The Supreme Court’s decision about race based school policies

I don’t have a lot to say about the Supreme Court’s recent decision about racial shell games in public schools beyond this: I agree with the decision. However, to the extend I do agree, I found very graceful the way the National Review Online summed up the decision’s meaning and impact:

Over the last 40 years, liberal civil-rights groups have gone from advocating colorblind policies to rejecting them. They may try to describe the new ruling, perversely, as a partial repeal of Brown v. Board of Education. Justice Stephen Breyer says as much in his dissent. Yet the decision resembles Brown in a crucial respect: Starting now in Louisville and Seattle, students won’t be blocked from certain schools simply because they lack the proper melanin content.

We are sure to hear that the Court has just encouraged the “resegregation” of the schools, but that is mostly left-wing bluster. Brown and other legislative and judicial measures — to say nothing of evolving social attitudes — put an end to Jim Crow-style de jure segregation long ago. What we have today is de facto segregation, which is better described as racial imbalance. Such imbalance need not be worrisome. As Justice Clarence Thomas noted in Missouri v. Jenkins more than a decade ago, “It never ceases to amaze me that the courts are so willing to assume that anything that is predominantly black must be inferior.”


2 Responses

  1. Same sex and same race schools have in the past accomplished wonderful things. While I would not compel same sex or same race schools, neither would I outlaw them.

  2. The government-run schools have partially resegregated and are likely to resegregate further. That’s only a bad thing if one can persuade oneself that the safety of one’s children and their exposure to constructive, civilized influences are of less importance than schools that exhibit “racial balance.”

    Where I live, we have no racial troubles to speak of. Perhaps 90% of the neighborhood is Caucasian, and the rest is Negroid. Everyone conforms his behavior to the common norms. Our streets are clean and quiet; our public places are trouble-free. Our government-run schools may be exorbitantly expensive and educationally mediocre, but the kids and teachers in them are safe. Pimped-up cars blaring pain-threshold “rap music” — yes, those are “sneer quotes” — out open windows are unknown here.

    Were it otherwise — were any identifiable segment of our populace given to aggressive departures from public order or peaceable conduct — I would expect the rest, if it could not bring the offenders back into line, to depopulate the area. When whites do this, it’s called “white flight.” But it’s actually a retreat from mounting incivility and a relocation to somewhere public order and peaceable conduct still prevail.

    It’s a pity that such relocations so often fall along racial lines, but it’s also a symptom to be studied. Why do youth unruliness, gutter talk and behavior, and physical violence correlate so well with majority-black and majority-Hispanic districts? What brought it about and what can be done about it? If we refrain from noticing the patterns and asking the obligatory questions out of PC aversion to racial subjects or fear that some Sharptonesque grievance-monger will lead a protest in front of our businesses or homes, we’ll never know, and the problem will not be solved.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: