Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
First Annual White Heterosexual Male Scholarship
A while back, the College Republicans at the University of Rhode Island tried their hands at a wee bit of social satire: They inaugurated the First Annual White Heterosexual Male Scholarship[PDF of application]. "Applicants were asked, first, to certify that they were indeed white, heterosexual, American and male and then to answer two questions: 'In 100 words or less, what does being a White Heterosexual American Male mean to you? As a White Heterosexual American Male, what adversities have you had to deal with and overcome?'"
The inevitable occurs:
The student senate was not amused, and in February the Student Organizations Advisory and Review Committee demanded that the College Republicans: A) not award the $100 scholarship, B) apologize in writing for having violated the anti-discrimination section of the senate’s bylaws, and C) seek permission from the senate before mounting any programs in the next 12 months. The group cheerfully agreed to A – why not? – and declined to comply with B and C.
In response the Advisory and Review Committee exercised the nuclear option and voted to derecognize the group, in spite of the fact that Robert Carothers, the university’s president, had declared on April 6 that it was unconstitutional to require the College Republicans to “make public statements which are not their own.” (The relevant First Amendment category is “compelled speech.”)
The student senate backed down on Thursday. Stanley Fish blogs on the resolution and does some deepthink about FIRE's role in the controversy.
More on FIRE here and here. The founders of FIRE write in Reason here and here.
|4.30.07 @ 12:39PM|#
At least it sounds like the U. president doesn't have his head up his ass. (He has a JD, which probably helped in this particular instance: http://www.uri.edu/president/bio.html)
ed|4.30.07 @ 12:49PM|#
That's one hip university they've got there, where the
Republicans are the ones
with a sense of humor.
Straight White Frat Boy\'s Ess|4.30.07 @ 12:50PM|#
ESSAY
when I was a pledge at delta frakin pie frat last year, I lurnd
what it wuz like bein' a HeteroSEXual male. We played ookie cookie,
and I won. It was a long, hard battle, but I overcame
any obstikals to win.
It was because of this support from the d frak pie house that I
could overcome my problems.
So please gimme the money, cuz we could have a great kegger with
it.
thoreau|4.30.07 @ 12:51PM|#
What have we learned today? Well, we've learned nothing
new, but we've gotten nice reminders of two things that we
already know:
1) College Republicans are frequently obnoxious assholes who like
to piss everyone off with dumb students. (Not to be confused with
college students who just happen to vote Republican.)
2) Student governments (much like other governments) don't know how
to let asshole organizations stew in their own bad PR. Instead they
have to get all draconian and create a pretext for outside
organizations to get involved on behalf of the assholes.
If the Student Senate had an ounce of sense (insert joke here)
they'd get one of their friends to attend a party with the leaders
of the College Republicans, capture embarassing footage on camera
phones (ideally involving at least partial nudity, plus
intoxication with substances that may or may not be legal), and
post it on the web.
|4.30.07 @ 12:54PM|#
United Negroe college fund anyone?
Miss Ebony Pageant?
Miss Bronze?
NAACP?
B.E.T?
Black Congressional Caucus?
WTF?
Roving Reporter|4.30.07 @ 12:57PM|#
THIS JUST IN: DO NOT CROSS DR. THOREAU! HE WILL KRUSH
YOU!
This just in: the Roving Reporter apologizes for those
embarrassing pictures of him that an anonymous source posted on teh
intertubz
In an other story, do not cross Dr. T. Just send him accolades. and
a Mr. Goodbar. With sprinkles.
|4.30.07 @ 1:05PM|#
thoreau,
Do you think all people who offer scholarships for people of a
particular race/gender/sexual orientation are obnoxious
assholes?
Jennifer|4.30.07 @ 1:05PM|#
This is no better and no worse than scholarships offered to any
other ethnic group.
That said, I'd love to write an essay about "What Being a White
Woman Means To Me." Basically, the money I save by not having to
pay for my own drinks in bars is more than overshadowed by the
fortune I must spend on sunblock.
Nobody knows the trouble I've seen. Nobody knows my sorrow.
|4.30.07 @ 1:06PM|#
Hmmm. Well, the only real objection that I have to this affair is how come I didn't have access to such scholarship opportunities when I was in law school? I'm still paying off those furshlugginer loans.
thoreau|4.30.07 @ 1:06PM|#
Do you think all people who offer scholarships for people of
a particular race/gender/sexual orientation are obnoxious
assholes?
Whatever else might be said about the general concept of a
race-specific scholarship, it's clear that the intent here is to
generate controversy and piss people off. So that certainly
qualifies the College Republicans for the "obnoxious asshole"
label.
Jennifer|4.30.07 @ 1:07PM|#
Whatever else might be said about the general concept of a
race-specific scholarship, it's clear that the intent here is to
generate controversy and piss people off.
Which is what good satire is supposed to do.
|4.30.07 @ 1:08PM|#
It's no worse than any of the agit-prop stunts the leftist organizations do. In fact, it's quite well-done.
|4.30.07 @ 1:11PM|#
No, that's what shitty satire is supposed to do.
Good satire is supposed to encourage thought.
thoreau|4.30.07 @ 1:11PM|#
Which is what good satire is supposed to do.
Except that you have to do it with a smile on your face for it to
work, and you have to get the crowd to laugh with you and
sympathize with your point. If you're just kind of pissed at how
unfair it all is, and it shows, then it ruins the satire. Good
satire is an art form, and College Republicans consistently fail at
it.
Dave Barry could probably offer a white guy scholarship and make it
work. Even P. J. O'Rourke. But not your typical College
Republican.
|4.30.07 @ 1:13PM|#
do you trust the roving reporter, jimmy?
no?
here have a zagnut bar. now do you trust the roving reporter?
survey says yes!
|4.30.07 @ 1:13PM|#
...the money I save by not having to pay for my own drinks
in bars is more than overshadowed by the fortune I must spend on
sunblock.
A fortune in sunblock? In friggin' Hartford?
|4.30.07 @ 1:13PM|#
"Do you think all people who offer scholarships for people of a
particular race/gender/sexual orientation are obnoxious
assholes?"
Do you think the Sally Struthers character in the "Starvin' Marvin"
episode of South Park really had as much right to eat the food aid
as the malnourished Ethiopians?
|4.30.07 @ 1:13PM|#
brotherben,
The problem is that those organizations are outside the purview of
the college administration/student senate rules and don't exactly
qualify here. If the college allowed a "GLADD Scholarship" to be
distributed to a gay only person by the Student GLADD organization,
or a Student NAACP group offering scholarships to black only
students, then your comparison would have merit (I do not know
whether said University has such groups nor what they can offer in
ways of scholarships).
To counter those organizations you listed, name me at least a
couple non-minority, non-violent organizations that espouse a
"majority view". I am drawing a blank, except for the fictional
United Honky College Fund. If any do exist, perhaps you can explain
to me what the rationale is for their existence.
Most groups whether based on racial (NAACP), gender (NOW), sexual
persuasion (GLADD) or work ethos (Unions) usually band together to
facilitate change in what they view is the "bigger world". I don't
think the "bigger world" usually finds need to band together
against the minorities, though I suppose I could be wrong.
Bee|4.30.07 @ 1:16PM|#
Whether it's good satire or shitty, and whether they are assholes or not, this is an indefensible attempt to silence them.
Jennifer|4.30.07 @ 1:18PM|#
Except that you have to do it with a smile on your face for
it to work, and you have to get the crowd to laugh with you and
sympathize with your point. If you're just kind of pissed at how
unfair it all is, and it shows, then it ruins the satire. Good
satire is an art form, and College Republicans consistently fail at
it.
It may or may not have been effective satire, but satire it was.
And I thought it was pretty clever myself; they worded it EXACTLY
the way sex or race-based scholarship essay questions tend to
be.
"What does being a white woman mean to me?" Uh, nothing. It simply
is. And being of various European ethnicities means fuck-all to me,
too. But if I wanted to get a scholarship I could spin all kinds of
bullshit about the sorrows and travails I've faced.
|4.30.07 @ 1:19PM|#
thoreau,
What's the big deal? So they don't agree with all things
affirmative action. That's not exactly an insanely invalid
position, whether or not their motives are pure. Besides, it's just
supposed to be one of those silly provocative things that student
organizations like to do in lieu of writing and speaking and stuff.
Not that they aren't likely jerks--anyone that into being a
Republican or Democrat at that age should be shaken, not
stirred--but that's hardly relevant to the college's response to
the whole matter.
joe,
That was South Park at it best. I loved that episode.
|4.30.07 @ 1:20PM|#
Yeah, what Bee said.
They're just playing to the assholes' hands.
