Supreme Court Decision

I think some people know about the recent Supreme Court ruling that declared on Thursday that public school systems cannot seek to achieve or maintain integration through measures that take explicit account of a student’s race.

This decision sparked a conversation with one of my best friends that I have know since I was 13 years old. Her name is Jessica and she grew up with me in Thousand Oaks, CA. She was one of maybe 5 black families in the area.

I wanted to write something on this Supreme Court decision. I feel that the small amount of diversity that my almost all white school had was a very precious gift for me. Diversity teaches and I don't think I would be the person I am today if that diversity did not exist. But before I write about my experience with this issue I asked Jessica to write something for the blog that gave her perspective. I think you will find it informative, challenging and entertaining. I will post my narrative in a few days. Here is what I like to call "What Jessica Thinks!"

Surprise-less Anger

It's funny how lack of surprise does not necessarily translate into lack of anger. I mean, take this scenario: The company you work for has been struggling financially and, after years of faithful, sacrificial, and productive service you find yourself laid off. You are not surprised by this; rumors of layoffs had been circulating for a while, and many in the company, including you, have been coming to work for months unsure about job security. You have even been keeping an eye out for job postings and sending out your CV.

Still, despite expecting it, the layoff will probably make you angry. I guess when it comes down to it, it's not being caught off guard that causes anger in many situations, but the consequences and the significance involved. Being forced to find a new job and face financial instability is upsetting, just as the realization that years of loyalty, hard work, and dedication often, in the end, meant absolutely nothing. So, surprise or no surprise, the anger comes.

In the same way, I guess that it has been the consequences and significance of the Supreme Court's decision to limit the use of race in school integration policies that have made me so angry. I'm DEFINITELY not surprised - racism/lack of racial understanding and discrimination of all kinds have not only been a part of US and international history, but have been key determinants of how our world is structured. But, just like the laid-off employee, I'm still angry - and this is why.

The Roberts written majority decision argued that "the way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race." To translate, the Supreme Court agrees with the mother in Louisville, Kentucky, who claimed that because her white child couldn't transfer to the public school (kindergarten) of her choice (due to a policy to maintain racial balance/diversity), the child was being discriminated against and that this is unconstitutional. In essence, the court majority is saying that current attempts to integrate schools racially amount to discrimination. That is absurd. Even more ludicrous is the claim that this decision is the path to end discrimination and is faithful to the 1954 Brown decision.

Really???? Remember the Brown decision? The decision that declared that legalized racial segregation in schools is unconstitutional? The decision that resulted in the National Guard having to be called in to Little Rock, Arkansas to protect nine brave black kids who were physically and verbally attacked by white mobs as they "integrated" an all-white school? This, the Brown decision that angered President Dwight Eisenhower, causing him to famously say to then Supreme Court Justice Earl Warren that, "[southern whites] are not bad people... All they are concerned about is to see that their sweet little girls are not required to sit in school alongside some big, overgrown negroes." Remember those glorious historical words? And this court now has the NERVE to say that school policies fighting for integration are the same thing as discrimination...??!!!

This in the age where schools in many areas are just as, if not more, segregated than they were when the Brown decision came down in 1954??? Efforts to fight against this trend are now seen as discrimination. What a sad, sad joke.

Because of Justice Kennedy's opinion, other methods may be used to achieve diversity, such as redrawing school attendance zones. This is what schools across the nation are now trying to figure out how to do. But they are NO LONGER able to simply say, "We have a policy that promotes racial integration." Such language in school policy is now deemed unconstitutional.

This all really pisses me off. Not only does the history of this issue make me view the majority decision as a travesty, but I find it absurd that in terms of education, racial diversity as a goal is not seen as valuable, which to me is part of the spirit of the Brown decision. Now, don't get me wrong - I am not one of those people who thinks that integration is some panacea - like, if we all live together, work together, study together, and play together a utopia will emerge.

In fact, I don't see integration as a solution to most problems that stem from prejudice. For instance, if a group of people is biased towards another group, sometimes the latter group can only thrive when surrounded by their own people. I get that.

That said, to say a school district cannot VOLUNTARILY push for racial diversity ignores the benefits that a diverse student population, when done right, can bring. Education is about exposure - exposure to literature, methods to solve math and science problems, history, etc. Exposure to people different from oneself can be a huge educational advantage, just ask anyone who has traveled. As any teacher knows, students learn as much from each other as from the teacher. Students with different life experiences each bring something unique to the table, making the learning environment much richer. And diversity is not only about race - it is about class, region, nationality, age, etc.

My own education in college and graduate school has greatly been advanced by a diverse flavor of colleagues in the classroom. Students from other countries have read different texts in primary and secondary school, and have a completely different knowledge base that nicely complements and/or challenges my own. Students from the Midwest have a different perspective on many issues than do students from the South. Middle-aged students have different ideas and approaches to learning than teenagers. I've experienced it all and have grown intellectually from it all as well. Lucky is the student who is exposed to such diversity at an earlier stage in their education.

But really, like I said, the integration issue is not really what makes me so angry. I am more incensed at the court's use of language of racial equality to advance policies that do the exact opposite. It's funny, none of these people who claim to be concerned about issues of discrimination seem to put their efforts to help the most disadvantaged victims of that discrimination in our society. Instead, they work to maintain the privileges of the already privileged.

It reminds me of a discussion I had with a friend the other day about a lecture I attended given by famous Princeton philosopher Kwame Appiah. He was talking about cultural value systems and argued that when it comes down to it, many values or judgments have no ideological or rational foundation. Really, you often just don't like something because you just don't like it.

One example Appiah gave was that most of us are grossed out by cockroaches. He said that we can rationalize why we not only don't like them, but are in fact disgusted by them. Typically we say that they are nasty, germ-ridden, dirty insects. However, Appiah pointed out that flies are actually more germ-ridden and dirty than cockroaches. I mean, we don't like flies either, but most people don't react with the same level of disgust to a fly as they will to a cockroach. Why? We just can't stand them. It's that simple.

I relayed this example to my friend Glenna who said, "That's what I wish the Christian right would admit. Stop using the bible to validate your prejudice... just say, 'We just don't like gay people.'" They just don't like gay people. Why build this elaborate, ideological, biblical case against it? If you followed the bible carefully, it's clear that Jesus was more opposed to things like materialism, which doesn't seem to bother most Christians. Similarly, why do certain people try to act like they give a shit about the Civil Rights Movement and use its ideological language to do things like oppose integration in the courts? They just don't care about the fight for racial equality, or they REALLY don't get it, or they DO get it and are clever as hell. I'm sure it's a combination of all of the above.

But do I REALLY think that things would be better if people just openly said, "We don't like you" or "We don't care"...??? I honestly don't know. Quite possibly it's just the surprise-less anger talking.