NationStates Jolt Archive

Boston University College Republicans (a university sanctioned group) has decided to give a $250 scholarship to only white students (the Caucasian Achievement and Recognition Scholarship).

The groups objective is to call attention to the idea that we give any scholarship based on race instead of achievement. Students applying for this scholarship must be at least 25% caucasian. The money will come from the College Republicans, not the university.

"Did we do this to give a scholarship to white kids? Of course not," the scholarship reads. "Did we do it to trigger a discussion on what we believe to be the morally wrong practice of basing decisions in our schools and our jobs on racial preferences rather than merit? Absolutely."
*snip*
The application for the $250 scholarship, due Nov. 30, requires applicants be full-time BU undergraduate students and one-fourth Caucasian and maintain at least a 3.2 cumulative GPA. Applicants must submit two essays, one describing the applicant's ancestry and one describing "what it means to you to be a Caucasian-American today."

Dean of Students Ken Elmore has spoken against the scholarship, stating that it undermines the goal of the university: to provide an increasingly diverse student population. Boston University has a majority of white students.





I'll start by saying that I support this. BU is a top university. I understand need-based financial aid and academic/sports-based scholarships. Those should clearly be available to all students. What I do not understand is why the university wants to give a certain group of students more money based off of what race they are. A white student whos family makes $40,000 a year needs just as much financial aid as a black student whos family makes $40,000 a year.

There is more to diversity than just race. Does that make some impact? Of course. Will not offering a race-based scholarship stop minorities from coming to the school? No.

What is interesting is that the school does not publish the racial makeup of the university, but does publish the academic makeup (SAT/ACT scores, GPA's, etc).


So, are the BUCR being racist with this? Is it not racist, but not right? Is it the right move?

Personally, I think that yes, it is racist (as are black scholarships et. al.), but it is a good thing. It has opened tons of dialogue, and has gotten the BUCR a chance to talk with the head of African-American studies, as well as Dean Elmore.


The CNN article (http://www.cnn.com/2006/EDUCATION/11/22/caucasian.scholarship.reut/index.html)
Boston University Daily Free Press (Freep) article (http://media.www.dailyfreepress.com/media/storage/paper87/news/2006/11/21/News/Bu.Group.Offers.White.Scholarship-2505837.shtml?sourcedomain=www.dailyfreepress.com&MIIHost=media.collegepublisher.com)

I support this because if there is black student loans, then they should allowed a white student loans.

If you want to ban this, then you need to ban scholarships offered specifically to Hispanics, specifically to blacks, specifically to women, specifically to any particular group.

If you want to ban this, then you need to ban scholarships offered specifically to Hispanics, specifically to blacks, specifically to women, specifically to any particular group.

Dammit, stop saying things I agree with! :p

Dammit, stop saying things I agree with! :p

Me and Kat agree: not surprising.
Me and Wilgrove agree: Slightly more surprising.;)

ETA: me not agreeing with Dean Elmore: quite surprising, and a little unsettling. One of the men I respect the most at my university. :(

So, are the BUCR being racist with this? Is it not racist, but not right? Is it the right move?

If there are all black schools, why can't there be all white scholarships?

So, are the BUCR being racist with this? Is it not racist, but not right? Is it the right move?

No more racist than the United Negro College Fund. :rolleyes:

I agree, this is a great thing. if htere's black only scholarships, why can't there be white only? Granted the whole idea of scholarships given on the basis of race is very stupid, and just a form of segregation, but attention needs to be called to that. And this little venture has done it well.

No more racist than the United Negro College Fund. :rolleyes:

But Condie Rice put that to an end right after she used it to pay for her education.

I think it's fair enough to have such a scholarship.

there is nothing inherently wrong with setting up a scholarship for any group you want.

but

1) its not meant to be a scholarship but a political statement. $250 is not enough to make a difference in the price of a school like that

2) it makes republicans look like assholes

3) it makes BU look bad

if i were associated with BU i would be pissed.

there is nothing inherently wrong with setting up a scholarship for any group you want.

but

1) its not meant to be a scholarship but a political statement. $250 is not enough to make a difference in the price of a school like that

2) it makes republicans look like assholes

3) it makes BU look bad

if i were associated with BU i would be pissed.

