Dear Collegiate Colleagues:
First they came for Harvard, now Yale. It’s clear that the ideals of our elite colleges — a league that boasts the most inclusive, exclusive colleges on the planet — are under attack. They say we are racist because we discriminate against Asians but that is nonsense. We discriminate against everyone because we are discriminating!
It’s a complex reality that our polarized nation cannot understand. Therefore, it falls to me — the president of a very inclusive, exclusive college — to explain the difference between race-conscious admissions and racism.
“Race-conscious admissions” means using proprietary rules to ensure a student body that feels diverse without threatening our tradition of favoring legacy applicants, athletes, and the children of privilege.
Through a “secret sauce” of standardized testing, big money appeasement, and the wholesale abandonment of standards in the recruitment of athletes, we have built exclusive academic communities that are inclusive in all the ways the general public does not value because they’re just jealous.
Let’s consider diversity in athletics.
Have you ever watched a squash match? Me neither. But we recruited the heck out of the squash players. The fact that most of our squash recruits are wealthy, white kids from elite boarding schools is irrelevant. We do the same for the crew and lacrosse and fencing teams. What incredibly diverse life experiences (and donation potential) these students bring!
Graduation from our inclusive, exclusive colleges set up our alums for life, so we have to be thoughtful to ensure no single race or ethnicity overwhelms the very wealthy, very white insiders that still run our schools out of the all-male final clubs, secret societies, and whatever bizarro cafeteria situation Princeton has in place.
Racism is supporting slavery and using the n-word and other stuff. We search our souls very deeply anytime we find racism on campus. We all agree slavery is terrible, but not terrible enough to expend our billions in tax-free endowments on reparations. To be clear, indentured servitude, driven by crushing student loan debt and oligarchy, is totally fine. In either case, we might rename a restroom facility for a non-white alumnus as a nod to equality (and a way to gloss over the challenge that every other building on campus is dedicated to slave owners and/or investment bankers).
Speaking of nods, we have ethnic food nights in our cafeterias. Our dining hall staff — who are mostly contractors without benefits — show off the foodstuffs of their native lands, which include many non-European countries as well as the flyover states.
Bill Clinton sagely warned that doing away with race-conscious admissions would mean filling universities with Asian Americans. That man is a paragon of inclusive leadership and understands that the best way to impede social progress is to pit minority groups against one another for our table scraps. I’m not saying that’s what I’m doing here, I’m just saying the specter of an Asian tsunami is real.
Imagine how the world would be different if George W. Bush, Brett Kavanaugh, Donald Trump, and those guys that destroyed the economy in 1987, 2001, 2008, and so forth had been denied admission in favor of more qualified but less wealthy applicants? Instead of launching a war, economic apartheid, and a rape epidemic, our graduates would have invented a way to reverse global warming. While that sounds enticing, there’d be a lot fewer of our kind of people in charge.
We have a sacred duty to this country (but mostly to ourselves) to continue to operate beyond the reach of the law, the common folk, and common sense itself. It is imperative that we stick together!
To borrow from those insufferable social justice warriors — I sign off in solidarity!
(fist raised)
— A college president more likely to be named Larry than be a woman or a person of color