"You are cordially invited to provide us with an enormous amount of
publicity, by disciplining us in a heavy-handed manner that
encourages sympathy for us among the general public.
RSVP by Tuesday.
I WILL / WILL NOT respond in exactly the manner you hoped I
would."
Quick, Margaret, circle "WILL" and put the card in the mail!
|4.30.07 @ 1:25PM|#
urkobold:
they are bereft in deathly bloom.
lake looks okay today. nothing special.
thoreau|4.30.07 @ 1:25PM|#
PL-
Arguing against affirmative action is a perfectly reasonable thing
to do. The problem is that College Republicans (the organizations,
not to be confused with college students who happen to vote
Republican) who make these sorts of arguments tend to look like
fratboys who feel that it's really unfair that they don't get the
same special breaks as everybody else. Now, from the standpoint of
logic that is an ad hominem and it shouldn't matter. From the
standpoint of PR, however, it matters a lot, and the College
Republican kids don't get it. Or they do get it and they find it
unfair so they're even more determined to rail against
it.
The whole idea of a publicity stunt is to not only be right but be
persuasive as well. If it isn't persuasive, it doesn't matter how
right the underlying point is.
|4.30.07 @ 1:26PM|#
Bah, I had a whole bunch of useless drivel written out but I
deleted it all to say:
All Hail Urkobold, eater of the living, shitter of the dead!
THUNDERCHICKEN|4.30.07 @ 1:28PM|#
*makes omelet out of Bela Lugosi's toenail
clippings
THE LAKE LOOKS BEAUTIFUL TODAY. MUCH COOLER BY LAKE. GO
BACK TO 773
(TAG MIGHT OR MIGHT NOT BE LEFT OPEN!!!)
ed|4.30.07 @ 1:28PM|#
Good satire is supposed to encourage thought
That's what left-wing satire is for. Lot's and lots of thought. Not
so much laughter.
Good satire has to piss off at least half its audience or it's a
failure.
|4.30.07 @ 1:32PM|#
Whatever else might be said about the general concept of a
race-specific scholarship, it's clear that the intent here is to
generate controversy and piss people off.
By forcing them to examine how they can possibly justify
scholarships that are limited to a particular race, just as long as
that race isn't white.
thoreau|4.30.07 @ 1:32PM|#
Here's the College Republican problem in a nutshell:
There are perfectly respectable points to be made against special
privileges for members of particular groups. However, College
Republicans manage to come across as being whiners who just feel
like life has been so unfair to them.
Nineteen year-olds whining about how unfair life is will never be
terribly persuasive.
|4.30.07 @ 1:34PM|#
Urkobold®,
You were summoned in the Johnston Timeline thread. I sacrificed a
fatted calf and everything.
thoreau,
Honestly, aren't all kids at that age annoying? I certainly
was.
thoreau|4.30.07 @ 1:39PM|#
Honestly, aren't all kids at that age annoying?
Yes, but while they all have annoying traits not all of them
pollute their attempts at satire with whines.
SugarFree|4.30.07 @ 1:39PM|#
Maybe the College Republicans are just like producers of "R"
rated movies.
The R rating covers everything you can do in a movie that is only
slightly more than PG-13 and slightly less than X. Once your movie
gets slapped with an "R" you have no incentive to stay at the PG-13
end of the spectrum; you might as well push it right up to X.
Maybe the College Republicans have realized that if you express the
tiniest doubt about affirmative action, then the reaction is
"RACISTS!!!" being yelled at them across the quad. If anything you
do that questions the orthodoxy garners the same set of reactions,
why not just push it as far and be as offensive as you can?
I would also apply this principle to sexual harassment, date rape,
the lowering of the DUI intoxication limit, food bans, Imus, zero
tolerance laws in schools and the expansion of the death penalty to
crimes that are not murder.
(This is not an endorsement of the College Republicans.)
ed|4.30.07 @ 1:41PM|#
Thoreau,
Did one of those College Republicans give you an apple with a worm
in it?
Federal Dog|4.30.07 @ 1:42PM|#
"B) apologize in writing for having violated the
anti-discrimination section of the senate's bylaws"
Oh, why the hell not bring in freaking Dr. Phil to preside over the
therapy session and issue absolution? Goddamned infantile
idiots.
Jennifer|4.30.07 @ 1:43PM|#
Thoreau, what was whiny about this? If anything, it sounds like these guys took the scholarship forms for some other group and just replaced "Black woman" or "Samoan transgender" with "white heterosexual male."
thoreau|4.30.07 @ 1:44PM|#
Maybe the College Republicans have realized that if you
express the tiniest doubt about affirmative action, then the
reaction is "RACISTS!!!" being yelled at them across the quad. If
anything you do that questions the orthodoxy garners the same set
of reactions, why not just push it as far and be as offensive as
you can?
Fair point, but:
1) While the yells of "racist!" are often the loudest response,
they aren't necessarily the only response. By being a bunch of
assholes they alienate anybody who might respond differently
(albeit at a lower decibel level).
2) Of course, the univerity's response only further encourages them
to push the envelope.
PL-
Yes, but some college students know how to do satire without
whining. (They just whine at other times, when they aren't doing
satire.)
|4.30.07 @ 1:44PM|#
If I become rich later in life, I'll fund a scholarship. The entrance essay will be on the topic: "What being a Pict who looks like a Jew has meant to me"
|4.30.07 @ 1:44PM|#
The big deal is that because of colonialism and slavery white people are not allowed to have a racial identity or take any pride in their race. All other races of course are allowed. That was kind of the guilty payback that the white European race made with itself for its sins. The problem is that time has elapsed and no one living today has any direct tie to colonialism or slavery. Further, the other races have just as much to answer for as white Europeans do. As time goes on, the bargin is looking more and more rediculous. The problem is that if we continue to suppress any and all expressions of "white pride" for lack of a better term and do nothing about really militant expressions of other racial pride, you leave field entirely open for extremists. I think that the sollution is to get rid of all racial pride period and get people to judge themselves and each other as individuals. Right after they shut the college Republicans down they need to move on to La Raza and every other racially exclusive group.
thoreau|4.30.07 @ 1:45PM|#
Jennifer-
Anything that sounds like "I want special treatment too!" sounds
whiny.
|4.30.07 @ 1:50PM|#
If Jennifer's right, and the language was lifted from some other minority preference scholarship, then couldn't the "whininess" come from that source, too? I'm just not seeing this as any worse than similarly silly stunts. Maybe I'm too Nordic and innately oppressive :(
|4.30.07 @ 1:53PM|#
One thing I know for sure is that you absolutely can not throw a
great kegger with only $100. I therefore conclude that Straight
White Frat Boy is an imposter.
Knock, knock-knock, knock-knock
SugarFree|4.30.07 @ 1:53PM|#
thoreau,
I agree with the whole CR=asshole thing. Basically they are just
the campus equivilent of board trolls. If they just ignored them,
they would go away.
Of course, if you shut down legitimate debate, all that is left is
illegitimate debate. Let's just call it a vicious cycle...
Jennifer|4.30.07 @ 1:56PM|#
Anything that sounds like "I want special treatment too!"
sounds whiny.
But I didn't take this as "I want special treatment too"; it sounds
more like "look how ludicrous that special treatment for others
really is."
|4.30.07 @ 1:57PM|#
The big deal is that because of colonialism and slavery
white people are not allowed to have a racial identity or take any
pride in their race.
Now that is whining.
D.A. Ridgely|4.30.07 @ 1:57PM|#
Many of the comments on this thread suggest that the commenter
believes his or her own reaction to the stunt is (or should be) the
typical reaction. My guess is that many found the CR stunt
obnoxious, some found it funny and a few might even have done a bit
of thinking in reaction. Now, for the drinking game rules
closer...
As libertarians (alternate: as readers of a website that calls
itself Reason), surely we don't believe in a
one-size-fits-all reaction, do we?
s.m. koppelman|4.30.07 @ 1:59PM|#
Do College Republicans ever read any American History? Look at the list of current officers in the URI organization. Judging from their last names, they're all of Irish, French and Italian descent. "Ethnic" Catholics! As if any of them would have been eligible for a scholarship specifically restricted to whites (as many were) back in the good old days!
Rhywun|4.30.07 @ 2:01PM|#
While I grudgingly acknowledge the cleverness of this stunt, I'd like them to name ONE scholarship targeted at gays. Bet they can't. They probably just included sexual orientation in their laundry list on reflex.
Guy Montag|4.30.07 @ 2:02PM|#
Unless an item is approved by the freedom loving thoreau it is
invalid, unfunny and racist.
Don't you people know anything?