It makes the BU look bad if the person being offended doesn't stop and think about what it is, and the message it's supposed to be sending. If they aren't so blinded by their own automatic foot-stomping reaction on the mere mention of "white only", they'd understand that it simply is a political statement, and a damn good one at that.

Will not offering a race-based scholarship stop minorities from coming to the school?

yes

So, are the BUCR being racist with this?

yes, obviously. their only aim is to stir up racial animosity. nice move, fucktards.

yes



yes, obviously. their only aim is to stir up racial animosity. nice move, fucktards.

So how about all the <ethnicity only> scholarships already out there? Nice move, fucktards.

there is nothing inherently wrong with setting up a scholarship for any group you want.

but

1) its not meant to be a scholarship but a political statement. $250 is not enough to make a difference in the price of a school like thatThey admit it is to make a statement

2) it makes republicans look like assholesInterestingly, the GOP has spoken against the BUCR

3) it makes BU look badBecause we allow controversey? The dean has spoken against their actions. Dean Elmore could strip the BUCR of their charter...it wouldn't be fair, but he could. Instead, he is allowing university students to do exactly what he asks of us: think for ourselves.

if i were associated with BU i would be pissed.
Some of us are. Others of us aren't. I think it is great that the questions are being raised and there is dialogue.

A year or so back, BU made headlines by being the first university to publish a porn magazine that was made entirely by and for students: the writers, publishers, photographers, and models were all part of BU and surrounding colleges (it was not university sanctioned). BU is increasingly becoming known for being willing to challenge many things.
There are 16,000 undergrads and 11,000 postgrads. It is inevitable that we are diverse and many issues are raised. I don't see how this makes BU look bad. The dean spoke against it, but is allowing the students to speak their minds infront of department heads and deans of the university and assorted colleges. Amazing that a university allows students to think and question and create controversy.

yes



yes, obviously. their only aim is to stir up racial animosity. nice move, fucktards.

No, they are doing it to bring attention to the racist (in its own sense, minority scholarships target one racial group and excludes others) minority-only scholarships already established. It's not "to keep the black man down". Anyone who believes so hasn't taken the time to actually look at it and think on the reason why it was established.

Am I the only one thinking that for the trouble of stirring up controversy the BUCR should at least have given a scholarship worth something? $250 wont even cover the cost of all the books in one semester.

yes



yes, obviously. their only aim is to stir up racial animosity. nice move, fucktards.
So students won't attend BU because they have to work to get a scholarship, rather than be given it because they are black?
Guess what? BU has very few black students. The two largest minority groups are asians and southern asians (indian, pakistani). Know why? Because they are foreign students who choose to come to BU for our business and engineering programs. They already pay more by being international students.

There isn't racial animosity at BU more than anywhere else. Why should a black or asian or latino student get a scholarship because of his background, while I have to work my ass off to make enough to pay back loans I have to take out?

BU is notoriously stingy in giving out money. It is a top university in the world, and should select its students and their funding based off academics, need, and athletics (in that order). Race should not be an issue.

If I remember correctly, this scholarship is offered by one of the student groups, not directly from the college. The college doesnt even have the ability to stop students from handing out cash to anyone they want to. I see this as more of a statement than any real racism. Its only $250 anyway.

So how about all the <ethnicity only> scholarships already out there?

Acting to correct racial inequities and promote diversity - good
Acting to make a stupid political point and to counteract the above efforts - bad

This is really not that hard to understand.

I LOVED this story. It is Class A satire. I think it is great that discussion like this is spurred about the absurdity of race as a factor in ANYTHING.

My high school aged white son will be applying to college soon.

1. Why should a latino or black with a lower SAT get taken ahead of him?

2. Is "student body diversity" really a valid goal? Or is it only employed when it is needed to bring more minority students in? Why bother with any sort of competitive environment then? Why not just have a racial quota lottery?

3. Do you see any colleges out there looking to bring minorites onto their hockey teams or white guys on to their basketball teams? Oh, those are meritocracies like the real world? What does that disparity tell our kids?

4. Reversal is a great test of validity. The outrage about a "white" scholarship based on skin color provokes screaming outrage from the liberals...who therefore look absurd :p . The emperor has no clothes.

It isn't "reverse discrimination". It is just discrimination, period.

Acting to correct racial inequities and promote diversity - good
Acting to make a stupid political point and to counteract the above efforts - bad

This is really not that hard to understand.

Unfortunately, its not that easy for some people to understand. Its impossible to convince some people that "reverse racism" is not a real factor, or that many people who are ethnic minorities like blacks need the money more than the average white person because they come from repressed economic background that is a direct result of slavery by whites and continuing racism.

I personally think we should get rid of scholarships all together, and have free public higher education for everybody. But that's just me.

Acting to correct racial inequities and promote diversity - good
Acting to make a stupid political point and to counteract the above efforts - bad

This is really not that hard to understand.

No, what's hard to understand is why people are freaking out over this.
Does it take away the scholarships for <ethnicity>? No.
Does it prevent people of <ethnicity> from coming to BU? No.

Does it in some way level the playing field to offer a whites only scholarship? Yes, and apparently giving one out for as little as $250 so threatens the status quo (that non-whites deserve breaks that whites do not) that people have already fallen to flaming, for pete's sake.

Despite what some may like to think, not every white student comes from a two-parent middle class or upper class home, and not every white student has parents that are willing or able to support them either financially or emotionally. There are some who come from worse situations than their fellow non-white students.[/devil's advocate]

Acting to correct racial inequities and promote diversity - good
Acting to make a stupid political point and to counteract the above efforts - bad

This is really not that hard to understand.

To me, these extra scholarships and particularly giving tests extra points, always seemed like an intellectually approved "White Mans Burden" stunt. The minorities that this targets should be offended by the idea that they are expected to function better when pulled into a "white" atmosphere.

They admit it is to make a statement

should the scholarship system be used for political statements?



Interestingly, the GOP has spoken against the BUCR

as well they should. that doesnt stop them from being "the party of white only scholarships" if someone wants to use it against them in the future



Because we allow controversey? The dean has spoken against their actions. Dean Elmore could strip the BUCR of their charter...it wouldn't be fair, but he could. Instead, he is allowing university students to do exactly what he asks of us: think for ourselves.

because it makes BU the home of the white only scholarship and can cause fewer donations to come into the university. that makes a headache for dean elmore. bad publicity can make his job much harder.


Some of us are. Others of us aren't. I think it is great that the questions are being raised and there is dialogue.

A year or so back, BU made headlines by being the first university to publish a porn magazine that was made entirely by and for students: the writers, publishers, photographers, and models were all part of BU and surrounding colleges (it was not university sanctioned). BU is increasingly becoming known for being willing to challenge many things.
There are 16,000 undergrads and 11,000 postgrads. It is inevitable that we are diverse and many issues are raised. I don't see how this makes BU look bad. The dean spoke against it, but is allowing the students to speak their minds infront of department heads and deans of the university and assorted colleges. Amazing that a university allows students to think and question and create controversy.

ohhhh i thought bucr was an alumni group making its own statement at the expense of the students. that does make a small difference but it still makes the university look bad. as im sure the porn magazine did too. i suppose it does depend on what the end result is and what bad press can be made of it.

Am I the only one thinking that for the trouble of stirring up controversy the BUCR should at least have given a scholarship worth something? $250 wont even cover the cost of all the books in one semester.That isn't the point of it. The point was to raise a discussion, which, it has done incredibly well.

If I remember correctly, this scholarship is offered by one of the student groups, not directly from the college. The college doesnt even have the ability to stop students from handing out cash to anyone they want to. I see this as more of a statement than any real racism. Its only $250 anyway.The issue is that BUCR are a university sanctioned group, and partially funded by the students tuition. While it isn't the university directly, it is still associated with the student. The dean could stop them, but that would go against the purpose of BU (to encourage critical thought and action to support your belifes)

Acting to correct racial inequities and promote diversity - good
Acting to make a stupid political point and to counteract the above efforts - bad

This is really not that hard to understand.Boston University is a top university. If you cannot make it into the university and gain standard need-based, athletic, and academic scholarships, or take out college loans (FAFSA, etc.), or take a work-study position, or any other program that they offer which are NOT race related, then you have no reason to be at the university. Does that sound cocky? Yeah, probably. However, I am working my ass off both academically and true work-wise to go to BU. Why should a student who comes from a similar background as me have an easier time because he has minority status?

