Well, it looks like many have given up on the concept of equality and have decided that - hey - we like the idea of discrimination - let's make it the law.
First came the Coast Guard Authorization Act, which Congress approved last fall.
This gave the Coast Guard Academy - for the first time - the leeway to consider an applicant's sex, race, color and religious beliefs as it shapes the makeup of its classes. The act struck down the provision in the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations that prohibited the academy from considering those characteristics of an applicant.We convered that earlier - but this article from TheDay in CT is just full of wonderful second and third order effects.
Hidden behind a fluff of "outreach" - which everyone agrees should be done and is good - there is the core of what they are actually doing.
The academy looks for well-educated, physically fit students who have demonstrated leadership in their high schools and communities. The sorting of applications eventually gets to a point where all the remaining students are qualified, but the number of places is limited.Let's play a bit with round numbers, simplify and shorten for demonstration purposes - "operationalize Diversity," so to speak.
At that point, Burhoe said, it would be appropriate to consider the composition of the class in making decisions.
As you start to rack-and-stack them, you see that there is a natural grouping at the top you know are good to go. Let's say that is 200 people. Easy cut.
You go back into the pile. This time you have 800 people competing for 600 spots. You rack-and-stack them. You see another natural grouping at the top, let's say 200, and you also see a group at the bottom. You take the top 200 and cut out the bottom 100. Now you have 500 people competing for 400 spots. You're almost in the crunch.
You can find another top-200 and bottom-100 and you're through the crunch. Tough, but fair.
What happens now? From the sound of it - now we have the Diversity Commissariate come in with their color wheels and abacuses. There are different ways to execute a racist selection policy, this is one - though they all follow the same mentality.
They tell you that your efforts are not in alighment with the goals of The Party. You must increase your minority numbers by 100.
What happens then? Well, you go back into your stack of 800 and seperate them into racial categories. You will be given "goals" to meet. Your first step will be to go to the over-represented pile, probably the white males and possibly asian males (depending on how they are counting them this year). You will take out 100 of them.
You will then go through your reject stack and do the same. You ignore the white stack and probably the asian stack (we have discussed anti-asian activity by Diversity Committees before) and then try to find the best candidates in the reject stack per minority group in order to meet your "goals."
Bingo: you now have your numbers. Of course, when you take the 100 people removed from the initial selection and compare their objective criteria as an aggreate with the 100 "goal makers" - you will have a statistically significant difference between the two groups in their objective criteria. The reasons are complicated but well documented. This has been demonstrated in court cases for decades. It is how it works.
All of them meet "minimum criteria" - but some people are more equal than others.
That is why the law needed to be changed. If you cannot discriminate - which is what the law used to be - then people had to stand by the content of their character; not the color of their skin. Now, thanks to the last Congress - the USCG can actively discriminate not just on the base of race, creed, color, or national origin ---- oh joy of joys; it can now discriminate on the basis of religion as well.
So, is this the country you want to live in? Is there any society in human history that has prospered under a system of racial and/or ethnic spoils?
This brings up another topic. SECDEF Gates has spoken often about the need for Moral Courage by leaders to oppose those things that are bad. Admiral Mullen also set the example during DADT where, even though DADT was the law of the land, he thought is was wrong and said so - and even helped with its repeal.
We also had the Attorney General of the United States state that we are a nation of cowards when it comes to race - and he is right. Good people are terrified of speaking out against the Diversity Industry becasue if they do, they are afraid of being called nasty names and their careers destroyed.
Where does that leave us? Well, listen to what leadership is saying. If they support this policy it tells you one of a few things:
- They support a policy that is at its core based on discrimination based on race, creed, color, national origin, or religion. There are names for people who conduct their business from that framework - I'll let you figure it out.
- They think the policy is wrong, but they lack the Moral Courage to speak out against it. There are words for people who act like that as well.
That position is not one I agree with - but I understand it and think on the margins I can respect a person for holding that position. If that is your position though, it is not your job to then become a cheerleader. Just execute your orders in silence and hope that the courts or the new Congress will change things. If you are a cheerleader though - you are #1 or #2.
For the parents of young men and women who are applying to the USCG Academy whose were unfortunate enough to have DNA from Europe, North Africa, The Middle East through to the Indian Subcontinent (and maybe Asia) - well there are other options. Don't feel guilty because in the Navy we have Flag Officers who have done this and gotten away with it their entire careers.
Change your children's ethnicity. In my family we can pick white, American Indian, and/or Hispanic. If you try hard enough, you can too. Just find a grandparent or great-grandparent and roll with it.
Do two wrongs make a right? No - but as my friends who grew up in Communists countries would tell me - a "Comrade!" here and there is worth it to be able to get on with your life.
If you don't like that - then you may want to contact your Congressman or find a good Civil Rights organization, such as the Center for Individual Rights. Good luck.