Bee|4.30.07 @ 2:02PM|#
One thing I know for sure is that you absolutely can not
throw a great kegger with only $100.
Depends on how many people you invite. Um, and the size 'o the keg.
My ex and I used to get a pony keg a couple of weekends a month and
just park it on the patio. It was kinda fun. Next best thing to
building your own taproom!
Fluffy|4.30.07 @ 2:04PM|#
"The whole idea of a publicity stunt is to not only be right but
be persuasive as well. If it isn't persuasive, it doesn't matter
how right the underlying point is."
That's crazy. That would mean that freedom riders sitting at
segregated lunch counters were doing the wrong thing, because the
crackers who clubbed them weren't persuaded.
Their publicity stunt is persuasive to people who are predisposed
to agree with it - just like every other publicity stunt.
This whole "It's not good satire because I personally didn't laugh"
thing that you are Joe are doing is pretty lame. You won't laugh if
you are the butt of the satire.
SugarFree|4.30.07 @ 2:04PM|#
Rhywun,
"GLAAD scholarships"
First Google
hit.
Unless you want to discount that it is also for transgendered
students as well.
lunchstealer|4.30.07 @ 2:04PM|#
Do you think the Sally Struthers character in the "Starvin'
Marvin" episode of South Park really had as much right to eat the
food aid as the malnourished Ethiopians?
But would I have the right to donate my own food specifically to
Sally Struthers for her personal consumption?
|4.30.07 @ 2:06PM|#
I hate college assholes as much as the next guy. However, I found this pretty damn funny. Then again, I'm a white heterosexual male.
Guy Montag|4.30.07 @ 2:10PM|#
I hate college assholes as much as the next guy. However, I
found this pretty damn funny. Then again, I'm a white heterosexual
male.
Because of all of your earth raping oppression, you need to buy
some carbon credits, toilet paper credits and I will toss in some
slavery credits too.
I take all major credit cards and cash.
Rhywun|4.30.07 @ 2:12PM|#
"GLAAD scholarships"
Ouch - I just got bitch-slapped :)
Funny how as it becomes less and less of a "trial" to be gay, the
number of scholarships has mushroomed. The "proof of gay" portion
of the application process must be interesting.
SugarFree|4.30.07 @ 2:14PM|#
Rhywun,
Sorry, I do have the unfair advantage of working at an
university... :)
SugarFree|4.30.07 @ 2:19PM|#
The "proof of gay" portion of the application process must
be interesting.
I see a remake of Soul Man coming
soon to a theater near you!
(With the caveman sex thread, it must Rae Dawn Chong Day on
Hit&Run.)
Sandy|4.30.07 @ 2:20PM|#
Well, I Googled the non-WHAM (interesting acronym) portions of
the essay instructions, and found nothing other than references to
the WHAM scholarship.
So this leads me to two conclusions:
1) They didn't simply do a search-and-replace on another
scholarship.
2) The URI College Republicans should henceforth be referred to as
"members of WHAM."
Jennifer:
To be funny and not whiney, all they had to do was establish that
everyone who qualified had to pay $100 extra to compensate
for being white heterosexual American males.
Or ask for a recipe for Irish children. Either one works.
tlxtftrf|4.30.07 @ 2:21PM|#
Kind of reminds me of a stunt that the college republicans at my
college attempted. There were two events as I remember, both set up
to make a point about illegal immigration:
1. They set up a section of chain link fence for students to crawl
under, after which they had to put on shirts saying "illegal
immigrant," then grabbing welfare checks and food stamps along a
course to the finish line. The winner of each heat would receive
$20
2. Their was a white guy dressed in a white t-shirt that said
"illegal migrant" on the front who would run around campus during
class hours and whoever "caught" him first got a free meal at a
Mexican restaurant courtesy of the college republicans. I believe
they had to give up on this one after no one even attempted to
catch the guy.
The president of the university wrote an angry notice to everyone
on campus, telling us about the virtues of diversity...etc, etc.
The Mexican restaurant owner went on tv saying the college
republicans weren't welcome anymore.
Around the same time as this a gay member of the student senate
claimed an irate redneck beat him unconscious with a baseball bat
late at night for "being a fag." There was a criminal
investigation, the student senate and college democrats issued
releases condemning the "homophobia of conservative students" which
"caused all this," the college president issued a shocked release
praising diversity, and the gay senator finally admitted that he
was lying and his injuries (stitches on his head, concussion) were
self inflicted by cutting himself or (in the case of the
concussion) faked by lying about symptoms to the doctor.
The senator resigned in shame. The liberals wrote an article
condemning the senator and the college republicans again saying
that if something like this were to occur, than it would be the
CR's fault. The senate didn't apologize to the the conservative
students, there was no new presidential message condemning lying to
the police.
Their both just retarded.
|4.30.07 @ 2:22PM|#
The big deal is that because of colonialism and slavery
white people are not allowed to have a racial identity or take any
pride in their race. All other races of course are allowed. That
was kind of the guilty payback that the white European race made
with itself for its sins.
This is bullshit. Sorry. But if you said you had Irish pride, or
you said you had Italian pride, or that you were proud to be
French, or proud to be Polish, or whatever, no-one would have a
problem with it. But when you say "white pride", what you really
saying "Not Black Pride".
African-Americans have "Black Pride", only because the specific
local African identities were stripped from them during
slavery.
|4.30.07 @ 2:25PM|#
The number of comments here, and the national attention they've
received, indicates that they have been effective at gaining
attention and making people think.
Not sure why Thoreau woke up on the wrong side of the bed. I
suggest the all around remedy: apply alcohol.
|4.30.07 @ 2:27PM|#
"This is bullshit. Sorry. But if you said you had Irish pride,
or you said you had Italian pride, or that you were proud to be
French, or proud to be Polish, or whatever, no-one would have a
problem with it. But when you say "white pride", what you really
saying "Not Black Pride".
People do have a problem with it. Set up a scholarship program for
"Italian Americans Only" and see how long it lasts. Yeah you can
get drunk and make a parody of yourself on Columbus or St.
Patrick's Day but you can't do things that really matter like have
an Irish college fund or special set asides like Blacks and
Hispanics can.
My answer is that if you want to be a Pole or an African or an
Irishmen, there are entire countries full of them. Move to one of
them. Otherwise shut up and be glad you are an American.
Guy Montag|4.30.07 @ 2:32PM|#
African-Americans have "Black Pride", only because the
specific local African identities were stripped from them during
slavery.
Unless they are Egyptian or Moroccan, other North Africans.
Apparently they are not "black enough" to be African, or something?
Never made much sense to me.
tlxtftrf|4.30.07 @ 2:33PM|#
I fucked up my their/there/ they're in the last post
From now on
their in 3rd paragraph =>there
their in last sentence =>They're
Guy Montag|4.30.07 @ 2:33PM|#
People do have a problem with it. Set up a scholarship
program for "Italian Americans Only" and see how long it
lasts.
I thought the Italian-American Society had one of those.
thoreau|4.30.07 @ 2:33PM|#
OK, maybe I am a little cranky today (I'm sick), but College
Republicans have a pattern of doing stunts that mostly just piss
people off. So that might explain my reaction.
And John, you wrote:
Set up a scholarship program for "Italian Americans Only" and see how long it lasts.
You mean like this?
https://www.niaf.org/scholarships/index.asp
I'm not here to defend the exclusive nature of the scholarship, but
the situation is not as you perceive it. It's a bit more
complicated, with a distinction between "White pride" and "White
sub-group pride". The later is, rightly or wrongly, more acceptable
in society than you seem to think.
|4.30.07 @ 2:35PM|#
Fur den Elch* ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F0sazxkF1_Y
*Ich kann gut Deutsch nicht sprechen!
H. R. C.|4.30.07 @ 2:35PM|#
Caucasian-Americans have "White Pride", only because the specific local European identities were stripped from them during hundreds of year celebrating cultural diversity through interracial unions."
|4.30.07 @ 2:36PM|#
joe,
The Sally Struthers on "South Park" analogy is just sad. The
character Struthers engaged in fraud, which this College Republican
stunt did not (well, maybe it did, seeing as how nobody is getting
the 100 bucks), and the fictional Struthers was taking away
resources meant for the starving Ethiopians. Were the College
Republicans taking 100 dollars away from black, homosexual, or
female scholarship seekers?
|4.30.07 @ 2:37PM|#
Did I miss video of these CRs going on earnestly how they're so oppressed by affirmative action scholarships? I hate to say it, Thoreau, but you're throwing a characterization on them that doesn't seem to be warranted. Sure, I dealt with annoying CRs - and annoying CDs - in schoo, but it seems a bit much to base all your arguments in discussion on simple dislike for a group and assuming the worst behavior.
