Boston University group offers 'White' scholarship

[Sisyphus]

But (in theory at least, if not always in practice) it's not about giving someone success, it's about giving them the chance to succeed. My personal experiences on this are mixed. On the one hand, there were "Hispanic" rich kids from my high school with $200/an hour SAT tutors who got into the most selective universities based on affirmative action. I've seen minorities get in to schools based on affirmative action who then couldn't compete and had to drop out, since they weren't actually disadvantaged, they were just not smart enough. On the other hand, I know people from college who really did grow up in poverty, who often didn't have parents, let alone parents who went to college, whose high schools taught next to nothing and were highly dangerous to even walk down the hallway, who saw only drug dealers as "successful" role models. These guys were really smart, but there's no way in hell they'd get into a school like this without affirmative action. But because they were smart, once given the chance to succeed, they did, often spectacularly.

 

So yes, affirmative action is most definitely broken. "Race" is not a good enough criterion, since there are yuppy black kids and poverty-stricken white kids. I suppose what I would be in favor of was a more broadly socioeconomic-based affirmative action, focused on granting opportunity to succeed. I suppose race need not even be a factor.

[ParanoiA]

So yes, affirmative action is most definitely broken. "Race" is not a good enough criterion, since there are yuppy black kids and poverty-stricken white kids. I suppose what I would be in favor of was a more broadly socioeconomic-based affirmative action, focused on granting opportunity to succeed. I suppose race need not even be a factor.

 

I would probably agree with this, except I'm more of the mind to FIX the crappy schools, unacceptable learning environments. We could dedicate an entire forum to just education. I'm so disgusted with our current system, our goals or lack thereof, the structure, teacher salaries, everything. There's a ton of money spent on education and we're getting squat for it. It is unacceptable. It deserves the attention that Michael Richards is getting - that ought to tell you something about America's priorities.

[hotcommodity]

if you quote me, then someone else, could you make sure you attribute at least the first non-me quote to the originator please, otherwize it looks like your attributing all the quotes to me.

 

Fair enough, I fixed it.

 

1/ wear baggy pants

black people did not invent baggy trousers.

2/ listen to music centred on sex and drugs

most music, from all contemporary cultures, focuses around sex. see: pop. lots of music focuses on drugs aswell. black people did not invent music about sex and drugs (sex, drugs, and rock and roll anyone?).

 

3/ talk jibberish

this is, again, common to any group of people, and is a natural effect of them spending time semi-isolated from other cultures. kids generally over-emphasize it to exclude adults. agian, not the reserve of blacks.

 

basically, i dont see how any of this is attributable to black people, or even how it's 'negitively effecting our societies'.

i'm going to give you slightly less benifit of the doubt than sysiphus. your oppinion of black people and parts of your society is, to put it bluntly, very stupid. of all the wrongs in this world, ventelated clothing, rude songs, and slang probably rank extremely lowly, and are not attributable to black people.

First, you're not really in any position to speak about how Americas culture has been effected, as you reside in the United Kingdom. Secondly, you're assuming that I attribute all of Americas woes to black people, which is ridiculous. I never stated that black people invented baggy pants, that they are the exclusive source of promoting sex and drugs, or that they invented gibberish. Clearly you're missing the concept, which is that their culture, which is one that has made few contributions to society, and one that is primarily materialistic, is having a negative effect upon society as a whole. Additionally, you have no basis to say that my opinion of blacks is "stupid" until you successfully debunk my statements. You can go off on as many tangents as you would like, but I suggest you read my comments very carefully, so as not to put words in my mouth.

 

What the hell is this about? MLK was an idiot? MLK probably saved everyone's ass from a racial meltdown. His speeches were emotional and delivered with conviction and faith you can feel in his words. Have you ever actually heard this speech? He managed to advance civil rights and inspire millions to do the same, with peace and dignity. You should only hope to matter a fraction as much to the world.

 

King:"Five score years ago, a great American, in whose symbolic shadow we stand today, signed the Emancipation Proclamation. "

 

I don't believe any black person would regard Lincoln as "a great American" if they had read his congressional quotes stating that he supports the supiority of the white race.

 

King:"When the architects of our great republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir.This note was a promise that all men, yes, black men as well as white men, would be guaranteed to the inalienable rights of life liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

It is obvious today that America has defaulted on this promissory note insofar as her citizens of color are concerned. Instead of honoring this sacred obligation, America has given the Negro people a bad check, a check that has come back marked "insufficient funds.""

 

Do you really believe that Thomas Jefferson, who drafted the Declaration of Independence, and other founding fathers thought of negros as equal? Of course not, as they were slave holders. This is exactly what I mean when I say that King misrepresents the intentions of our founding fathers. By "equality," our founding fahters meant that they deserved the same rights as British citizens, not that the negro is equal to the Anglo American. King says that "America has defaulted on this promissory note ." The fact is that the founding fathers never promised them anything. Either King was smart, and used these words to manipulate the black masses to a common negro benefit, or he was stupid, and blindly misrepresented the intentions of our founding fathers. I probably shouldn't have called him an idiot, and I confess I was having a bad day the day I said it and that's no excuse. But what I'm stating here are facts, which is what I stick to, popular or not.

 

Wow. I can think of few things in the entire history of my participation here that I've disagreed with more than practically every phrase in that quote.

 

It's fine to disagree. I don't expect very many people to agree with me or take my side as it isn't a popular one. But i hope you can elaborate on your post. I could very well be wrong about what I say, and I like to think that I can learn from others, including but not limited to the posters here. So if you can sway my opinion by way of fact and logic, so be it. But don't expect me to change my views out of emotion or guilt.

 

aside: I doubt that hotcomm has the sufficient courage of his convictions to post his real name and workplace. I'll do it if you will, hotcomm.

 

I'm not sure what that would accomplish. I think you're getting a bit too emotional over the internet. But again, if you can sway my opinion by way of logic and/or fact, I urge you to do so. And my name is Evan ( I don't work yet, I go to school) and believe it or not it's a pleaure to have meet the rest of you, Zyncod included. This is a simple discussion, no need to get overly contentious.

[ParanoiA]

I don't believe any black person would regard Lincoln as "a great American" if they had read his congressional quotes stating that he supports the supiority of the white race.

I already acknowledged this sentiment in post #44

 

And while history reminds us Lincoln's primary reason for civil war was preservation of the union, I'm also reminded of Bush's primary reason for Iraq was WMD's...Lincoln was sympathetic to the plight of african american slaves, a morality developed over the course of his life. I doubt he saw african americans as equals, that's true, but he saw something wrong with enslaving people no matter their judgement of them.

 

So, yeah I get that. And most people do. The limited discussions I've had with other black folks have confirmed that. Lincoln did a good thing relative to his time, not relative to ours.

 

Do you really believe that Thomas Jefferson, who drafted the Declaration of Independence, and other founding fathers thought of negros as equal? Of course not, as they were slave holders. This is exactly what I mean when I say that King misrepresents the intentions of our founding fathers. By "equality," our founding fahters meant that they deserved the same rights as British citizens, not that the negro is equal to the Anglo American.

 

Yeah, we all get that too. These aren't terribly deep concepts. It's a part of white guilt conditioning.

 

However, King forced everyone to put money behind those words. Sure, we know what our founding fathers meant. They wanted freedom for anglos, slavery and servitude, submission from everyone else. But they didn't use those words did they? King read those words and interpreted them as they were written - and that's what he used to advance civil rights. And rightly so.

 

And who's really doing the misrepresentation here anyway? It's the founding fathers that wrote one thing, and did another. They are the ones that should be held under suspicion, not King. King worked with what he had - facts. The written facts. Everything else is just "he said", "she said", but those words were written - and written very carefully.

 

You touting factual worship should appreciate King's approach since he also worked with the facts, not the gossip.

 

aside: I doubt that hotcomm has the sufficient courage of his convictions to post his real name and workplace. I'll do it if you will, hotcomm.

 

This is juvenile and makes me suspect you of racial overture. You appear to be taking a popularist view and challenging masculinity to prove your allegiance. You don't need to prove your white shame and exaggerate your passion for equality to make your point. Just use intellect and reasoning, it's longer lasting and utilizes the spirit of freewill.

[GutZ]

which is that their culture, which is one that has made few contributions to society, and one that is primarily materialistic, is having a negative effect upon society as a whole.

 

....If anything they took that idea from white people. It's out of hand now, but it did stand for something...

 

For example : Clothes

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dress_code

 

It's an expression of self-worth, " I can buy expensive stuff too" deal.

[Pangloss]

It's fine to disagree. I don't expect very many people to agree with me or take my side as it isn't a popular one. But i hope you can elaborate on your post. I could very well be wrong about what I say, and I like to think that I can learn from others, including but not limited to the posters here. So if you can sway my opinion by way of fact and logic, so be it. But don't expect me to change my views out of emotion or guilt.

 

If you'll scan back through this thread, you'll find that I already have. I specifically responded to this quote, for example:

 

Now don't get confused. I'm not a racist, I'm simply stating facts. The only problem I have with the culture of African-Americans is that it is mixing with our original culture and slowing the progression of society. You may not despise it at the moment, but maybe one day when your kid begins wearing baggy pants, listening to music about ho's and drugs, and talking gibberish, just maybe you'll come to abhor the blending of cultures in our country.

 

And I'll be happy to elaborate on my earlier response now by saying that I think that's an overgeneralization. Such things happen in culture, and that fact really has nothing to do with blacks per se, which is why I don't see your comment as racist, but I think it is a bit pointless, and it isn't even remotely bad, in and of itself.

 

In fact, the fact that you don't have to be black (the fact that your point isn't racist) to eshew the use of proper English, or even get a haircut on a regular basis, just proves my point. Cultural change happens, like it or not.

 

Anyway, getting back to the point, this is the quote you responded to from me:

 

Wow. I can think of few things in the entire history of my participation here that I've disagreed with more than practically every phrase in that quote.

 

This is the quote from you that I was responding to:

 

... or Martin Luther King' date=' who was an idiot. People watch his famous speech and accept it as truth while he tries to misrepresent the intentions of our founding fathers and make Lincoln look like an African-American sympathizer.[/quote']

 

To be more specific, my disagreement can be summarized in three areas (if I may slightly paraphrase):

 

1) "King was an idiot"

2) "King misrepresented the intentions of our founding fathers"

3) "Lincoln was not an African-American sympathizer"

 

Regarding the first point, I set aside further discussion due to your clearly well-intentioned retraction.

 

Regarding the second point, you may have a valid point regarding the nature of the meaning of the phrase "all men are created equal", and I won't bother to repeat that debate here. But let's review what King actually said (which you quoted):

 

 

King:"When the architects of our great republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir.This note was a promise that all men, yes, black men as well as white men, would be guaranteed to the inalienable rights of life liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

 

It is obvious today that America has defaulted on this promissory note insofar as her citizens of color are concerned. Instead of honoring this sacred obligation, America has given the Negro people a bad check, a check that has come back marked "insufficient funds.""

 

There's another interpretation of these words, which is that it makes no difference what the founding fathers actually thought they were doing -- what they were doing in reality is promising equality to all. Note the use of future tense in the phrase "to which every American was to fall heir" -- King appears to be aware that they didn't think so at the time.

 

And you've responded to that point already, in the following manner:

 

or he ... blindly misrepresented the intentions of our founding fathers.

 

You have it right, here. And I have no problem with it, just as we "blindly misrepresent the intentions of our founding fathers" with many modern laws and regulations.

 

Regarding the third point, I think it's clear that Abraham Lincoln WAS an African-American sympathizer. And in fact he wasn't the only one, following in the footsteps that trace back to the slave-holding founding fathers themselves (as exhibited by the likes of Benjamin Franklin, as well as others who disagreed with the inclusion of slavery as an institution when the country was founded, but specifically Franklin because he didn't think they were inferior, just uneducated -- I wonder what HE thought of the phrase "all men are created equal"!).

 

But specifically regarding Lincoln, certainly he felt he had a more important issue to deal with (keeping together, then restoring the country), but he was also clearly aware of the moral flaw of slavery. "In giving freedom to the slave, we assure freedom to the free -- honorable alike in what we give, and what we preserve." And so I think it incorrect to say that he was not sympathetic to the plight of the African American. Superior, perhaps, but not unsympathetic.

[Sisyphus]

The issues of slavery was the most hotly debated of all arguments in the Continental Congress. The majority of the "founding fathers" were opposed to it in the new nation, and did indeed mean blacks, as well, in the notion of equality among men. Benjamin Franklin, Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and Thomas Paine were all among the foremost leaders of the original American Abolitionist movement. However, the Southern delegates proved inflexible, and considered it a deal-breaking issue. Ultimately it was agreed that it was more important to have a united front and preserve the Union for the time being, and work towards the abolition of slavery later on.

 

As for Lincoln, just look up the Lincoln-Douglas debates.

[big ez]

I have read that by the year 2015, the average "white" man, in the US, will be the minority. Then will it be ok to the masses to have a "whites only" scholarship?

[Aardvark]

I have read that by the year 2015, the average "white" man, in the US, will be the minority. Then will it be ok to the masses to have a "whites only" scholarship?

 

Interesting hypothetical question.

 

Does anyone seriously think that in a nation where whites were a disadvantaged minority other groups would do anything to give the whites 'positive discrimination' 'affirmitive action' or any other special assistance?

[ParanoiA]

Interesting hypothetical question.

 

Does anyone seriously think that in a nation where whites were a disadvantaged minority other groups would do anything to give the whites 'positive discrimination' 'affirmitive action' or any other special assistance?

 

Absolutely not - or at least not me. I can't wait until we're a minority. As a white man, the only problem I see, is that we still won't get the benefits of a minority status because then the attitude will be that we deserve to be kicked around for awhile - continual supposed payback. So no affirmative action for us. No using the race card. If we complain about being oppressed, the legitimacy won't be relevant, we'll be told that we basically deserve a taste of our own medicine. At least, that's my cynical outlook.

[GutZ]

Yeah and country music will become popular...*shudders*

[Sisyphus]

What group will be the majority? Or are you just saying caucasians will go from majority to plurality?

[Dak]

hotcommodity, if you quote me, and edit the quote, could you indicate that with ommission marks ( [,,,] )

 

First, you're not really in any position to speak about how Americas culture has been effected, as you reside in the United Kingdom

 

so?

 

Secondly, you're assuming that I attribute all of Americas woes to black people, which is ridiculous. I never stated that black people invented baggy pants, that they are the exclusive source of promoting sex and drugs, or that they invented gibberish. Clearly you're missing the concept, which is that their culture, which is one that has made few contributions to society, and one that is primarily materialistic, is having a negative effect upon society as a whole.

 

'their' culture?

 

so far, you've only mentioned four 'bad' aspects of 'black' culture which are pervading your society: materialism, baggy trousers, jibberish, and music about sex and drugs, which all either are, or have been, assosiated with various cultures, both black and white.

 

given that white sub-cultures, say, spoke jibberish before your country was even settled, then how can you blame black culture for promoting the speaking of jibberish within your country?

 

why not, say, that white culture promoted the speaking of jibberish in black culture, which then plays a role in back-promoting jibberish to a new generation of both black and white people? or that white culture promotes the speaking of jibberish within white culture, as they've been doing it for longer than they've been cohabiting with black people? or that the speaking of jibberish is a natural thing, desighned to convey membership to a group, and naturally occours in any culture (ie, all cultures develop it independant of one-another)?

 

why must it be promoted within the white community by black culture? same argument with the others, all of which have, at various points, been common within white cultures in the abscence of black people.

 

why is it that, having invented these things and had them before even starting enslaving black people, let alone freeing them and allowing them to contribute to culture, white people suddenly only have these things in their culture because of black people, who, assumedly, cannot use the same argument and blame white culture for promoting the prevalence of these things within black culture in the first place?

 

and, again, stuff like wearing baggy trousers isn't going to degrade your culture nor country, and it's incorrect to presume that stuff like rap represents black culture any more than rock/punk/pop represents white culture. using black sports stars as an example of black people promoting materialism is the same as using white sport/movie stars as an example of white people promoting materialism (tho, i forgot, they only do this because of the influence of black people, dont they )

[Dak]

Interesting hypothetical question.

 

Does anyone seriously think that in a nation where whites were a disadvantaged minority other groups would do anything to give the whites 'positive discrimination' 'affirmitive action' or any other special assistance?

 

i seriously think that the correct thing to do would be to sort the problem out, and that 'affermative action' and 'positive discrimination' would be equally ugly, tho probably justified, solutions to the problem as they are now.

 

to those of you speculating about a turner-diary-esque situation whereby white people are the majority, but are treated as an oppressed minority, i'd point out that the main benifit of democracy is that it stops the majority being shat upon by a minority, so i really don't think 'white subjugation' will ever happen in america.