The Tragedy of Affirmative Action
Derrick Bell is best known for his contributions to critical race theory—which claims that racism is embedded in American law and institutions and that the historical mistreatment of black people largely explains current social and economic disparities.
Before becoming the first black tenured professor at Harvard Law School in the 1970s, Bell was a lawyer for the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund, where he worked on school desegregation cases under the tutelage of Thurgood Marshall. Bell was once a critic of racial favoritism. But over time, he grew unhappy with the pace of black progress and came to believe that racism is so deeply ingrained in our society that colorblind remedies were destined to fail.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Axios
39 minutes ago
- Axios
Scoop: Gabbard tightens grip on intel assessments after Venezuela clash
Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard has imposed a more intensive review process for inter-agency reports, slowing their publication and deepening internal fears about political influence on intelligence, two U.S. officials tell Axios. The intrigue: The new layers of approval were introduced after Gabbard's acting chief of staff pushed for changes to a politically inconvenient report on Venezuela from experts across multiple intelligence agencies — an internal dispute that spilled into public view. Driving the news: That report from the National Intelligence Council (NIC) cast doubt on links the White House had drawn between the Tren de Aragua cartel and the Venezuelan government to justify deporting suspected gang members to El Salvador. Gabbard fired the acting heads of the NIC who approved that report last month. Her office said it was part of her efforts to "end the weaponization and politicization of the Intelligence Community." Veterans of U.S. intelligence warned the episode would send a "chill" through the community. "Nobody wants to give the boss what he or she needs to hear if the messenger is going to get shot," a former senior intel official told Axios. After the Venezuela controversy, Gabbard announced that she'd referred"deep-state criminals" to the Department of Justice over suspected leaks. Behind the scenes: She also quietly added a new layer of approval for NIC reports. An intelligence official said everything now needs sign-off from Deputy DNI for Mission Integration William Ruger or from Gabbard herself. An intelligence official told Axios the result was a slower flow of intelligence to policymakers. "The mere fact that they're going through all these steps has brought it to a trickle." "The process has definitely become more cumbersome," another U.S. official said, concurring that the NIC was publishing less in recent weeks than it had previously. In response to questions from Axios, an official from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) said it was normal for the DNI or Deputy DNI to review reports prior to publication. The official did confirm changes had been made. "Considering the heads of the NIC were terminated for their inability to remove political priorities from the workplace, there is an even more comprehensive review of the products coming out of the NIC to ensure the office is producing apolitical intelligence." "This is good for the trust of the American people in the intelligence community and for the safety and security of our nation," the official contended. The other side: A former member of the NIC, which is typically staffed by career intelligence officials on rotation from other agencies, told Axios he'd never heard of that level of intervention by DNI leadership into the publishing process. "The NIC is a production mill for the DNI, so to require everything to be going through Mission Integration, or wherever else, would have constipated the system," he said. Between the lines: The changes reflect the mutual distrust between the intelligence community and its new leadership. Intelligence officials worry Gabbard's team may shape intelligence to match their political preferences. But Gabbard's team claims "deep state" officials are shaping the intelligence to match their political preferences, hence the review process. How it works: The NIC is responsible for providing assessments that take in the views of all U.S. intelligence agencies, often in response to requests from the White House. Typically a relevant subject matter expert at CIA or another agency will draft a paper which is then circulated among the relevant analysts at a dozen or so additional agencies for their input. The final product is published by the NIC in a classified format, and provided to the relevant policymakers. These can range from a one-pager turned around quickly on a hot-button issue — some aspect of the war in Ukraine, for example — or a months-long deep dive into an adversary's nuclear capabilities or terror threats to the homeland. In the case of the Venezuela report, the assessment was that the Tren de Aragua cartel was not being controlled by the Venezuelan government — contradicting a claim President Trump made while invoking the Alien Enemies Act. Joe Kent, Gabbard's chief of staff, wrote intel officials in April that "some rewriting" and more analytic work was needed "so this document is not used against the DNI or POTUS," the New York Times reported. Intelligence community members Axios spoke to for this story raised concerns that after the Venezuela episode, analysts could start to self-censor or simply keep their heads down to avoid political backlash. What they're saying: "Ensuring only the most timely, apolitical, and accurate intelligence reaches the desks of our decision makers is DNI Gabbard's top priority," Gabbard's spokesperson Olivia Coleman told Axios.
