Sonia Sotomayor & Baseball: Diversity4Dummies

By: MODI

Prior to the Presidential election, I wrote “If Sports Were Like Politics” about how political absurdities would not last five minutes if subjected to the playing field. For all the debating about sports, few things in life that make more sense. Not so in politics. Take Sonia Sotomayor, President Obama’s judicial nominee. Ironically, she has been involved in quite a few judicial decisions relevant to sports, and because of her role in ending the 1994 strike, some have even labeled her “baseball’s savior”. It is too bad that her critics don’t understand the game.

Proof comes this week as conservative pundits and politicians trip all over themselves to brand her a “racist” based largely off of the following quote which is now well-known:

“I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion [as a judge] than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.”

These pundits rush into the predictable “what if you just reversed this word for that word” nonsense despite that her comments made perfect sense when placed in context. Now I don’t want to waste too much time on the Limbaughs, the Gingrich’s, or the Hannitys. Instead good folks like Jack and Jill Politics, Media Matters, and Keith Olbermann have those specifics covered.

However, this narrow criticism is repeated so often and in so many other scenarios. It is truly amazing how many people do not fully comprehend the value of diversity in race, ethnicity, thought, and personal experience on a team. Obviously, diversity is never a substitute for qualifications and competence — areas that have been undeniably met by Sotomayor’s record (even if not by some of her potential colleagues). Even still, myopic critics often dismiss diversity as some sort of “political correctness”.

I’m convinced that these people never played baseball.

It’s real basic. A starting line-up has a pitcher, a catcher, four infielders, and three outfielders. Each specific position brings a unique and nuanced skill set. If the current Supreme Court were a baseball team, then it would be starting five outfielders and four catchers out of position. If a wise Latino manager insisted that his team only have three starting outfielders instead of five, he might be accused of having a “quota system”.

Well guess what? ALL winning teams in sports have “quota systems”.  That’s why they win! Any NBA team with five centers or five point guards is a losing team, and a 5-person band with five sax players or five trumpet players is a terrible band. Everybody understands this without debate. But try to threaten powerful bodies dominated by white males, and every body’s brain suddenly becomes mush.

Let’s be clear. There are only nine Supreme court slots and probably at least a couple hundred candidates who are completely qualified. Once we: 1) Consider the current make-up of our Supreme court; 2) establishing that the ”competence criteria” has been met: and 3) control for similar political views, then

  • any female candidate IS more qualified than any male candidate! 
  • any minority candidate IS more qualified than any white candidate!
  • a candidate with different life experiences IS more qualified than one whose are not!

Conversely, if eight of the current Supreme Court Justices were women, and only one were white, then it would be absurd for Obama not to select a white male. And it is absurd that this has to be explained in such a didactic manner. But there has simply been too much idiocy spewing from my TV the last couple of days. Diversity is not about “firsts” or “quotas” or “being PC” — it is about putting together the best winning team of the nine most influential people to correctly interpret the Constitution for ALL citizens.

From past to present, the failure to achieve court diversity has been far too devastating.

Does anyone believe that in 1875 that the women’s right to vote would be unanimously rejected if at least four or five women were justices? Does anyone believe that in 1896 Plessy vs. Ferguson passes (”Separate but Equal”) by an 8-1 margin without an all-white court?  Does anybody believe that the 1963 Civil Rights “Act” would not be a constitutional amendment by 2009 if the make-up of the court were different? Virtually all of the worst decisions in our history up until today can be blamed on the court’s lack of diversity.

But the problem of not valuing diversity goes far beyond the Supreme Court…

Question #1: What is the most racist institution in America?

The Unites States Senate.

Of our 100 final lawmakers, 99 are white. They make (bad) education policy. They make (bad) prison policy. They make (bad) economic policy. And (bad) foreign policy. If enough white Senators can’t really tell the difference between one Arab that bombed America with one that did not, then big “mistakes” happen. 

Question #2: If you replaced every single white Republican Senator with a white Democratic one, what would be the most racist institution in America?

The United States Senate.

Lack of cultural diversity can be just as bad as intentional racism (not to suggest that all Reps are racist or all Dems are not) . Who championed the most racist crack-vs-cocaine drug sentencing laws of the 1980s? It was Joe Biden. Who is trying to overturn them now? Yup, Joe Biden. After 25 years and hundred of thousands receiving draconian sentences, Biden basically says: “oops — my bad, I was wrong about that one. Sorry everybody!” This is just one of thousands of laws that are merely “mistakes”. Do you think that Biden had any first hand experiences in Delaware that might have informed his vote? What about the other 99 Senators?

Question #3: As a white male author who often likes to write anti-racist and anti-sexist articles, if 100 white Senators thought just like me, would the Senate be a racist or sexist institution?

Of course it would! I do not possess the cultural competence or diversity of personal experiences to make laws that would be free of racial-bias or gender-bias. It doesn’t matter how hard that I would try or how good my intentions were. The result of lack of diversity during the process is racism or sexism as a result.

It’s not that diversity ensures good law, it’s that lack of diversity ensures bad law.

If you want a fairer Supreme Court, have members that better represents America. If you want a fairer Senate, do the same. If you want laws made and interpreted correctly for all Americans, ask what each candidate adds to the team.

And by the way, EVERY statement here can be applied directly to the well-documented monolithically-white mainstream sports media. Because there is no way — and I mean no way — that the death of Mike Tyson’s daughter this week would have been reported in the same disgusting fashion if there were more African-American editors in news rooms across the land.  The bottom line is this:

Sonia Sotomayor IS more qualified than any — yes, ANY — white male candidate with similar politics to occupy one of the nine positions on the United States Supreme Court.

And if you can’t understand that…

then you know absolutely nothing about baseball.

Share This Article

No Comments

No comments yet.

Comment On This Article