Wikinger Elch|4.30.07 @ 2:42PM|#
an den Abtrünnigen -
leiwand! toll! cool! danke! A sheynem dank! tack! takk! tak! merci!
gracias! grazie! Toda raba!
(does our exchange ruin HRC's thesis?)
|4.30.07 @ 2:43PM|#
Personally, I think all race based scholarships are silly and I
say this as a minority that would actively benefit from them (I've
recently returned to university after some time in the corporate
and military worlds).
Anyway, there ARE Italian American only scholarhips. Heck, here are
just a couple I found off my first hit:
https://www.niaf.org/scholarships/index.asp
- The Emanuele and Emilia Inglese Memorial Scholarship - $2,500
scholarship for an Italian American undergraduate student who
traces his/her ancestry from the Lombardy region and is the first
generation of his/her family to attend college ...
- The Eleanor and Anthony DeFrancis Scholarship Fund - Scholarships
for Italian American undergraduate ...
Here is one for Irish Americans:
http://www.irishsummerfest.org/html/scholar.html
First hit and what not.
Here ones for Polish american:
http://www.polishcultureacpc.org/
Now, I personally am not too fond of race based scholarships for
various reasons, though the idea that is no ethnic scholarship
opportunities for 'white' types isn't really true.
Though I guess the Libertarian question would be more be focused
more on things like affirmative action (another bad program for
multiple reasons) and governmental giveaways. I mean if some
private group wants to give money to only one race or whatever.
That is kind of their choice. I mean, personally, if say David Duke
wants to make the David Duke Aryan Purity Scholarship, as long as
he isn't doing it with tax dollars,...well his choice.
|4.30.07 @ 2:44PM|#
John,
I have never received even the slightest degree of hostility for
any expression of pride in my heritage (Irish and Italian).
The reason "white pride" isn't treated the same as "black pride" is
because "white pride" is a political concept made up for the
explicit purpose of denigrating non-white people, not a genuine
expression of someone's cultural identity.
People really are black, or Irish, or Jewish, in terms of the
subcultures that grow up in and the cultural history they are
influenced by. Nobody is white in this sense - they're Irish, or
Irish-American, or Dutch, or something.
|4.30.07 @ 2:49PM|#
Apparently there are Italian American scholarships. If those are so wonderful then what is the big deal with the College Republicans? As far as it meaning "not black", what the hell does "Italian American" mean if "not black"? The idea is that there is something sinister about the term "white" versus Pole or Italian or Frenchman. Why? If people can claim to be black they ought to be able to claim to be white. The answer lies in the history of race relations and the justifiable griviences blacks have against whites. As those grievences age and get less and less justified, the reasons for objecting to white pride but embracing black pride get more and more obscure. At some point, unless we want to let white people have white pride, we probably need to kill the idea of black pride.
|4.30.07 @ 2:49PM|#
mitch, lunchstealer,
Do you think maybe there was a point in there thay you missed?
Naaahhhhhh...
Hint: we weren't supposed to dislike Sally Struthers' eating the
food because of the intentions of the donors, but because...
Come on, I know you can do this.
|4.30.07 @ 2:51PM|#
"The reason "white pride" isn't treated the same as "black
pride" is because "white pride" is a political concept made up for
the explicit purpose of denigrating non-white people, not a genuine
expression of someone's cultural identity."
I said that above Joe. Slavery colonialism and such make "White
Pride" verbotten. Some people have just gotten around that by
claiming "Italian Pride" "Spanish Pride" or whatever, ignoring the
fact that the Italians or Spanish bear just as much blood over
colonialism and slavery as any other white nations.
|4.30.07 @ 2:52PM|#
joe,
SHUT YOU FACE, YOU GODDAM WOP-MICK!
GO BACK TO SLURPING YOUR PASTA SOAKED IN WHISKEY.
WHILE YOU'RE AT IT, PICK A TARGET TO BLOW UP. I RECOMMEND THE
TRAINS, YOU FASCIST, BECAUSE YOU KNOW THEY'LL BE ON TIME.
FEKKIN' GANGSTER.
|4.30.07 @ 2:53PM|#
As a Danish-German-Italian-French-English-Swiss-American, I raise my fist in support of Danish-German-Italian-French-English-Swiss pride! The revolution will be televised on late night cable!
THUNDERCHICKEN|4.30.07 @ 2:55PM|#
*stunned silence. backs slowly away. turns and runs off into woods
blahblahblah|4.30.07 @ 2:56PM|#
I'm not Dutch or Jewish or Irish or black. I'm just a
heterosexual white male American. Everyone else gets a nice piece
of victim-hood, why can't I? After all, it's a growth
business…
Its societies fault…
|4.30.07 @ 2:57PM|#
"The answer lies in the history of race relations and the
justifiable griviences blacks have against whites."
No, John, the answer lies in the actual historical and personal
experiences of people living in this country. Including
Italian-ness in your individual identity "my parents are Italian,
my grandpa came over from the old country, we have antipasto at all
of our holidays, and being Italian is something that's been real to
me my entire life."
Making whiteness part of your individual identity means "I ain't no
nigger." Maybe in some alternate universe, there actually is an
apolitical experience of growing up white that has nothing to do
with asserting power over people from different backgrounds, just
acknowledging the cultural experience of belonging to a group that
has meaning to you. In this universe, in this country, there
isn't.
|4.30.07 @ 2:59PM|#
THIS IS A COMEDY GOLDMINE!
Although "whiteness" is no guarantee for success, to pretend that
it hampers one's life if just comedy gold. Higher skin cancer rate
anxiety? Inability to flavorfully "get down" syndrome? Unaided Dunk
Wistfulness anxiety?
Judging people by factors they have no control over such as
race/ethnicity is never just or wise and it usually leads to stupid
rules at best, and flat-out injustice otherwise.
A college friend of mine who just happened to be the daughter of a
millionaire businessman got through college free (I think she
actually came ahead as she had an allowance) on the count of being
from "Africa". The more accurate description would have been Jewish
Millionaire Princess from Casa Blanca, Morocco.
I don't blame her at all, she was faced with a retarded system and
she used the retarded ness to her advantage.
But you have to keep one thing in mind, having a large uneducated
and disgruntle poor is very very bad for capitalism. Rich and
educated people are far better clientele than the other
alternative.
I'm not saying people should get a free ride. A C- student should
never been put ahead of an A student whether he's a Navajo or a
Welshman. However, the fact that George W. Bush's Grammar and
Annunciation was good enough for Yale tells me that right now
academic or intellectual merit can't be that high up on the totem
pole for getting into universities....
|4.30.07 @ 3:00PM|#
No, non, nein, ne, etc.
Kolik jazyku umis, tolikrat jsi clovekem. (Bez carky atd. protoze
neumim jak delat v HTML.)
Mluvim spatne cesky take!
|4.30.07 @ 3:01PM|#
None should question the might of the Urkobold. That was
powerful trollin' indeed.
I'm Scot-German, which means that I will eat anything and invade
France on a moment's notice. Of course, considering that my
Scottish ancestors arrived here well before the founding of this
great nation and that my German ancestors came in the early 1800s,
I'm about as American as it gets. At least from the
European-descended oppressor point of view, that is.
|4.30.07 @ 3:02PM|#
blahblahblah,
I assure you, my identity as an Irish-American here in Kennedyland
has nothing whatsoever to do with victimhood. My Lord, you people
love that word! It's like some sort of talisman against
thought.
John,
"I said that above Joe. Slavery colonialism and such make "White
Pride" verbotten." No, you didn't say that above. I'm making a
different point. There isn't, and never was, some "white identity"
that people used to feel and celebrate, that has been made
verbotten. It never existed. Irish and Spanish pride actually
existed - the experience of growing up Irish or Spanish, and
feeling Irish and Spanish, is real. It is not the same thing with
"whiteness." White, as an identity that people related to, never
ever existed EXCEPT as a political concept.
|4.30.07 @ 3:04PM|#
HUZZAH FOR PRO LIBERTATE.
HE KNOWS HIS PLACE.
HIS REWARD IS GREENLAND.
EXCLUDING MINERAL RIGHTS.
dhex|4.30.07 @ 3:06PM|#
"Maybe the College Republicans have realized that if you express
the tiniest doubt about affirmative action, then the reaction is
"RACISTS!!!" being yelled at them across the quad. If anything you
do that questions the orthodoxy garners the same set of reactions,
why not just push it as far and be as offensive as you can?"
that's part of it. they haven't mastered the art of ignoring
insults-fu (the college kid political version of the gita, as it
were) or more likely, they don't want to. yeah, it's obnoxious that
people are very quick to just toss out "fuck you racist" (and then
call it "free speech" like those tards up at columbia) but through
bypassing that obnoxiousness you can actually win something other
than animus. (like getting laid and/or actually invited to parties;
or heaven forbid, convincing people that your viewpoint has at
least some merit.)
again, personal sample, but i've never met a college republican
member who wasn't a complete fuckface; a gang of timmies in need of
a wedgie. same goes for college commies. i met plenty of folk who
were republicans or even communists while in college - and played
dominoes with both - and they tended to be regular folk with the
occasional odd viewpoint.
much like the rest of us.
|4.30.07 @ 3:06PM|#
Set up a scholarship program for "Italian Americans Only"
and see how long it lasts.
Or this:
http://www.irishamericanhome.com/au_scholarshipinfo.html
|4.30.07 @ 3:09PM|#
THIS CONVERSATION IS STALE. Urkobold WILL END IT NOW.
COLLEGE REPUBLICANS = STUPID, NOT WRONG
SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS = STUPID AND WRONG
PUNISHMENT:
COLLEGE REPUBLICANS WILL EAT THE SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS
dhex|4.30.07 @ 3:10PM|#
i'm on board with joe about the "white pride" thing, but want to
note that i had some interesting conversations with some of my
Caribbean classmates in a statistics course (qualitative) i took
last year. one woman in particular couldn't get that different
kinds of white people might actually have serious beef with each
other (i.e. a story about lace curtain irish and shanty irish
families in america having all sorts of issues) and was reduced to
yelling "but you're all the same!"
don't get me wrong, as i laughed my ass off at the time, but it was
also very helpful in understanding how various groups view other
groups. (similar, perhaps, to the idea that all asians are
interchangeable or all speak a common language, etc. not even
bigotry so much as being utterly mystified by an alien culture and
doing the best with weak logical reasoning.)
the whole weird homophobia thing is another issue entirely. all
sortsa wtf up in there about stealing boyfriends and shit.
phew.
VM|4.30.07 @ 3:10PM|#
Apostate - awesome -
Czech/Slovakian?
ProGLib - love the description: "I'm Scot-German, which means that
I will eat anything and invade France on a moment's notice."
|4.30.07 @ 3:17PM|#
Oh, boy, Greenland! I'll rule with the Iron Fist of Liberty. I
wonder if I could get an Inuit Disney built up there? I plan to
throw off completely the yoke of the Danish oppressors and
implement an economic policy involving shrimp, ice, and
tourism.
Man, the Urkobold is the greatest. What is the creation story in
Urkoboldism, anyway?
|4.30.07 @ 3:19PM|#
"There isn't, and never was, some "white identity" that people
used to feel and celebrate, that has been made verbotten."
Ever hear of the "White Man's Burden Joe"? Ever read any of the
justifications for Slavery in the 18th and 19th Centuries? Ever
read the defenses of colonialism? Nobody said that it was the
"Spanish" burden to civilize the indians. They did so because they
were Christians and white. I don't write the history books Joe, I
just read them. To say there was never an identity called "white"
is just to deny about three hundred years of history from 1600 to
about 1960.
|4.30.07 @ 3:20PM|#
Um, okay. So it's safe to say that there's more cowering than praying, for instance? Is there anything about bridges and tolls?
|4.30.07 @ 3:21PM|#
VM,
Defy the power of the Urkobold at your own risk. He gave me
Greenland, and I'm not giving it back. Death to the Danes! And
Canada!
Actually, I do have some Danish blood. Maybe it should be death to
some Danes?
The Inner Child of Hit & Run|4.30.07 @ 3:22PM|#
I hate it when joe-Daddy and John-Daddy fight. It makes my tummy all icky.
|4.30.07 @ 3:22PM|#
"The following are privately contributed loan and scholarship
funds. For federal programs and general student aid information,
see the Enrollment Services section of the URI Catalog."
http://www.uri.edu/catalog/cataloghtml/loansscholarshipawards.html
Each line is a separate scholarship:
-preference to female residents
-scholarship in men's basketball or men's track
-a scholarship awarded annually to an African-American
student
-with preference to Armenian students
-endowment for scholarships to minority students.
-awarded annually to woman
-with preference to African-American or Hispanic students
-students of Italo-American descent
-awarded annually to a woman student
-preferably African-American,
-awarded annually to a minority student
-Awarded to female student-athletes
-Annual grant awarded to ... a Native American.
-awarded annually to a worthy male student
-equally between men's crew and men's tennis
-awarded annually to a woman
-worthy and needy female student.
-awarded annually to American-born undergraduate
-awarded annually to women athletes
-awarded annually to one or two undergraduate women
-students in the women's studies
-awarded annually to women students
-majors or minors in women's studies.
-awarded annually to a female student
-awarded annually to women students
-to minority students
-Preference will be given to students of Italian heritage.
-scholarship in women's studies
-female premedical student
-awarded annually to a female student
-awarded annually to an African-American student
-awarded annually to one male and one female minority student
-awarded annually to "women in transition"
-to a female student
-awarded annually to an African-American
-Preference to a first-generation American
-awarded annually to a female student
-minorities, and/or women will receive preferential
consideration.
-awarded annually to Rhode Island female students
-Preference given to a woman
-to a female pharmacy student
D.A. Ridgely|4.30.07 @ 3:22PM|#
White, as an identity that people related to, never ever
existed EXCEPT as a political concept.
Unlike black? Actually, joe has a decent point historically.
However, the motive force behind the CR stunt is not racism or, at
least, not your father's racism. Yeah, CRs tend to be obnoxious
jerks (and for equal time, so do CDs and campus politicos of all
stripes), but they're not thinly disguised Klansmen, or at least
the overwhelming majority of them aren't and attacking the
institutionalization of political concepts of race or so-called
benign racial or ethnic discrimination (state sponsored or
otherwise) or the mind-set that (continues to) produce them isn't
itself a racist objective.
|4.30.07 @ 3:31PM|#
Mr. F. Le Mur,
"Worthy male?" What, pray tell, makes one worthy? That's the only
one that I could qualify for.
VM|4.30.07 @ 3:38PM|#
ProGLib -
surely as überLord of Grønland, you qualify.
And, if the rumors are true, you run around (with face painted
blue) in a kilt that goes below the knee.
Now why would you need that?
|4.30.07 @ 3:38PM|#
What, pray tell, makes one worthy?
Perhaps this: "preference to children of former employees of the
American Screw Company."
|4.30.07 @ 3:40PM|#
The Urkobold is believed to be the illegitimate son(?) of the disgraced former aide to Chancellor Palpatine, Prooter "Gator" Libby, and military commander Grand Moose Tarkin. He(?) has an estranged twin who roams the galaxy upsetting the balance that he(?) restores. This twin is known as THUNDERCHICKEN.
|4.30.07 @ 3:44PM|#
once again, i'm tempted to filter everyone in the thread except high-#, VM, and all their pseudonyms.
|4.30.07 @ 3:46PM|#
VM,
Don't refer to my fiefdom by its former oppressor's name! It is
Kalaallit Nunaat until I impose a new name--like Pro
Libertatia or something like that.
As for the blue and white paint and kilt (not to mention the
Wallacian "pro libertate" slogan), well, let us just say that
Kalaallit Nunaat's economic growth plans may include the
liberation and annexation of, um, Scotland.
"Prooter 'Gator' Libby?"
thoreau|4.30.07 @ 3:48PM|#
The difference between the College Democrats and College
Republicans:
Most liberal activism on college campuses is done by single-issue
groups. The College Democrats are largely invisible, in my
experience, with their main activities being to support candidates
for office and try to get internships. The liberals with signs
standing in front of the Student Union to raise money and/or "raise
awareness" are generally not with the College Democrats. And while
there will be dumb left-wing stunts done on campus, they won't
(usually) be done by the College Democrats.
The College Republicans are also interested in internships and
campaigns, of course. But they take on the additional task of
engaging in stunts to get attention for some issue. And a lot of
these stunts seem to relate to affirmative action and/or
immigration.
To the extent that a lot of their stunts pertain to issues with
ethnic/racial and/or gender (at least for affirmative action)
components, I'd say that they are no different from their
counterparts on the politically correct far left: They're obsessed
with ethnicity. They're just the right-wing mirror image of a
Womyn's Studies major.
So I'll take a College Democrat (not to be confused with a college
student who votes for Democrats) over a College Republican (not to
be confused with a college student who votes Democrat) any day of
the week, because the odds are that the College Democrat is more
about resume-building (which can admittedly be annoying in its own
way) than axe-grinding, while the College Republican probably has
an axe to grind.
It's unfortunate, really. Dumb right-wing college students with
grievances have nowhere to go but the College Republicans, while
dumb left-wing college students with grievances have a wide range
of outlets. The result is that the Republican Party is represented
on campus by a bunch of jackasses (ironically enough, given the
mascots), while the Democratic Party is (usually) represented by
some more sane, mainstream students.
If Republicans want to improve their image among college students,
they should secretly fund some kooky right-wing organizations to
compete with the College Republicans and drain away the zanier
elements, leaving behind an organization with fewer image
problems.
VM|4.30.07 @ 3:50PM|#
ProGLib:
I still think you should merely open a bar there.
Bela Paternal Unit is right! About Howard Street being right!
Dr Urkoboldologist - thank you for the history! You certainly a
learned soul!
|4.30.07 @ 3:52PM|#
Here's my theory: the "College Republicans" in this case were
actually a covert Democratic group who performed this stunt to
reaffirm the stereotype of young Republicans as soulless, racist
brats.
Successfully, I might add.
lunchstealer|4.30.07 @ 3:53PM|#
joe's gonna blow up a Target? I thought they were supposed to be
pissed off at WalMart.
Seriously, though, joe, I didn't miss the point you were making,
with the Sally Struthers thing. I get that a targeted scholarship
for whites is less likely to help someone who needs it than an
equal scholarship for an underrepresented minority.
I was just trying to point out that it's not an entirely apt
analogy, though, because the food aid was aimed at needy members of
a specific ethnicity, and being diverted to a rich, overfed
celebrity. I don't think that the CRs are pissed off at the
means-testing so much as the ethnicity testing.
Suppose you had a food aid program that went to any Ethiopian that
chose to apply for it, with no effort to target those in the camps.
It would still be more likely to do good than a food aid program
that gave to Americans. But it would be a boneheaded program,
nonetheless.
I was mostly just snarking lightly. The CR thing is a stupid prank,
but the real scorn should be reserved for the morons that felt
their transgression was Unacceptable And Must Not Be Tolerated.
D.A. Ridgely|4.30.07 @ 3:56PM|#
D.A.R.,
For once we agree.
Oh hell, now we're going to have to figure out which one of us is
wrong!
Grotius|4.30.07 @ 3:58PM|#
lunchstealer,
I get that a targeted scholarship for whites is less likely to
help someone who needs it than an equal scholarship for an
underrepresented minority.
I'd say that it is equally likely to help as long as we don't class
all whites as blue bloods.
____________________________
Anyway the CR prank was clever and hit home. Which is source of
much of the teeth gnashing.
|4.30.07 @ 4:05PM|#
And, if the rumors are true, you run around (with face
painted blue) in a kilt that goes below the knee.
Um, Ms. Pro L told me it was because of his huge...tract of land.
Apparently called Greenland. Or something. I confess I haven't been
following the thread as closely as I should...:-)
|4.30.07 @ 4:05PM|#
Grotius,
Which raises an interesting point. I would be much more impressed
and influenced by protests if the protesters would do that scraping
their heads thing that some tribal societies do where all the blood
drips out of their heads. Nothing says, "I'm friggin' serious here,
folks" than doing that.
|4.30.07 @ 4:06PM|#
Jennifer-
Anything that sounds like "I want special treatment too!" sounds
whiny.
Isn't it possible that, rather than looking for special treatment
for their own group, the CRs might have been challenging the whole
concept of special treatment for any group?
lunchstealer|4.30.07 @ 4:07PM|#
It certainly exposed the double standards and internal
contradictions in political correctness and diversity in modern
academia.
As for the equal likelihood of classifying whites as bluebloods,
I'd say that the fact that median and mean incomes are lower among
any traditional minority than white heterosexual males would mean
that you've got at least a greater statistical likelihood of
getting a needy student among minorities than among
WhiteHetMen.
And yeah, if the college government hadn't been such that it
overreacted to their prank, then it would have been stupid. The
college's reaction shows that it was, if not a worthy tweaking, at
least a successful tweaking of liberal sensibilities.
Erik|4.30.07 @ 4:12PM|#
Whatever, no whining is necessary. I take pride in my Western
civilization background, without denying or apologizing for past
wrongs perpetrated. Honestly, try it. You'll be called a
Eurocentrist, a racist, closet white supremacist by some people. So
what? Those people are idiots, and you don't want to associate with
those people anyway. They're just mad because their goal was to
prevent you from feeling good about yourself to elevate themselves.
When they fail they necessarily must feel bad.
The Chartres Cathedral is more impressive to me than blue facepaint
and a feathered headdress, and I'll take Aristotle over edicts from
a tiki head any day. No whines, here, I just feel pretty
proud.
Honestly, the CR joke was lame, and pretty trite. Probably not a
"whine." I don't believe they actually feel deprived of a
scholarship as much as they are annoyed by the double standard on
what constitutes "discrimination" and "preference." Put the shoe on
the other foot and watch the righteous indignation, that college
fell right in their trap and continues to deny there was even was a
trap. Predictable and lame.
thoreau|4.30.07 @ 4:21PM|#
Having complained about the College Republicans, I'll re-iterate
what I said before: The school should have ignored them.
Then again, if schools didn't over-react to these stunts, how would
the College Republicans get any attention?
Hmm...
Grotius|4.30.07 @ 4:24PM|#
lunchstealer,
There are lots of white kids from impoverished backgrounds. In
other words, if one is going to have it make scholarships tied to
someone's heritage a function of economic background.
Sandy|4.30.07 @ 4:37PM|#
Grotius: percentage and absolute number are related concepts, but different.
|4.30.07 @ 4:51PM|#
I am some random mix of European ethnicities (French/Swedish, as
best I can determine) and my wife is 3rd generation Nigerian
immigrant. Our daughter, 13, has darker skin than most people who
call themselves African Americans, but she bristles when anybody
refers to her as "black", and I don't blame her. But, does that
mean that we aren't going to take advantage of every scholarship
offered to black students when the time comes around? Call me a
hypocrite, but we'd be fools not to.
I agree with George Carlin. The proper solution is to just keep
f..king until we're all gray.
|4.30.07 @ 4:59PM|#
Erik - I like the way you think.
Depending on who's asking, and why, I am either a "Native American"
or I am of Western European heritage (Scot/Irish on one side and
Norwegian/not French on the other); whichever answer is more likely
to skew the survey.
CB
|4.30.07 @ 5:42PM|#
The "proof of gay" portion of the application process must
be interesting.
Um, would having a subscription to Reason suffice?
|4.30.07 @ 6:03PM|#
Here, thoreau, fixed that for you:
The College Democrats are largely invisible
ubiquitous, in my experience,
thoreau|4.30.07 @ 6:15PM|#
R C-
I'm talking about the formal party organization, hence the
upper-case C in College Democrats. Maybe I've just observed the
wrong schools, but it seems like most politically-oriented events
on campus are not run by the College Democrats. Oh, there are
plenty of liberal students who vote for Democrats, but not every
voter is involved with the party-recognized organization.
OTOH, the College Republicans generally do sponsor some very
visible and frequently controversial events. Maybe it's just that
they know how to work the shock angle and get attention. Problem
is, they get mostly negative attention.
|4.30.07 @ 6:26PM|#
When the College Republican (heck, when ANYONE) yowls as much
about "legacy admits" as they do about AA, then I'll believe
they're actually putting their money when their mouth is.
Until that, they're just coming off as a bunch of whiny brats.
Afro-American kids on campus maybe don't worry that much about "not
being admitted while Black", but I will bet you each and every one
of them has a story of some relative within the last two
generations (parent, grandparent) that does so.
And when it was only this year that a certain public high school in
Georgia stopped having "white only" and "black only" proms--well,
we've still got a long way to work the toxic results out of our
minds.
|4.30.07 @ 6:32PM|#
The problem I have with the characterization here is that
everyone, even Thoreau, seems to be casting the CRs as bitching and
moaning about not getting the benefits of affirmative action.
However, in this case, and every similar case I've heard about,
they seem to be mocking affirmative action.
I guess I'm missing where I'm supposed to believe they really think
they need a $100 scholarship for white guys.
Jim Bob|4.30.07 @ 6:34PM|#
Why do I keep arriving late to the good threads?
This wasn't terribly clever and it wasn't terribly funny, but seems
they made a point that pissed off some section of the PC crowd.
College Republicans, in my experience, are better laughed at than
with.
