By Jason Eppink
Staff Writer
The University of Michigan has the right to admit whomever it wishes into its school — except for the fact that it is funded by Michigan and American taxpayers and that gives the government say over its admissions policies.
While judges and politicians quibble about the merit of preferential treatment in admissions processes, the larger and more fundamental issue is blatantly being left out of the dialogue: the sanctity of private property in the free market.
The ideal that property can belong to a person is the foundation of our economic and political system. If we believe that property is an extension of the person, then the use of one’s property without his consent is immoral, just as the use of one’s body without his consent is immoral.
Use without consent could be considered a form of theft. Theft is unlawful, and one of the government’s duties is to protect its citizens from theft.
By funding the University of Michigan with tax dollars, the state of Michigan is engaging in the very crime it is assigned to prevent. Citizens have no choice but to hand over their private property that by its very definition is an extension of themselves.
That’s only the beginning of the problem. Because each citizen contributes to government’s income, the government holds an obligation to protect the interests of every citizen in the redistribution of that wealth — an obligation it rarely fulfills.
Surely a large number of Michigan citizens don’t approve of a quota system, and yet they are forced to pay for an institution that supports such a device.
In contrast, private universities do not have the responsibility to please everybody. They are funded purely by the voluntary actions of people who use their services or care about their goals (not counting government financial aid).
If a student wishes to attend a school that places an emphasis on skin color in deciding who is allowed to learn there, that person is free to apply. If this is of no concern to the student, that person can apply elsewhere.
That’s the beauty of the free market — the freedom to choose how one’s money is spent and how one will benefit from it. Capitalism does not fail to work in the education market, operating on the basic principle of supply and demand motivated by self-interest.
For example, if a student finds the education provided by a university valuable, that person will pay the price to study there. Each student must choose a balance between the services they wish to obtain and the amount of money they are able and willing to trade for them.
Universities must also enroll students they predict will be successful in their later careers, thereby adding to the prestige of the school and making their services more valuable.
This necessarily includes offering financial aid to desired students who could otherwise not afford to attend the school.
The fact is, if we believe in the sanctity of private property the government has no place in the education market, not only from a moral standpoint, but from a practical standpoint as well.
The private education market is essential in protecting all free speech whether it’s politically correct or not, and it allows schools to choose for themselves what sort of diversity they will foster.
Quite simply, the government should abandon the education market. Not only do public universities violate the very foundations of the capitalist system, they are unnecessary and unable to meet the interests of the people who fund them. My advice to the Supreme Court? Stop making Michigan citizens pay for the education of others and let private schools take over.
January 23, 2003