A few days ago, the Los Angeles Times editorialized in favor of repealing California’s law requiring racial neutrality. I found it a pathetic effort and sent a letter. To my surprise, the paper has published it:
To the editor:
Your editorial in favor of Proposition 16 argues that because “the U.S. isn’t a meritocracy” California should abandon its race-neutral law. Let’s see if that makes sense to readers.
The U.S. isn’t a meritocracy, therefore the L.A. Kings should be compelled to have a roster that’s racially balanced — for fairness.
The U.S. isn’t a meritocracy, therefore the state bar exam should be junked and admission based on “fair” racial quotas.
The U.S isn’t a meritocracy, therefore the L.A. Philharmonic should stop using blind auditions when it fills openings and instead choose musicians so that all groups will be fairly represented.
Would The Times’ editors like those results?
Maybe the U.S. isn’t a perfect meritocracy, but it doesn’t follow that we should move in the opposite direction, as will be the case if the state abandons the racial neutrality of Prop. 209.