Ethnic Studies: Cure or Cause?

by Steve Sailer

Published in Chicago Tribune, 3/18/92, 850 words

Because colleges are Balkanizing into racial enclaves, many are considering requiring more minority studies and racial sensitivity classes. Sadly, though, mandating such courses (as typically taught today) might well exacerbate white racism.

Ethnic studies fall into three broad categories:

1. The Scholarly objectively analyzes serious questions, like Thomas Sowell's research into why 20th century African-Americans and 19th century Irish-Americans shared similar areas of success (urban politics, entertainment, government work, sports, and religion) and failure (abandoned families, crime, and substance abuse). Unfortunately, such disinterested inquiry is too unpopular to be common on many of today's sensitized campuses.

2. The Pragmatic shows how to surmount unintentional barriers between the races. Anthropologist Edward T. Hall, for example, observed that the white subjects he studied wanted their listeners to nod periodically, while the black subjects generally only expected firm eye contact. Obviously, these kind of subtle cultural differences can cause needless trouble during, say, job interviews.

3. The Moralistic, though, is the most common interpretation of "ethnic studies" today. Such classes celebrate one group's culture and deplores its victimization by other groups. Scholarly standards can take a back seat to comforting minorities and shaming whites.

Seldom discussed, however, is whether sermons stressing victimization actually persuade whites to treat minorities better. Or do young whites simply respond by mentally casting themselves as martyrs, too?

All teens, no matter how privileged, see themselves as downtrodden victims -- any parent can attest to that. For instance, black seniors at Chicago's Brother Rice High School recently staged a blacks-only prom because, for the official prom, the white majority picked only what one black student called "hard rocking, bang your head against the wall" music. Faced with shelling out $120 per couple to sit and listen to an evening of Megadeth and Queensryche, the blacks felt, with good reason, culturally oppressed. But, the whites probably also felt like victims . . . victims of a society that stereotypes heavy metal fans as greasy, pimpled, and stupid. If a prom is a celebration of yourself, and if you are a headbanger and proud of it, why emasculate your moment of self-glorification with black dance music just because it's more socially acceptable?

The mandating of minority studies at UC Berkeley lent a dangerous racial focus to the persecution complexes of the white sororities, crystallizing their grievances apparently like this: Quotas kept many of our friends out, yet those Hispanics and blacks act ungrateful and standoffish. The Asians, we'll admit, deserve to be here, but can't those Asian girls be a bit more standoffish around the white fraternity boys? And now, we're to be forced to listen to lectures about minorities, like they've got all the problems. Thus, the sororities lead a white backlash that successfully demanded "Euro-American studies."

Whether in ghettos or colleges, 18 year olds naturally form gangs, forging their identities by disdaining outsiders. Campuses have always been little Lebanons, youthful Yugoslavias, with endless subdivisions of spite. Undergraduates have long chosen lunchmates, for example, based on favorite rock groups. But, musical tastes fade over time. Today's preoccupation, skin color, doesn't, making it a breeding ground for future racial discord.

Yet, the races cooperate well under the right conditions. For example:

1. The athletic teams at Berkeley and Brother Rice sidestep these clashes, because, in contrast to proms or ethnic studies, sports don't celebrate what the kids are, but challenge them to become better.

2. When even the most cliquish student graduates and gets a job, he find himself lunching not with fellow Pearl Jam fans, but with whomever he is working. Why? Unlike in college, he and his tablemates, despite their diverse backgrounds, are competing together against other firms.

3. Pragmatic racial sensitivity training works for our military because soldiers share a mission, victory, and battle is dangerous enough without pointless racial squabbles. When war isn't imminent, the armed forces build camaraderie by fostering competition among units, which are randomly assigned and thus integrated.

Undergraduate professors can nurture interracial fellowship by emulating MBA school faculty in assigning more group projects to randomly selected teams.

Regarding campus housing, colleges should consider Rice University's middle path between fraternities' self-selecting, Lord of the Flies tribalism and dormitories' Kafka-like facelessness and transience. At this Houston school, students permanently belong to randomly assigned residence halls, which replace fraternities as the hub of social life and rivalries. Thus, everybody, not just Greeks, gets to belong to a gang. Each gang, though, is highly diverse in make-up but identical on average. At Rice, Richardson Hall kids and Lovett Hall kids despise each other as much as members of a WASP fraternity and the Black Students Union do on other campuses. But, at Rice the organized animosities are arbitrary and thus forgotten upon graduation, while the memories of comradeship with dissimilar hallmates survive.

Finally, universities need to regain a sense of purpose. Old ideals about The Pursuit of Truth, Beauty, and Excellence may seem outmoded, but they focus students on what they all could become. The current obsession with race fixates students on what each, unalterably, is.