Connerly: A Champion of Equality?
by Richard Bergeon
On January 21, 2005 many in the civil rights advocacy community issued a sigh of relief while others groaned. The reason for the two responses: Wardell (Ward) Anthony Connerly retired from the University of California Board of Regents.
This wealthy conservative minority businessman raised himself out of poverty on his own. Connerly, born in Louisiana in 1939, claims he is one-quarter Black, one-quarter French, three-eighths Irish, and one-eighth Choctaw. He refuses to be called African American. As a member of the University of California Board of Regents, Connerly opposed its race-based system of preferences in admissions claiming there was a flaw in affirmative action. On July 20, 1995, the University ended its use of race as a factor for admissions.
Connerly then joined the California Civil Rights Initiative. His support was instrumental in getting a referendum passed in California in 1996 that banned minority preference in government hiring. Connerly then helped anti-affirmative action advocates get a similar proposition (I-200) passed in our state of Washington.
While in Washington we still don't even know what I-200 has done to us, he is marching on. He is no longer focusing on states where he has achieved some victories, but is targeting other states that still hold to affirmative action principles.
Those like Connerly who oppose affirmative action deny that there are any differences between the races. They hold that, in society at large, the maturational and educational experiences of its majority and minority members are essentially the same. Left alone, they say, our society is naturally disposed to creating a structure in which minority membership is irrelevant to any issue, norm, or rule.
Such people tend to divide into two groups. Both say that affirmative action stigmatizes the minorities, entrenches stereotypes about intellectual capability and values, and reinforces racial inequality.
One group says institutions should be required to treat majority and minority members identically when making decisions about who gains entry or how they are treated after acceptance. Attainment of privilege requires someone to undergo adversity - those like Connerly (or their ancestors) did it, so must the current minority members of the society; if a minority wants acceptance or advancement he/she should meet the requirements. These people deny the relevance of cultural, social, economical or psychological difficulties a person of a minority might have experienced in trying to gain entry or obtain promotion.
The other anti-affirmative action group argues that all people have a desire for success and happiness. Institutions only need to adopt standards that can reasonably accommodate differences between the socially advantaged and disadvantaged. Since those people who make the decisions employ discretion, and hold good intentions, that should be sufficient to make sure that those who have encountered cultural, social and economic difficulties are given preference over those whose path was easy.
Affirmative action proponents embrace social, cultural and economic differences and acknowledge that differences will never disappear, and even argue that they never should. They seek to empower minority people by honoring diversity and what it brings to society. Believers say that, to achieve equality, some imbalance must be tolerated. They would limit the exercise of discretion in granting membership/hiring or advancement in an institution. They contend that it is better to have an education and a job that is obtained through legislated racial preference then to be denied even a chance at achieving the American dream because of discrimination.
OCA-GS has long aligned itself with the pro-affirmative action with its participation in trying to defeat I-200. We will continue to oppose Connerly and his associates who now advocate not only stopping affirmative action, but also the tracking of crime, hiring, admissions, … you name it, by race or gender. We will also oppose those seeking to dismantle ethnic (and feminist) studies programs in our universities and colleges.
© 2005 OCA-Greater Seattle
OCA - GREATER SEATTLE CHAPTER