In a Repeat of the 19th Century, Racist Academics and Politicians Are Attempting to Preserve White Supremacy

On April 8, 1996, Kenan Professor of Government Harvey C. Mansfield Jr. '53 published an article in The Crimson ("A Poor Defense of Diversity") which argued that Harvard is suffering from a lack of morale because of the stubborn intellectual inferiority blacks exhibit. While not openly stating that black inferiority was inherent, he insinuated that unchangeable biological reasons were behind what he saw as the less-than-stellar achievements among Harvard's African-American students. Sadly, Mansfield's article is in line with today's racist tactics. Posing as learned men, many of today's leading academics preach the inferiority of blacks, with the state and federal governments serving as their audience.

In 1994, The Bell Curve was published with much fanfare. In this work, Charles Murray '65 and the late Richard J. Herrnstein argued that intelligence is inheritable and black and Latinos come up short on every test. Since one author has a degree from Harvard, and the other was a professor at the University, their words and ideas have been taken by many Americans as gospel. Likewise, Agassiz, Morton and a number of other 19th-century scholars connected to prestigious universities and foundations operating from racist perspectives saturated the public with pseudoscientific proof that African-Americans were inferior. The 1990s is a repeat of the 19th century, where academics define the parameters of discussion and defend the racist thinking of their colleagues.

The "supposed" motivation behind past academic racism and present-day scholarly racial prejudice remains the same: protecting the United States (i.e., white Americans and some Asian groups) from the degenerate effects which would stem or have stemmed from letting blacks and Latinos into the body politic and social contract. Mansfield, Herrnstein, Murray and D'Souza argue that the academic rigors of society and Americans' competitiveness is decreasing because of the large number of undesirables and unqualifieds entering universities and jobs all around the country at the expense of bright whites and Asians. The argument reminds one of the segregationist platform in the 1950s and 1890s which argued that allowing black children to be educated in the same schools around white children would denigrate them intellectually. The true intent, during those times and during our own, is to keep as many African-Americans and Latinos as possible outside of places deemed "whites only," which include Ivy League schools, corporate America and the upper echelons of the United States government.

Today, as in the past, the academic racist appeals to those in the American public and legislature who want to implement a plan of racial segregation. In California, two scholars have led the crusade--recently taken up by Governor Pete Wilson--to abolish affirmative action in that state and in the nation. Politicians, who receive support from conservative think tanks, are running for office on platforms of redrawing federal and state congressional lines in order to decrease or obliterate Black and Latino voting power. They also advocate the dismantling of the "Great Society," claiming that its programs can not produce any significant results because the problems are biological, not social.

In the late 1960s and early 1970s, many civil rights activists thought that their jobs were done. Having crushed the system of segregation, they believed that equality and racial prejudice would soon follow. Unfortunately, proponents of prejudice have moved into academia, as their forbears did in the late 19th century, and are leading the way towards re-establishing separate and unequal societies through the legislative branch of the state and federal governments. --Joshua Bloodworth '97