[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

I mean, black people and white people growing up in the same area under similar conditions are likely to bring similar things to the table.

Conventional wisdom would say "yes" but research indicates that whiteness generates cultural and social capital and (in general) gives the white people some advantage. This is because when the common denominator is human capital (what we bring to the table), what propels people to the top will be racial differentials in cultural capital (valued identifiers like race, speech, style of dress, etc.) and social capital (who you know/networks). In general, this propelling has occurred when the white person is connected to a white person in a blue collar hiring position or gets access to a suit and instructions for entering the labor market.

Originally Posted by shinerbock

Meanwhile a white kid like me, and a white kid from Berkley whose parents lobby for PETA are likely to bring very distinctive viewpoints and experiences.

Yes, differing viewpoints and experiences are all over the place. The true test is in determining whether the different viewpoints and experiences translate to substantially different capital investments and returns. You and the Berkley student are likely to have similar capital investments and returns despite other surface differences. Now if there are social class differences, you or the Berkley kid will have some catching up to do.

Originally Posted by shinerbock

I fail to see that black people, simply because they're black, bring something more to a university. I imagine that a white kid from New Mexico probably would bring more diversity to UGA than a black kid from Decatur, but I think schools get too caught up on how diversity looks in the Princeton Review breakdown.

Where have you been looking?

There are commonalities across race, gender, region, class groups, etc. They do not have to translate to things that are observable on the surface level.