tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-494523114909821148.post7067116847885898445..comments2023-03-25T09:56:39.690-04:00Comments on Comparative Racism and the Law--Canada/U.S.: How Now, Brown? Parents Involved in Community Schools and the Triumph of Color Blind IdeologyProfessor Lolita Buckner Innisshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07465730656581820893noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-494523114909821148.post-24108488694376051532007-08-07T22:33:00.000-04:002007-08-07T22:33:00.000-04:00What I find most disheartening about Parents Invol...What I find most disheartening about Parents Involved in Community Schools is its stealth use of the language of anti-discrimination to eliminate the judicial mandate for racial integration in the schools. What Roberts CJ calls "racial balancing" is apparently bad because, as the new Chief Justice explains, (in what is surely the most cited passage of Parents Involved) "the way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race." Identifying race or 'racial balancing' as an illegitimate means of combating racism is almost akin to outlawing the use of redistributive taxes to redress income inequality on the grounds that such taxes discriminate on the basis of income. <BR/><BR/>Conceptually, the rhetorical use of racial equality to discredit programs aimed at redressing racial inequality is nothing new: since its inception, affirmative action has been subject to criticisms employing a similar strategy. In fact, it is one of the tried and tested tactics of colourblind racism. It is made possible by a deep-seated inattention to contemporary racial injustice. <BR/><BR/>What makes Parents involved, both an innovative and triumphal moment for colourblind racism, however, is that as a tactic, the practice of turning racial equality against itself is legitimized on a sweeping scale. That this is the case is most poignantly attested to by the remarks of one of Roberts CJ's ideological allies in the court, Justice Clarence Thomas. In a concurring judgment responding to Breyer J's dissent, Thomas J. contended that "disfavoring a color-blind interpretation of the Constitution, the dissent would give the school boards a free hand to make decisions on the basis of race -- an approach reminiscent of that advocated by the segregationists in Brown v. Board of Ed." Alas, the upshot of Thomas J.'s remark is that colour-blindness is now officially in the majority.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08567016252730733895noreply@blogger.com