No community can be built on the basis of preferential treatment and double standards, and their existence belies university rhetoric about equality.
-Dinesh D’Souza
In the name of diversity, multiculturalism, and political correctness, Brown University has deliberately broken with the ideals of a classical liberal education. Perhaps this academic revolution can be most plainly witnessed in the university funded “diversity” program, Building Understanding Across Differences (BUAD), which I, unfortunately, endured for two days of freshman orientation. Rather than “increasing understanding and dialogue among students of differing social identities related to race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, ability, and class,” BUAD deliberately and unequivocally engages in censorship, indoctrination, and race-baiting, which can only produce an environment of ignorance, self-victimization, and cultural division on campus.
Before exploring the hazardous implications of such programs, it is useful to first examine the sheer immaturity and benightedness of the student and faculty participants. Prior to any discussion of the issues, the students were instructed by the faculty leader of the program, that if they are hurt by anyone’s comments or feel uncomfortable in any way, they should “raise their hand and say ‘OUCH.” At this point, the discussion will be stopped, and the student will share his/her feelings on the matter. Shortly after we were told this, I discovered that this “OUCH” ordeal was no joking matter. After watching a Katie Couric documentary which explored the widespread bigotry and racism of America, I raised my hand to argue that racial profiling, in certain instances, can make our country safer. (It’s no secret that while most Muslims are not terrorists, most terrorists are Muslims.) Immediately, several students raised their hands and yelled “OUCH,” in order to promptly silence my “racist” opinion. My bigotry was confirmed a few moments later when I suggested that affirmative action causes lesser qualified minorities to be admitted over other white and Asian applicants. After another obligatory “OUCH,” I was assured by a fellow BUAD member that despite affirmative action, minorities at Brown, on average, have grades just as high as other applicants. It was at this point that I knew it was time to leave the program.
While it is easy to shrug off BUAD and other “diversity” programs as nothing more than laughable examples of far-left multiculturalism and political correctness at work, the long term consequences of this university funded asininity are potentially dangerous for the several reasons. In the words of Michael Chen-Illamos ’05, a West Indian, Latino and gay member of BUAD, “Discussions here are very politically correct.” This political correctness inevitably leads to a level of censorship, which takes away from the integrity of the debate. The fact of the matter is that issues dealing with race, class, ethnicity, and sexual orientation cannot be meaningfully discussed without hurting someone’s feelings. Ultimately, however, all sides gain when people are free to voice their opinion openly, even if it is not politically correct.
Furthermore, BUAD and other “diversity” programs are clearly politically tilted in their approach. Besides the fact that there are few if any conservatives involved with the program, the general philosophy on these issues are approached from a very left-liberal perspective. This environment is conducive to indoctrination, not education.
The inherent political agenda of such “Diversity” programs can be witnessed in their propensity to stir up blatantly anti-American thinking. The general theme of BUAD is clear: America is a racist, elitist, homophobic, insensitive nation. No mention was given to the fact that America was built on the principles of liberty, and that it is the most inclusive, egalitarian nation in the world. If the best colleges and universities of are nation continue to promote a generation of leaders who do not believe in the egalitarian principles of America, they have failed in their core missions. Finally, “Diversity” education, by singling out minorities and promoting the notion that they are oppressed, foster an environment whereby resentment, self-victimization, and isolation are inevitable. “Diversity” programs impede on their own core mission, that being, to build a society in which all members can assimilate fairly and equally.
Fortunately, at least one member of BUAD benefited from the program. “People come up to me and think it’s okay to just touch my hair,” he said. “They never think of it as a degrading act – or that it’s an invasion of personal space…. It’s condescending, but I don’t think there’s a conscious decision to be condescending.” His classmates in BUAD, he added, “know not to do that anymore.”

I enjoyed your article. While enrolled the University of New Orleans during the 80s, I witnessed many institutionalized “ouch” responses to common sense. A business communications teacher, a very liberal one, suggested that because the number of African Americans enrolled at UNO was high there was no need to have a separate black college down the street called SUNO (“Southern University of New Orleans”). SUNO doubles the overhead costs of a system that should be merged into one to save money and promote consistent acedemic standards. SUNO is a sacred cow in the black community, but its academic standards are a joke. Businesses do not hire students from SUNO, because the degrees are not worth the paper they printed on. SUNO does not exist to provide education. It exists to meet a quota of degreed African Americans. Low and behold, the president of the student chaprter of the NAACP was in our class and raised a loud objection. The teachers audacity to disagree with the student was met with accusations of racism. We all know that mere disagreement with any black leader is by political correctness definition “racism.” In addition, UNO had an open door policy to allow anyone to enroll regardless of their ACT score or high school foundation. This policy was designed to allow African Americans disadvantaged by the horrible public school system to get into college. It also drew in a lot of money from Pell grants and other such financial aid doled out to minorities without question or qualification. Year after year, half of these students failed out in the first semester and the most of the other half failed out in the second semester. It is a big waste of our tax dollars. Too much of our resources is spent to minority assure access to college and not enough to prepare minorities for college. Affirmative action is dysfunctional because its success is measured by dollars spent and not by actual results.
Reply