Axios
39 minutes ago
- Axios
U.S. races to break China's hold on rare earth magnets
While U.S. trade negotiators work to ease an immediate shortage of rare earth magnets from China, the Trump administration is scrambling to line up viable alternatives that would reduce America's reliance on its chief economic rival. Why it matters: Small-but-powerful rare earth magnets are essential to high-tech products, from cars and robots to electronics and weapons. But China controls 90% of the world's supply of the critical components. The contentious trade relationship between the U.S. and China has amplified the economic and security risks of that reliance. Global automakers are "in full panic" that China's limits on rare earth exports will trigger supply chain shocks like the pandemic-related semiconductor shortages that occurred in 2021 and 2022. The big picture: It's not a new problem. U.S. officials have been talking about the need to mitigate American dependence on China for years. China also dominates processing of metals like lithium, cobalt, nickel and graphite used in batteries. The latest: U.S. and Chinese officials met Monday and Tuesday in London to try to iron out their trade issues, amid reports that China was willing to expedite export licenses for U.S. and European automakers if the U.S. loosened export controls on jet engine parts and software. Late Tuesday both sides said they'd reached a framework of a deal, pending approval from both countries' leaders, that would in theory resolve the most recent export issues. Yes, but: There's still an urgency to find alternative sources. President Trump in April called for an investigation into national security risks posed by U.S. reliance on imported processed critical minerals, including rare earth elements. He has also used a series of executive orders to try to bolster domestic supply chains, like fast-tracking environmental reviews for U.S. mining projects. In Congress, meanwhile, rare earth competition with China has galvanized both parties. A spate of bills would create a tax credit for production of high-performance rare earth magnets, use Defense Production Act authority to direct emergency funding, and establish an Energy Department program to finance minerals projects. Two Republicans and two Democrats are pressing legislation that allows the president to strike free trade agreements exclusively focused on critical minerals and rare earth elements. "There is fairly broad bipartisan support around becoming more resilient, especially in areas that invoke national security — and this is clearly one of them," Sen. Todd Young, an Indiana Republican leading that bill, told Axios last month. Zoom in: One deal that's getting a lot of attention is a potential partnership between California-based MP Materials and Saudi Arabia's flagship mining company, Maaden. The deal was inked in May on the sidelines of the U.S.-Saudi Investment Forum, coinciding with a broader agreement between the U.S. and Saudi Arabia to cooperate on energy and critical minerals. MP Materials operates California's Mountain Pass, the only rare-earths mine in the U.S., which produces 12% of the global supply. At maximum production, Mountain Pass could yield enough rare earths to supply more than 6 million electric vehicles, the company says. But the bottleneck is magnets, which MP Materials is just beginning to produce. Maaden, a fast-growing, government-controlled mining company, is developing mines for a variety of critical minerals, but doesn't produce rare earths today. What to watch: Together, the companies seek to jointly develop a vertically integrated rare earths supply chain in Saudi Arabia—mining, separation, refining and magnet production—for global consumption. Zoning and environmental regulations in the U.S. make it hard to open a rare earth mine, but Saudi Arabia moves more quickly and is anxious to wean its economy off of oil. Saudi expertise in petrochemical refining can be leveraged for minerals processing, while MP brings experience across the entire rare earths supply chain, including mining, refining and magnet production. Reality check: The preliminary deal is non-binding, so it could still fall apart.
Epoch Times
an hour ago
- Epoch Times
Trump's Travel Ban Courts Both Controversy and Support in Africa
JOHANNESBURG—Some critics of President Donald Trump's latest proclamation of bans from entering the United States on the nationals of seven African countries, and restrictions on three others, say these are unjustified and proof of American neo-colonialism and imperialism. On the other hand, supporters and some experts said his measures are fair, as some of the countries concerned are terrorist havens, while others are poorly governed and don't have the security systems in place to adequately screen and vet travelers.
