The US Supreme Court reaffirmed Michigan’s Prop 2, which prevents public colleges and universities from using race or gender in admissions decisions. While many in the Civil Liberties movement view this decision as a step back, it actually paves the way for a new era of race relations that does depends on social progress and not discriminatory policies.
As then-Senator Barack Obama pointed out in his famous race speech in 2008, today’s racial, as well as gender, economic inequality is largely inherited from a history of discrimination. As such, the most prevalent consequences of institutionalized racism and sexism are manifested in socioeconomic terms. Because the Michigan ban disallows any racial or gender considerations in the admissions process, it seems this piece of legislation does actually reinforce the Equal Protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, despite what opponents say. Given these two considerations, public schools should be able to accomplish their mission of diversity by giving preference to qualified students from lower socioeconomic backgrounds who come from socioeconomically diverse regions. Although opponents of the Michigan ban pointed to evidence that suggests these practices do not produce the type of racial diversity sought after, this does not mean directly accounting for race and gender in the admissions process is the only or best solution while a failure to achieve racial diversity through indirect means may well be the result of far larger problems, i.e. failings in primary schools, where minorities live, may not be producing qualified candidates. In such cases, forcing students into colleges only sets them up for failure, thus the legacy of racism is best addressed in our failing elementary and high schools. Alternatively, candidates may not be able to afford to attend classes, they might lack faith in the educational system, or colleges may not be recruiting enough students from regions where disenfranchised minorities live. As for the Michigan ban, it is likely Constitutional, but it is important to remember it does not prevent legal action against public schools that engage in racist or sexist practices.
Comments
One major issue overshadowed by the Ukrainian-Russian conflict, which has consumed the attention of the International Community due the size of Russia and the provocative nature of its behavior, is the unrest plaguing Venezuela. With the death of the often-confrontational socialist President Hugo Chavez last year, there is no longer a beloved figurehead capable of pacifying the growing unrest rooted in the unfulfilled promises and failing policies of the Chavismo socialist revolution. Where the high-valued oil reserves of the South American country offered Chavez an easy and plenty source of revenue that could be used to fuel massive socialist programs, yet insufficient to meet all the interests of the Venezuelan People, Venezuela suffers from the shortcomings of an idealized socialist economy.
The fault of any socialist economy is that the political class is empowered to manually distribute wealth to the population. Because politicians are pressured to appease the whims of their constituents in order to stay in power, among other issues, it is far harder to distribute wealth (resources/capital) to areas of the economy that will increase production while developing new sources of capital for the economy. Of course, this fault does exist in capitalism economies when a small wealthy elite over serves its own interests to the detriment of all others, but the automated approach to distributing wealth can help weed out bad investments doomed to fail. That said, Venezuela is not the only story in South America. Since before the beginning of the Clinton Administration, little constructive attention has been paid to the Americas by the United States and the rest of the International Community. NAFTA, which is probably the most significant foreign policy effort of the US and its neighbors, was essentially a “set-it-and-forgot-it” approach to dealing with the economic relationships between American countries. Certainly, there have been conflicts, which were either ignored or solved with hurried reactions, while there have been efforts to address humanitarian crises, but the US has largely been disengaged in its own hemisphere with no true regional leadership present. Currently, we have Brazil emerging as a major global economic power, yet so ripe with hopeless poverty that civil unrest is certain to erupt into a major social conflict at some point. Meanwhile, the degenerative socioeconomic conditions in Haiti are getting no better while Mexico continues to be engulfed in an inner war against terribly vicious drug cartels that act like terrorists. Clearly, these are only a few well-known examples of what is going wrong South of America, but there is definitely an ongoing and growing trend toward governments failing to address the most basic interests of their Peoples. Given the inspirational nature of the Arab Spring Revolutions and the democratization/Americanization of the International Community, among a whole host of other consideration, including a shift away from outsourcing to as far away as Asia by the US, the Peoples of Central and South America will eventually have to demand their interests be addressed as the Peoples of the Middle East are. With diplomatic efforts slowly yielding mixed results and the situation on the ground increasingly fluid, Ukraine continues to dominate the world’s attention. Because Russia’s attempt to reassert its sovereignty is a major driving force behind the unrest in Ukraine, world powers must focus on helping Russia find healthier ways to pursue its interests.
