply put, diversity is a smokescreen for racial preferences that fly in the face of a reasonable policy of color-blind standards in public tax-supported facilities.

Instead of a commitment to the evils of diversity, I encourage the Council to rescind the previous resolution, and strongly commit to an endorsement of excellence in education, scholarship, and the responsibilities of citizenship; and stand firm against the social engineering and theories that are the basis of the socialist mantra, "diversity." This social engineering may work in North Korea or Cuba, but it should be shunned in the United States.

The encouragement of intellectual freedom, which diversity is the enemy of, will result in a bright future for our region, our economy and its citizens.

On The Web: