capital stock will remain largely socialized.nWhen the Soviets say privatization,nthey mean that “one enterprisenwill own another,” so most of the stocknwill be owned by other enterprises innthe same industry, and not by thenpublic. This creates state-protected privatencartels that will protect each other,nboth economically and politically. Partynleaders still talk of the “right to anjob,” the “right to leisure,” the “rightnto housing,” and other Brezhnev-eranfoolishness. Nobody is talking aboutnreforming socialized medical care,nwhich is killing the public.nTrue reform, if the leadership reallynwants it, should take no longer than anday or two. It should feature totalnprivatization, a defunded state apparatus,ncomplete price decontrol, a newnmonetary system, the rule of law, completenindependence for the republics,nand no new dictators. (Editor’s note:ndictatorship is exactly what ForeignnSecretary Eduard Schevardnadzenwarned against in his December 19,n1990, resignation address.) It is a bitternirony that after forty years of the ColdnWar the Bush administration is tryingnto salvage what’s left of the old Communistnorder — for the sake of the NewnWorld Order.nWhether Washington or the Sovietnleadership wants it, a revolution isncoming. And whether it can be bloodlessndepends entirely on the presentnregime’s willingness to relinquish itsnpower, and soon.n— Yuri N. MaltsevnWASHINGTON’S GERRYMANderingnof job seekers’ test scores toncomport with egalitarian fantasy hasngiven us a glimpse of the testing centernof the future. On university campuses,nthe proctors will be apostles of PoliticalnCorrectness. Armed with a high-technapparatus that can detect signs of brainnactivity, they will prowl the test centersnand activate a mental scrambler whenevernany test taker emits waves indicatingnhe is taking unfair advantage of hisnbrains. The time will have arrived, asnleftist Kurt Vonnegut once imaginednin the short story “Harrison Bergeron,”nwhen the ideal of absolute humannequality has been reached; thanks tonthe 21Ith, 212th, and 213th Amendmentsnto the Constitution and thendiligence of the United States Handi-n8/CHRONICLESncapper General, nobody will ben”smarter than anybody else” (or prettiernor stronger or anything). Life, at last,nwill be fair.nVonnegut’s fiction was set in thenyear 2081. The reality of brain-leveling,nhowever, is coming much soonernthan that. The U.S. Department ofnLabor’s system of secretly riggingnscores on a widely used job aptitudentest according to a racial handicappingnscheme — a system that was exposednlast summer and then put on hold bynDOL—was not just a single quirkynexperiment destined to be interrednwith all the other brain-dead progenynof the social engineers. The racenormingnof the General Aptitude TestnBattery (GATB) so as to award blacksnand Hispanics hefty bonus points toncompensate for the lower test averagesnof their groups was, it turns out, part ofna larger subterranean movement to rigntest scoring toward racial parity — thusnbringing job quotas in through the backndoor.nThe irony of all this is that thenegalitarians behind this scam are implicitlynsiding with racialists who longnhave contended that the disparity betweennwhite and black test averages isnthe result of immutable, genetic-basedndifferences in intelligence. The testnriggers are throwing in the towel, givingnup the liberal faith in perfectibilitynof the human being. In the processnthey are besmirching the real achievementsnof those who have shown theyndon’t need any hoked-up gradesheetsnto get ahead, and they are stoking thenfires of racial resentment. The equalnopportunity promised by the landmarkncivil rights laws has become the fulcrumnfor unequal entitlements.nThe details of the great testing deceptionnmay be revealed only gradually,nlike the tantalizing lifting of annexotic dancer’s veils. Nearly half a yearnhad passed after then-Secretary of LabornElizabeth Dole had suspended usenof the race-normed GATB when itncame to light that the staff of the EqualnEmployment Opportunity Commissionnwas dragooning Fortune 500 companiesninto using other kinds of testsnthat disguised racial preferences —nquotas — in their scoring. EEOCnchairman Evan J. Kemp, Jr. promptlyndisavowed race-norming, but his underling’snscheming showed how deeplynembedded in the bureaucracy the ne­nnnfarious practice is. The EEOC-preferrednsubterfuge, or something like it,ncould be attached to GATB — a popularntest for blue-collar jobs in wide usensince 1947 — when DOL trots out itsnnext version of the test in the next yearnor two. An EEOC official admittednthat yet another test favored by thenfederal bureaucracy is sex-normed: thatnis, because women tend to score lowernthan men on mechanical aptitude, thenscores of women are padded to eliminatenthe difference in group averages.nEuphemisms are the stock in tradenof test-falsifying egalitarians. The preferrednone for the race-norming ofnGATB was “within-group scoring,”nwhich meant that blacks’ percentilesnresulted from being scored against fellownblacks alone, while Hispanics werenranked against other Hispanics, andn”others” (mainly whites and Asians)nwere scored in a separate category.nThe most fraudulent aspect of this isnthat the jobs bureaucracy then gave outnpercentile scores to the unemployedntest takers as well as to prospectivenemployers as though they werenstraightforward merit-based rankingsnfrom the total test population. Were anprivate company to engage in suchnwholesale misrepresentation, the governmentnand Naderites would sue itninto receivership.nThe EEOG-preferred alternative isncouched in an even more misleadingneuphemism: “performance-basednscore adjustment.” Contrary to itsnmeritocratic ring, this method uses anconvoluted formula to artificially boostnpercentiles based on the size of differencesnin average test scores betweenndesignated minorities and “other persons.”nPerversely, the worse blacks andnHispanics score as groups, the largernthe bonus points they individually receive.nThis so-called “performancefair”nsystem gives minorities approximatelyn90 percent of the advantagenthey receive from “within-group” scoring.nLinda S. Gottfredson of the Departmentnof Educational Studies at thenUniversity of Delaware figured that anraw score of 270 that would give anwhite person a percentile score of 16nunder either system would entitle anblack test taker to a score of 50 undernGATB race-norming and 46 under thenperformance-fair quota system.nThere are two tip-offs that the performance-fairnsystem may become then