:: Netmarcos' Notes ::
Musings and rambling commentary on current events, politics, music, and other cultural issues mixed with a few personal references.
| [:: (re)search ::] | |
|---|---|
| :: google :: | |
| :: Dog Pile:: | |
| :: Charters of Freedom :: | |
| :: ThomasPaine.org :: | |
| [:: news and opinion ::] | |
| :: Opinion Journal :: | |
| :: National Review Online :: | |
| :: FOX :: | |
| :: MSNBC :: | |
| :: World Net Daily :: | |
| :: The Drudge Report:: | |
| :: InstaPundit :: | |
| [:: blogosphere ::] | |
| :: Day by Day Cartoon :: | |
| :: James Lileks :: | |
| :: ScrappleFace :: | |
| :: Moxie :: | |
| :: The Dissident Frogman:: | |
| :: Insignificant Thoughts:: | |
| :: Dave Barry :: | |
| [:: España ::] | |
| :: Atlas of Spain :: | |
| :: EL MUNDO :: | |
| :: DIALNET::Búsqueda de articulos científicos en español | |
| :: Prestige: exigimos responsabilidades | |
| [:: archive ::] | |
:: Monday, April 21, 2003 ::
Peter Wood on Gratz v. Bollinger & diversity on National Review Online asks what John Payton meant by "I think that decision which would say that we have to choose, would be a Hobbesian choice here.
His defense of racial preferences in undergraduate admissions was amazingly inept. Listening to it, I began to wonder whether diversiphiles are paying an unexpected price for having ostracized all dissenting opinions for the last two decades. Perhaps by having refused to debate the issue on campus, they now don't know how to debate it in Court.
No, that's probably not it. Maybe Mr. Payton was just having a bad day. Justice Scalia asked him why, if the University of Michigan put such a high value on diversity, it didn't just lower admission standards for everybody. Mr. Payton thought that approach would impose an unwelcome choice, which is what prompted his remark about a "Hobbesian choice." What in the world is a Hobbesian choice?
It is a great read and a scathing indictment of the diversity movement with a gentle touch, brilliantly done.
:: Mark 2:42 PM [+] ::
...
Comments:
Post a Comment
