Legal Commentary

?Diversity? STEM-Selling, Release 2.0

A few weeks ago on Minding The Campus I discussed The Misguided Push for STEM Diversity, noting that every month or so (or so it seems) a new report appears pointing with alarm to the ?underrepresentation? of women or blacks or Hispanics or Aleuts (or usually all of the above) in the STEM fields of science, technology, engineering, math and outlining STEM-?diversity? steps that must be taken in order to save the nation from destruction by competition in the ?new global economy.?

I?ve written about these reports too many times to cite, most recently here, here, here, and here, which cites several earlier posts, and now I?ve gone and done it again today on Minding The Campus, and I encourage you to take a look there at More ?Diversity? STEM-Selling. I returned to the subject yet again, you will have guessed, because there is yet another new report saying the same old things.

One of those same old things is the implication that because of ?the new global economy? or some such our very national survival depends on attracting more women, black, and Hispanic mathematicians, engineers, and scientists. Excuse me for asking, but why? Do Intel, IBM, Hewlett Packard et al. need more Hispanic engineers and technicians to make more culturally sensitive computer chips?

The legislative history of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 makes it abundantly clear that ?customer preference? was no justification for employment discrimination. Employers were barred from excusing their refusal to hire blacks by arguing that their customers would go elsewhere if they did. Now, however, those who demand ?diversity? in science imply that we must abandon colorblind admissions and hiring because of some unspecified desire by foreigners that we do so.

So, Query: if it is legitimate for universities and employers to give preferences to blacks and Hispanics to help us compete and do business [with Asians?] in ?the new global economy?, does that mean it?s also legitimate for companies whose business is concentrated with Arabs or Muslims to ?take gender/religion into account? ? as only ?one of many factors,? of course ? and give preferential treatment to applicants who are neither Jewish nor male?. Would it have been legitimate for companies doing business in the old South Africa of apartheid to refuse to hire blacks?

Discriminating minds want to know....

Full post as published by Discriminations on April 30, 2010 (boomark / email).