• Front page
• Receive letters on your RSS reader

Charles King of Boulder writes:

The University’s Administration, already bloated to the gills, now seeks to add more bloat: a new cabinet level position, a Vice Chancellor for Diversity. My dictionary defines “diversity” as “the fact or state of being diverse; difference; unlikeness. 2. variety; multiformity. 3. a point of difference.”
Just how do the University’s nine regents define the word “diversity”? Are not all nine of them “different” or “unlike” from one another? Are not all faculty and students and staff members at CU also “diverse”?
Is our national population — with its groups of people from dozens of nations around the world, etc. — not diverse? Are we not the most diverse nation on Earth? And are we not united as one nation? Why? Because of the freedoms guaranteed to us in our federal Constitution, and because of our insistence that immigrants from t many nations the world over assimilate into our American culture. (For that they must learn English, the glue that holds us as a nation together.) Is our national maxim not E pluribus unum (“Out of many, one”), not, thank God! E pluribus plures, ( “Out of many, many”).
Was Martin Luther King, Jr. not right in wanting all Americans to judge one another not on our “skin color but on our character”?
Our Declaration of Independence states that “all men are created equal.” That means that though we all differ in natural gifts or talents we are to have a level playing field on which to compete with others.
Was the Civil Rights Act of 1964 not clearly designed to secure equality of opportunity for all, not equal results for all?
Our national Constitution guarantees rights for individuals, not for groups?
Should all CU faculty members — nonminority as well as minority, male or female — be employed and paid on the basis of their excellence in teaching, research, and service, as objectively determined as reasonably possible?
Does the admission to CU of minority students with lower cut-off scores than for nonminority applicants because of their ethnicity or race or gender not result in an obvious injustice to nonminority applicants?
Is the overwhelming obligation of any University to be “politically correct, or is it to educate ( pass true knowledge onto the next generation), and to discover (test, research, etc.) truth?

This letter has not been edited.

READER COMMENTS

they want to be politically correct and preach or teach the far left leaning ideas of fine scholars like churchill.

Hating mainstream America is an American cottage industry-with the state university system being the location of the cottages.Somewhere back in my long-lost youth I recall something about state universities getting land grants for their campuses conditional upon providing military instruction so that there'd be a supply of college-educated reserve officers available at need.I think that having a Vice Chancellor for Diversity probably won't help with the creation of military expertise,but might help make jobs for aging hippies still covered with mud from Woodstock.

"Vice Chancellor for Diversity"

This adds at least $160,000 to the BLOAT, excluding benefits. Throw in support staff and a few dozen airline tickets to attend diversity meetings in Havana and its a $750,000 package. This does not include staffing-up for the campus thought-police either. Your tax dollars at work.

It looks like CU's new race czar has already made a very nice living off of diversity, affirmative action and class warfare. Who ever said that racism doesn't pay?

Is this true, or is it a made up rightwing rumor?

If the former, I'm going to be really irritated. The University has no business wanting to hike up tuition 14% while at the same time advocating a redundant, not to mention ridiculously expensive position like this when there are diversity efforts already on campus.

Cu and " Chancellor for Diversity". Cu needs to get in touch with the newest educational socialist fad, "Diversity celebration" is so passé.

Responses to questions posed by Charles King of Boulder:

"Is our national population — with its groups of people from dozens of nations around the world, etc. — not diverse? Are we not the most diverse nation on Earth?"

Arguably so. But presumably the university's population is different than the nation's population.

"And are we not united as one nation? Why?"

I don't know. If I listen to talk radio, a mainstream media source, all I hear about all the time is those I should hate or depise.

"Because of the freedoms guaranteed to us in our federal Constitution, and because of our insistence that immigrants from t many nations the world over assimilate into our American culture. (For that they must learn English, the glue that holds us as a nation together.) Is our national maxim not E pluribus unum (“Out of many, one”), not, thank God! E pluribus plures, ( “Out of many, many”)."

It's ironic that Mr. King insists we all learn English, then proceeds to start talking in Latin.

"Was Martin Luther King, Jr. not right in wanting all Americans to judge one another not on our “skin color but on our character”?"

Yep. But don't take his statement out of context.

"Our Declaration of Independence states that “all men are created equal.” That means that though we all differ in natural gifts or talents we are to have a level playing field on which to compete with others."

Yes and yes--although, the Constitution expressed a somewhat different point of view, telling us that women, blacks, and Indians, were less than equal.

"Was the Civil Rights Act of 1964 not clearly designed to secure equality of opportunity for all, not equal results for all?"

Yep. Although the question asserts that somehow somewhere at the university, someone is seeking equal results. I see no evidence of that.

"Our national Constitution guarantees rights for individuals, not for groups?"

Many of us have this self-image of being rugged individualists, but, in reality, all of us are dependent on each other in some way. Also, sets up false pretenses. We have not, and are not, always treated as individuals under the law (think of Jim Crow for example, or, alternately, ignore history)

"Should all CU faculty members — nonminority as well as minority, male or female — be employed and paid on the basis of their excellence in teaching, research, and service, as objectively determined as reasonably possible?"

Sounds reasonable.

"Does the admission to CU of minority students with lower cut-off scores than for nonminority applicants because of their ethnicity or race or gender not result in an obvious injustice to nonminority applicants?"

No. Non-minority students have not been been historically excluded from education (as certain minority students have in my life time), nor are non-minority students excluded now. CU is the state's flagship school. If I, white person, have good qualifications, I will not be excluded by affirmative action. If I don't quite meet their criteria, I can go to another college in the state. That's not unjust.

"Is the overwhelming obligation of any University to be “politically correct, or is it to educate ( pass true knowledge onto the next generation), and to discover (test, research, etc.) truth?"

Duh. What do you think? Why don't we just abolish the university if they're doing all these bad, bad, things that King, the ministers of misinformation (Denver/Boulder's talk radio)and the editors of the RMN hate so much?

The hell with diversity. I want homogenity. I can find it pretty easy by plugging into the TV each night, learning how I can be a good consumer, and innoculating myself from any dangerous ideas, like most people do.

CU must have plusgood bellyfeel about diversity. It is crimethink at CU to focus on White people things. CU is fullwise behind it's thinkpol who enforce diversity at ALL COST. They will have to upsub to Ward Churchill for bellyfeel on the new vice chancellor.

CU, Boulder especially, is an insanely white campus. While I don't feel that this new position will have much impact, something definitely needs to be done. As tuition rises and minorities remain disproportionately poor, things will only get worse instead of better.

Exactly, Kyle. It's not that I'm against diversity, I just think this is a dumb way to bring more of it to CU's campus.

It seems to me one of the most obvious ways would be to make college more affordable for all. Thus, freeze the tuition hikes for good, or at least for years to come.

Instead, the university wants to create an expensive new administrative position?

And I might add this:

CU IS FEEDING AT THE WRONG END OF THE FOOD CHAIN.

The odds of any significant payoff from CU's "diversity" fandango is highly remote and very unlikely. Let's not forget that payoffs are critically important to any organization needing to raise it prices by 10-15% when the rate of inflation is only 2-3%. Since taxpayers kick in only 10% of CU's expenses while tuition carries the bulk of the burden, this is a business like any other business. CU better keep both eyes on the "cost of goods sold" line or they might go BK. And they better find out where their "bread and butter" market resides.

POST A COMMENT

• 'Kid Nation' reality show a new low
• Rivers a shameful hire
• Too little news
• ‘Diesel’ fumes
• Unlocalized story a disservice to readers
• Riled up by Christian music
• Darling of the left
• Solutions too costly