I didn't get too far in the comments, but joe, your Sally Struthers
comparison was absurd (if memorably vivid). Do you embrace a
"minorities as perpetual victims here in White Amerikkka" school of
thought?
thoreau|4.30.07 @ 6:48PM|#
Eric-
I have misspoken (mistyped?). I don't think they want
their own affirmative action, but they seem to feel significantly
disadvantaged by the existence of affirmative action for others,
hence this issue is so high on their grievance list. College
Republicans love to bitch about how oppressive the college
environment is, which is why I observed that they are basically a
right-hand mirror image of the Womyn's Studies and Ethnic Studies
majors. Obsessing about affirmative action is just a symptom of the
"Help! Help! I'm being oppressed!" thing that College Republicans
organizations tend to pull.
Paul|4.30.07 @ 7:04PM|#
Whatever else might be said about the general concept of a
race-specific scholarship, it's clear that the intent here is to
generate controversy and piss people off.
Thoreau,
Spot on. So now that we all agree how stupid this looks, how does
it look when a group does this in earnest?
miche|4.30.07 @ 7:26PM|#
I mean if some private group wants to give money to only one race or whatever. That is kind of their choice.
Agreed. In my house we have the Shinghal Family Scholarship
Program. The recipients have to be females of my womb and have a
better than decent G.P.A. No formal essay will be required but the
recipient must demonstrate that being a Shinghal family member is
important to her. She can do this by being a respectful and
responsible young woman. Scholarship eligibilty will be reviewed
every semester.
We will have no "what adversities have you overcome" qualification
so if the hopeful starts spouting off about the "difficulties" of
being my child, she will get a lesson on how to pay for college on
her own.
|4.30.07 @ 7:43PM|#
For all those posting comments calling the CR who did this stunt
"assholes" or worse, let's look at what they did:
They printed up a few applications briefly satirizing racist or
sexist scholarship applications, and offered a $100 prize for
completing the essay.
They managed to get their opponents so lathered up that their
opponents inadertently portrayed themselves as anti-free-speech
authoritarians; then made their opponents essentially admit they
were wrong; and got their opponents to "force" them to retract the
scholarship; and got a heck of a lot of free press for their
viewpoint for almost no money invested.
So, does your dictionary have this listing: "asshole, n., one who
effectively, wittily, and cheaply publicizes their point of view
while getting their opponents to look like, well, assholes"
Guy Montag|4.30.07 @ 7:55PM|#
Agreed. In my house we have the Shinghal Family Scholarship
Program. The recipients have to be females of my womb and have a
better than decent G.P.A. No formal essay will be required but the
recipient must demonstrate that being a Shinghal family member is
important to her. She can do this by being a respectful and
responsible young woman. Scholarship eligibilty will be reviewed
every semester.
We will have no "what adversities have you overcome" qualification
so if the hopeful starts spouting off about the "difficulties" of
being my child, she will get a lesson on how to pay for college on
her own.
I thought the Lefties called that "the lottery of life" and it is
so unfair that you are using that money on your children, rather
than the government getting it and distributing it fairly?
Of course, I support your method not theirs.
Guy Montag|4.30.07 @ 7:56PM|#
The problem I have with the characterization here is that
everyone, even Thoreau, seems to be casting the CRs as bitching and
moaning about not getting the benefits of affirmative action.
However, in this case, and every similar case I've heard about,
they seem to be mocking affirmative action.
What did I write that indicates that? I happen to agree with
you.
Guy Montag|4.30.07 @ 7:58PM|#
And when it was only this year that a certain public high
school in Georgia stopped having "white only" and "black only"
proms--well, we've still got a long way to work the toxic results
out of our minds.
I believe they ended the practice that was demanded in recent times
by the black students. It was not a government imposed segregation,
it was a self-imposed student segregation that was ended.
Bad English|4.30.07 @ 8:38PM|#
"the Student Organizations Advisory and Review Committee
demanded that the College Republicans: A) not award the $100
scholarship, B) apologize in writing for having violated the
anti-discrimination section of the senate's bylaws, and C) seek
permission from the senate before mounting any programs in the next
12 months."
Fuck off, assholes. Apologize for being such goddamned whining
morons.
I\'m Not Ghey|4.30.07 @ 8:44PM|#
the whole weird homophobia thing
It's a debate concerning whether or not they're taking, uh, jobs
that heterosexuals won't.
M|4.30.07 @ 8:46PM|#
White, as an identity that people related to, never ever
existed EXCEPT as a political concept.
...held as well by people of color too, right?
|4.30.07 @ 9:17PM|#
-equally between men's crew and men's tennis
Looks to me like they've got whitey covered.
D.A. Ridgely|4.30.07 @ 9:19PM|#
Thoreau,
Perhaps if there were as many conservative special groups on the
typical college campus as there are liberal, single-issue or
identity-politics groups your comparison would be, IMHO, more
significant than it is. The fact remains, as a quick look at the
laundry list of university funded student groups readily reveals,
that the CR's tend to be just about the only game in town for
right-wing advocacy at most schools.
thoreau|4.30.07 @ 10:18PM|#
The fact remains, as a quick look at the laundry list of
university funded student groups readily reveals, that the CR's
tend to be just about the only game in town for right-wing advocacy
at most schools.
Yep, which is why the Campus Democrats tend to avoid stunts
(liberal students who want to antagonize other people have plenty
of other groups to choose from) while the College Republicans tend
to revel in stunts (conservative students who want to antagonize
other people have no other choice).
And, once again, as far as I'm concerned there's no excuse for what
the student government did. They should ignore the College
Republicans.
JH:
So, does your dictionary have this listing: "asshole, n., one who
effectively, wittily, and cheaply publicizes their point of view
while getting their opponents to look like, well,
assholes"
Here's the thing: They aren't interested in debate, they're
interested in provoking a response. And once they provoke that
response they get to claim that they've been victimized by an
oppressive liberal campus. On the surface, this may look like the
sort of thing that is potentially thought-provoking, depending on
how it's handled. But in practice, College Republicans
organizations (not to be confused with individual students
who voted Republican) almost never handle these things well.
In the past several years there have been numerous events like
this, including "affirmative action bake sales", on a variety of
college campuses, and usually they provoke a negative response.
Now, I'm not here to excuse anybody who gives the negative
response. I'm just here to suggest that when chapters of a national
organization keep doing the same thing and getting the same
negative response, maybe, just maybe, the agenda here isn't about
starting an insightful dialogue. Maybe, just maybe, it's about
provoking a response and then talking about how victimized they
were.
A similar dynamic played out several years ago with David Horowitz
and his reparations talk. Yes, I'm against reparations. Yes, I
think the responses on campuses were wrong. But I also think that
he knew exactly which buttons to push, he knew he could get
speaking fees once he'd pushed those buttons (various foundations
helped College Republican chapters pay for him to visit campuses),
and when all was said and done he even wrote a book (which you can
read, for a fee).
There's a dynamic among conservative student activists:
Push the right buttons, then cry out "Help! Help! I'm being
oppressed!" If something interesting and thought-provoking came out
of it, I'd applaud their "civil disobedience." (OK, maybe not quite
the right word when you're going up against campus authorities
rather than legal authorities, but you get the picture.) But it
isn't about that. It's about creating excuses to whine about
victimhood.
At least the Original Recipe Thoreau wanted to make points about
war and government, and wrote a popular and insightful essay about
his experience. The same cannot be said for the College
Republicans.
|4.30.07 @ 10:32PM|#
College Republicans are frequently obnoxious assholes who
like to piss everyone off with dumb students.
It's like this: When the people you hate make a joke that is in the
category of "Why did I not think of that", then they are a$$holes.
If on the other hand, the joke was made by people you like, then it
would be satire that makes you think, as Joe said.
I smell a double standard here . . .
Untermensch|4.30.07 @ 10:36PM|#
Qvað Cracker's Boy:
Depending on who's asking, and why, I am either a "Native American" or I am of Western European heritage (Scot/Irish on one side and Norwegian/not French on the other); whichever answer is more likely to skew the survey.
For my part, I keep hoping that I can use my Saami (Laplander)
heritage to my advantage some day. Never mind that I don't look
like a Saami (although some of my close relatives do and there was
at least one minor genetic disorder in my family that can be traced
to a Saami phenotype). But no one ever had scholarships for Saamis,
so I gave up. I have thought of listing myself as "Other" for
census purposes, but no one would ever believe it for half an
instant since I have blond hair, a red beard, and skin almost as
lily white as Urkobold's teeth as they crunch through my skull on a
religion thread...
Pepe|4.30.07 @ 10:50PM|#
"The fact remains, as a quick look at the laundry list of
university funded student groups readily reveals, that the CR's
tend to be just about the only game in town for right-wing advocacy
at most schools."
