In the article, Susan Van Deventer Iverson examines university diversity policies through the lens of critical race theory. The rationale behind the article is that strategies that were initially developed to fight injustice and bias to people of color frequently occur to be ineffective. Indeed, the “analysis of 21 diversity action plans issued at 20 U.S. land-grant universities” conducted by the author reveals that “attempts to create a more inclusive campus may unwittingly reinforce practices that support exclusion and inequity” (Iverson 590, 586). The present paper discusses the arguments of Iverson and explains the reason why intentions to eradicate racism aggravate the situation contrary to expectations. One of the aims of university diversity policies is to provide equal access to education to all people regardless of their race, gender, religion, or socioeconomic status. In the context of fighting racism and discrimination, universities support the entrance of applicants of color to increase the number of such students (Iverson 594). However, one might suggest the problem is that this strategy is racist per se because it obliges authorities to divide students into whites and non-whites. Iverson shares such a view on this policy by emphasizing that the implementation of policies aimed at the provision of equal access creates division even between the students of one race (Iverson 595). More precisely, these policies target not all the existing people of color who want to enter university but mainly those who could be characterized as elites. The second problem is that according to diversity action plans, students of color are more likely to have flagging academic records and become victims of hatred and harassment. What is more, one of the universities explicitly refers to the students of color as “disadvantaged and underprepared” (Iverson 597). The critical point here is that by putting such labels on students of color, universities state the following fact: due to the variety of factors, many non-white students lack access to education of high quality. Unfortunately, higher educational institutions have to reconcile this problem of poor education at lower levels and create ways to mitigate it. Nowadays, democratic values are becoming more and more critical to society. Democracy, in its turn, is unimaginable without equality that could be achieved through the implementation of affirmative actions (Iverson 602). This point returns one to the second paragraph of the paper that discusses failures to provide equal access to education. Still, the most striking finding on diversity policies is that they are widely used to promote the university. Using modern terminology, universities manage to “hype” on their anti-racist strategies to attract more applicants and attention (Iverson 600). Overall, the situation with diversity policies resembles a vicious circle or a Perpetuum mobile because all these policies exacerbate the inequality based on racial differences. To conclude, it should be noticed that even though the paper was written 14 years ago, it applies to modern times. Undoubtedly, the world has changed, and society is moving towards equality and non-discrimination. Nonetheless, from Iverson’s article, it could be inferred that university diversity pol