As a reminder, MLK once spoke of the true measure of his fellow man, ”I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.”
Today “content of character” or merit is deemed racist. If you think I jest, the Education Writers Association asks, “Are merit-based education admissions practices racist?” Why stop with merit. Everything is racist now. The Seattle Times asks, “Is math racist?” Medium claims that waking up early is rooted in white supremacy. Perhaps I should sleep in more to atone for my alleged privilege.
In America today, everything is viewed through the eye of race and gender, ignoring experience and skills, in favor of fulfilling some arbitrarily defined quotas, all in the name of diversity. In other words, judging people, not by the content of their characters, but solely based on the color of their skin. MLK must be turning over in his grave.
Even Russian president Vladimir Putin recognizes this and quoted MLK in a recent speech about the left’s wokeness. He noted that the majority of Russians don’t think a person’s skin color or gender are important. Instead, he said, “Each of us is a human being. This is what matters.”
How ironic that Putin speaks common sense, unlike most of the ruling class and elites in America.
Since quotas are seemingly based on ensuring that the compositions of organizations or professions reflect the same diversity as in general society, what exactly is American society’s diversity?
According to USA Facts, approximately 330 million people live in the United States. By race, the US is 59 percent White, 19 percent Hispanic, 13 percent Black, and 6 percent Asian. Do we need a law or constitutional amendment requiring that every organization, from the NBA to the New York Times editorial board, reflect these exact ratios?
Is the goal of race hustlers and virtue signaling leftists to force society to conform to these specific ratios? Or they want to take it even further? Here are some recent examples.
In the medical world, the once prestigious American College of Surgeons is pushing critical race theory. Rather than promoting their mission, “To serve all with skill and trust”, this longstanding surgical organization has declared itself to be “structurally racist.”
A doctor quoted by Fox News observed, “All we hear about is, ‘Oh, a Black patient should have a Black doctor.’ Well, that is so wrong. A Black patient should have a good doctor. And that's what all patients want."
Patients, regardless of skin color, want the best and most competent doctors caring for or operating on their bodies. Instead, future doctors are being admitted to medical school based on their skin color, rather than their character or demonstrated knowledge as medical schools are increasingly ignoring MCAT scores and grade point averages, favoring diversity over competence.
Airlines are doing much the same, training and hiring pilots based on diversity quotas rather than competence.
This is not an argument against diversity, and if all other things are equal, it is reasonable to diversify the profession or work force. But it’s rare that all other things are indeed equal and lowering standards for particular groups may compromise the skill and competence of that profession. Is that prudent for airline pilots or surgeons when lives are on the line?
Were the passengers on Captain Sullenberger’s plane or patients about to undergo heart or eye surgery more concerned about the race or ethnicity of their pilot or doctor or their competence, without concern over skin color, as MLK dreamed?
Another life and death situation, not for individuals as much as for countries, is the military. If America is at war, do Americans want the best military leadership or the most diverse?
The likely next Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Charles Q Brown, Jr is all in on quotas. As Daniel Greenfield reported, “Brown’s quotas limit the number of white officers to 67% and cut white men down to 43%.”
Will that provide the best and most competent military? Or soothe
General Brown’s rage over once being questioned about a parking space due to either his civilian clothes or his skin color?
Under General Brown’s military, there may not be room for the likes of Eisenhower, Patton, MacArthur, Nimitz, and others, all because their skin color is wrong. How would such policies have helped us defeat Germany or Japan in World War Two?
The US military is unable to meet its recruiting standards. For those who do sign up, are they being trained to be the most lethal fighting force on Earth or instead does their training now focus on drag shows? While the Russians are training warriors, our soldiers are tasked with knowing proper gender pronouns.
One arena notably absent in the quota game is professional sports. Why aren’t sports leagues pushing for diversity?
The NBA is 17 percent White, 72 percent Black, 2 percent Hispanic and less than 1 percent Asian. The NFL is similar with 25 percent White, 58 percent Black, and less than 1 percent each Asian and Hispanic. This is far different from America of 59 percent White, 19 percent Hispanic, 13 percent Black, and 6 percent Asian.
Why isn’t this of concern to DEI proponents?
What if, like supposed medical patients, sports fans should be able to watch players of their own race? That is absurd in sports, yet it is what the medical establishment thinks is appropriate for patients and doctors.
Playing in a professional sports league is a monumental achievement, based on speed, skill, strength, and power, but not on race or skin color. MLK’s dream is alive and well in professional sports, without any push for diversity.
Except for team owners. The Guardian asks, “Why are there so few Black team owners in US?” Do they ask why there are so few White, Asian, or Hispanic players in the same leagues? Why are we playing “situational diversity”?
Sports is not a life and death matter and, in this arena, social justice games will cause little harm. But in the medical world, in airplane cockpits, and in the military, the implications are huge. Yet it is in these latter areas where diversity is being pushed to the potential detriment of society.
While we are virtue signaling our diversity, Russia and China are utilizing their best and brightest for crucial roles in their societies. When push comes to shove, which countries will be better served by their diversity policies?
MLK knew the answer half a century ago. Too bad America has reversed the teachings of MLK, ushering back racial discrimination and segregation, attempting to remedy one atrocity by ushering in a new and similar one. American exceptionalism will soon be replaced by American mediocrity. Our adversaries, including the Russian President, are aware and watching.
Source: American Thinker.