Maybe it is different at other Universities, but in my experience,
explicitly partisan groups like the CRs or CDs NEVER receive
university funds because of their partisan nature. The African
Student Union, MECHA, GALA, etc. do because they are "student
interest" groups. Since no equivalent right-wing student interest
groups exist, university funds effectively only go to support
left-wing causes.
I was an asshole College Republican at one time, and I'll agree
that CRs do have a propensity for jackass stunts. I agree with
Thoureau's assessment that this is probably because they are the
only right-of-center group of any consequence on campus and thus
draw all the crazies who have nowhere else to go. Although, if the
school has an active YAF chapter, they tend to go too far even for
the CRs. But any stunts we pulled in my days were nothing compared
to the left-wing groups that did things such as blocking traffic
and taking over buildings to the point that the riot squad had to
be called in. All this while wearing "whiteface" to show their
disapproval for the abolishment of affirmative action and the
resulting "whitewashing" of the campus.
I have to say though, the portrayal of CRs as a bunch of
ascot-wearing, blue-bloods or partying frat boys seems more like a
bad 80s movie to me and bears no resemblance to my experience.
Maybe it's because I went to a large public school in California.
Our group was mostly middle-class suburbanites looking for a little
resume padding and we were about as much Asian as we were White. I
didn't know any active members who were in a frat. Frat boys care
more about getting laid and drunk then politics. Hardcore CRs are
more likely to be political geeks that no frat would want.
We probably had 300 or so actual members but a group of 5-10 true
believers really ran things. I think this is true at many campuses
and probably accounts for some of the extremism as well.
thoreau|4.30.07 @ 10:57PM|#
Although, if the school has an active YAF chapter, they tend
to go too far even for the CRs.
When I was in grad school, the CR's would bring in speakers
sponsored by YAF. Usually firebrand speakers, like Ann Coulter,
David Horowitz, and Oliver North. The goal was to see if they could
provoke a response.
Which is not to justify the response, but if you're going to piss
people off at least piss them off with something thought-provoking.
Speeches by Ann Coulter don't count. Given how prone the far left
is to protesting, getting them to show up and protest your event is
hardly an accomplishment.
|4.30.07 @ 11:03PM|#
Anything that sounds like "I want special treatment too!"
sounds whiny.
"Isn't it possible that, rather than looking for special treatment
for their own group, the CRs might have been challenging the whole
concept of special treatment for any group?"
I say: Special treatment for everyone!
Pepe|4.30.07 @ 11:03PM|#
Thoreau,
Are you thinking of the Young America's Foundation or the Young
Americans for Freedom. The former is a group that sponsors
conservative speakers, the latter is the conservative activist
organization. People often get them confused.
We had both, Young America's brought Ollie North to campus. Young
Americans through meat at vegetarians and put up flyers with
pictures of a NOW march with the caption "Mad Cow disease strikes
campus"
|4.30.07 @ 11:05PM|#
I have to say though, the portrayal of CRs as a bunch of
ascot-wearing, blue-bloods or partying frat boys seems more like a
bad 80s movie to me and bears no resemblance to my
experience.
Hey, Chad -- look what just blew in from the wrong side of the
tracks!
|4.30.07 @ 11:10PM|#
Young Americans through meat at...
That's the wrong way to spell that kind of threw, college
boy.
Pepe|4.30.07 @ 11:14PM|#
"That's the wrong way to spell that kind of threw, college
boy."
I tolled u I went to to publik schuul.
|4.30.07 @ 11:23PM|#
I tolled u I went to to publik schuul.
So did I, but I paid attention while I was there. :-)
Paul|4.30.07 @ 11:34PM|#
like Ann Coulter, David Horowitz, and Oliver North. The goal
was to see if they could provoke a response.
*gasp* Provoke a response? Say it ain't so. Shyeah, welcome to
college political shenanigans ever since, oh, I dunno, the
sixties?
Yawn.
M|4.30.07 @ 11:46PM|#
Aren't many here expecting a bit much of college students? Isn't
being sophomoric part of the job-description? If they were all as
wise as their critics, why would they need to be students?
I'd cut them some slack for failing to parse the nuances of satire,
of effective-strategy-in-the-long-run, of exhaustive acquaintance
with the elements of their own motives, the palette of available
rhetorical flavors... They're kids. They're supposed to
experiment with lead balloons, bumble, harvest unanticipated
consequences, maybe learn from them. And the school paid to
instruct them should tolerate that (in fact in this case should
really reform in shame, but that would expecting too much).
The main point about the story (seems to me) is that, tacking
against the prevailing winds, they recognize and choose to oppose
an injustice. That seems to place them a very healthy notch above
the bien-pensant administrative authorities who with
egregious hypocrisy take them to task.
Kudos, sez I, for challenging wrongdoing, however clumsily or
without the depth and sophistication of a classic satirist. They're
trying. They're young. This course is not for credit. Soon enough
they'll be in institutions that suppress dissent with threat of
loss and possibly disgrace. Let 'em stretch their wings before life
clips them.
Jeez, guys, lighten up.
/rant, thank you
Pepe|5.1.07 @ 12:31AM|#
I agree M. Being passionate about anything at a young age tends
to manifest itself in a jerk-off sort of way.
Most college kids are way into something to the point of being
obnoxious to everyone outside of it be it frat or sorority, the
pre-law society, an ethnic organization, foreign exchange program,
niche art or music interest, etc. But you can't learn moderation
until you have some idea what the narrow-sighted extreme is like.
The only real distinction with the CRs is that they choose
something that is looked down upon not only by experienced
grown-ups, but also by the majority of their fellow students. If
you are a virgin and you want to stay that way, join the College
Republicans. CR women often do this on purpose, CR men are just
poor misguided bastards.
Still, thank god I was a College Republican when I was 19. It saved
me from being a Real Republican by the time I graduated.
|5.1.07 @ 2:29AM|#
Geesh, I am on a worship Jennifer binge lately.
Jennifer is 100% correct here. I see nothing whiny here from the
college republicans, although I do agree that any 19 year old who
self identifies as a republican or democrat should be "shaken, not
stirred". This is simply a satire of the blatant racism that runs
through US college staff thinking.
These guys are not asking for special treatment, they are
lampooning the existing system of racist "special treatment", and
quite effectively judging by Thoreau's reaction.
|5.1.07 @ 9:04AM|#
We can assume that the college republicans were being jerks or give them the benefit of the doubt (that's all ad hominem), it doesn't change the fact that they highlighted a major double standard in the PC world.
|5.1.07 @ 10:03AM|#
"Ever hear of the "White Man's Burden Joe"? Ever read any of the
justifications for Slavery in the 18th and 19th Centuries? Ever
read the defenses of colonialism?"
Yes, John, and as I've pointed out three times already EVERY SINGLE
ONE OF THOSE WAS GINNED UP TO JUSTIFY A POLITICAL AGENDA.
"White Man's Burden" = keeping foreign peoples in colonial
bondage
Slavery = political system
Colonialism = political system
What do want, an interpretive dance? Charades? ASL? It's a rather
simple point, John - those "white identities" were made up as
justifications for political agendas. They were not genuine
expressions of people's social and cultural backgrounds.
Didn't you notice, as you were typing that comment, that every
single example you produced was an explanation for why a political
system that put whites on top should be maintained and
expanded?
|5.1.07 @ 10:07AM|#
D.A. Ridgely asks, "Unlike black?"
That's a very interesting question. Obviously, "black" started out
as a category Europeans created to justify their political
domination. Once upon a time, it was a phony replacement for the
real cultural categories that African people actually understood
and related to.
But at a certain point, with the slave trade and plantation system
destroying those old categories and cultural experiences for
Africans brought to America, "black" became an actual, self-defined
cultural category.
|5.1.07 @ 10:11AM|#
lunchstealer,
The point I was trying to raise with the Sally Struthers episode
was that her whining "But I'm hungry!" in the face of the starving
Ethiopians is similar to the way the white, heterosexual Christian
males who make up most CR chapters whine about be "oppressed" by
affirmative action.
No, there is nothing remotely comparable between the reduced level
of privilige we white Christian heterosexual college-attending
males experience, and the historical and ongoing racism and
disparate opportunities the justify affirmative action.
dhex|5.1.07 @ 10:17AM|#
wait john just used the white man's burden as an example of
ethnic identity?
curse you, comedy-eating filter!
thoreau|5.1.07 @ 11:50AM|#
OK, so maybe the real problem here is that as somebody who went
to grad school I instinctively sneer at the things that dumb
undergrads do when they want attention.
Trying to civilize the dumb kids is part of the Teaching
Assistant's Burden.
M|5.1.07 @ 1:26PM|#
as somebody who went to grad school I instinctively
sneer
Still?
How stoooooooooooooooooooooooopid!
;-)
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245