Monday's New York Times offered one of the more stimulating and thought-provoking articles to be found this holiday week. The University of Cape Town, South Africa, once a bastion of white higher education, has reemerged in the post-apartheid era ?resplendently multiracial.? But at what price and to what end? In order to re-align the racial make-up of the university, and thus that of the country, a strong affirmative action program has been implemented at the University of Cape Town. But, though the university admits to accepting black students (and those of the other apartheid-era racial categorizations) with lower test scores than whites, whites still outnumber black students on campus?by a strong margin. While South Africa's population is 79 percent black (and 9 percent white), the campus demographic is 25 percent black (and 45 percent white).
Even with this compensatory program in place, just over half of black students on campus graduate after five years (compared to 80 percent of whites). Never mind the efficacy of this program, the article pushes forth into even muckier waters. Some in South Africa decry the morality of the program itself. One apartheid-era freedom fighter, Professor Neville Alexander, has roused campus debate, charging that ?affirmative action betrays the ideals of nonracialism that so many fought and died for during the long struggle against apartheid.? A black student on the University of Cape Town campus, Sam Mgobozi, finds affirmative action offensive. He asks: ?Are we here because we're black or are we here because we're intelligent??
So, how best do we achieve racial redress? And where does that responsibility lay?
I won't apologize for not having an answer for you on this one. This is tricky business. But, boy, would it make for an interesting dinner conversation around today's bird.
?Daniela Fairchild
* Note: The article further delves into the issues of socioeconomic status, aside from race. Really worth a read.