Because Russia has never truly been integrated into the International Community as a trusted partner, Ukraine has served as a buffer state to “protect” Russia from Western influence and actions. In accordance, European Union member states and the US need to offer a path forward that will allow Russian leaders to feel their high priority interests will be served if they allow Ukrainians the freedom to follow their own political interests. Although most bridges with Ukraine have been thoroughly burnt by Russia, the West must offer an olive branch in order to eliminate the need for a buffer state between Russia and the European Union, i.e. Putin’s most legitimate reason for meddling in Ukrainian affairs. That said, the Ukrainian situation cannot be solved by world leaders alone. Within Ukraine, there are serious pro-Russian Ukrainian factions that thoroughly reject Western influence and view themselves to be Russian. Political divisive within cannot be wholly blamed on Putin. What Russia has done is prime these factions for conflict and that mechanism is in motion. This means the internal dynamics of Ukraine must be addressed in addition to the international diplomatic crises between Russia and the rest of the world. Unfortunately, Russia has decided to expand its creeping invasion of Ukraine with a subversive campaign that is rather poorly disguised as a pro-Russian Ukrainian uprising. Although there are pro-Russian elements within Eastern Ukraine, Vladimir Putin is focusing on the current Ukrainian government’s lack of legitimacy due to the fact that the current leadership was appointed after a popular uprising forced the former pro-Russian President to leave Ukraine. Clearly, an election will have to be held, but Russia’s efforts to destabilize Ukraine have nothing to do with legitimacy while the interim government is charged with stabilizing the situation through the use of force when necessary. What is driving Russia’s action has everything to do with Russia’s overly aggressive pursuit of its own perceived interests.
That said, one way of understanding Russia’s behavior is to understand it as part of a larger trend toward resovereignization. During the Cold War, all nations had to more or less align their national agendas toward two poles, i.e. the USA and the USSR, thus they largely forfeited their sovereign rights and were polarized. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the United States was the only true sovereign nation. During this time, the International Community began to rebuild while members states continued to forfeit their sovereign rights to the United States when it was in their best interests to do so, yet there was also a slow movement away from the monopolar International Community toward a multipolar International Community. In the post Cold War era, the European Union, for example, was a result of a push to resist the hegemonic power of the United States, which existed in the monopolar world that arose. Relative US power and influence has waned with the strengthening of the multipolar democratizing International Community of democratizing nation-states. Consequently, arrangements like the European Union are becoming far more intrusive and burdensome. Under a global trend toward resovereignization, the Euro is an affront to the nation-state and the global financial crisis has only helped fracture political fault lines in the concept. Under the context of resovereignization, Russia’s aggressive and domineering behavior toward Ukraine was to be expected long ago. Unfortunately, the world was lured into a false sense of security due to the stable, peaceful nature of the post Cold War world. Where Russia’s power elite embraced democratic reforms and economic cooperation in order to serve the economic interests of Russia following the Cold War, they now feel compelled to recapture their ability to act without the consent of outside influences, i.e. their sovereignty. That said, Russia, as a world power, has never had to truly submit to direct US influence. As such, the resovereignization of Russia means a recapturing of former Russian territories and a reestablishing of Russia’s sphere of influence to fight the Western dominance, i.e. the modern International Community. Since the 1999 Columbine School Shootings, there have been a fair number of individuals, including this writer, discussing the influence of mental illness on violent crimes. Thanks in part to an increasing number of mass killing perpetrated by those who suffer from some form of mental illness and a political desire to push the debate away from gun control, recent events like the Jewish Center Shooting and the Murrysville School Stabbings have focused heavily on the mental health of the murderers. As the 2014 Fort Hood Shooting demonstrates, this instantaneous attraction to mental illness can distort the reality of the story.
Mental illness is not neccessarily the cause of anger and violence. What mental illnesses can do is overwhelm, or prevent individuals from learning, the inhibitions they need to function properly in our society; therefore, certain mental illnesses make it more likely individuals will respond violently in inappropriate situations and in inappropriate ways. Behavioral modifiers like drugs, alcohol, extreme stress, and toxic relationship can also play just as significant of a role in violent crime as certain mental illnesses. Because mental illnesses include a broad range of conditions that impact the functionality of people to varying degrees, the impulse to simply blame mental illness when a mass killing occurs stigmatizes those suffering from mental illness. In turn, this makes already reluctant individuals suffering from mental illness more hesitate to address their issues while it also deprives them of the social support structure they need to face their demons. At the same time, it is important to remember the sole reason for discussing the cause of a crime is to help prevent future crimes. Framing violent acts as a result of mental illness prevents our society from properly addressing the factors that lead to violent acts. The truth is that anger and violence are part of human nature, thus these elements of our personality need to be recognized and controlled. As a society, we need people to address their emotions and impulses in healthy ways that do not undermine social cohesion. Consequently, our discussion of mental illness when it comes to violent crimes must focus on mental illness resulted in a particular criminal act and what solutions might prevent particular situations from arising. |
Read old posts
April 2020
|