I LOVED this story. It is Class A satire. I think it is great that discussion like this is spurred about the absurdity of race as a factor in ANYTHING.

My high school aged white son will be applying to college soon.

1. Why should a latino or black with a lower SAT get taken ahead of him?

2. Is "student body diversity" really a valid goal? Or is it only employed when it is needed to bring more minority students in? Why bother with any sort of competitive environment then? Why not just have a racial quota lottery?

3. Do you see any colleges out there looking to bring minorites onto their hockey teams or white guys on to their basketball teams? Oh, those are meritocracies like the real world? What does that disparity tell our kids?

4. Reversal is a great test of validity. The outrage about a "white" scholarship based on skin color provokes screaming outrage from the liberals...who therefore look absurd :p . The emperor has no clothes.

It isn't "reverse discrimination". It is just discrimination, period.

1. Why should students have to compete to go to college in the first place?

2. Why should someone have a lower chance of going to college just because of the color of his/her skin? Or his/her economic background?

3. Why is college sports more important in many college's administration than the actual education going on? Furthermore, does athletic talent have anything to do with merit?

4. Is the entire system valid if many people, black and white, will be denied a chance for higher education? Why should education be a private commodity?

I agree, this is a great thing. if htere's black only scholarships, why can't there be white only?

Consider these two statements:

- Blacks-as-a-group don't have as much power that they deserve in today's society. Black-only college scholarships are one way to help solve this problem.

- Whites-as-a-group don't have as much power that they deserve in today's society. White-only college scholarships are one way to help solve the problem.

At first glance, the statements might look the same. But there's an important difference between them. Do see you what it is? (Hint: Do some groups have more power than others already?)

2. Why should someone have a lower chance of going to college just because of the color of his/her skin? Or his/her economic background?

Indeed, why? Watch this turn into OMG KAT'S RACIST!

Awww...those poor crackers, what with them being statistically marginalized in society, institutionally excluded, what with their historic lack and shortage of access. When, oh when, will we see a white man as president? Bless these brave little privileged children and their tizzy fit, standing up for the big guy!

Awww...those poor crackers, what with them being statistically marginalized in society, institutionally excluded, what with their historic lack and shortage of access. When, oh when, will we see a white man as president? Bless these brave little privileged children and their tizzy fit, standing up for the big guy!

:rolleyes:

Right. All whites are rich, educated, and have every advantage in the world. When they go to banks, they don't wait on line with everyone else; they are served caviar while roving bands of manicurists and pedicurists do their magic. Then they go to dinners that are comped simply because they are white, and are given beachfront condos for having blue eyes and blonde hair (which all whites have).

When you see whites working in manual labor, behind the counter at McFastfoods or living in trailer parks alongside people of color, it's because they WANT to, not because it's all that's available to them. Those wacky whites!

Indeed, why? Watch this turn into OMG KAT'S RACIST!

It shouldn't. I'm not going to accuse you of racism. I was asking a rhetorical question to see if anyone on either side of line has a reason for why the status quo should exist. (You're gonna have to better than just hide a message in white font.)

So now the question is, "Do you have an answer to rationalize the existence of the higher education system?"

should the scholarship system be used for political statements?This isn't exactly the scholarship system...it is being given directly by the BUCR.




as well they should. that doesnt stop them from being "the party of white only scholarships" if someone wants to use it against them in the futureTrue, I suppose.




because it makes BU the home of the white only scholarship and can cause fewer donations to come into the university. that makes a headache for dean elmore. bad publicity can make his job much harder. It also makes BU the home of students who were willing to stand up for what they see as being wrong, and start what has already started to become a nation-wide discussion.



ohhhh i thought bucr was an alumni group making its own statement at the expense of the students. that does make a small difference but it still makes the university look bad. as im sure the porn magazine did too. i suppose it does depend on what the end result is and what bad press can be made of it.Sorry...I should have elaborated on what the BUCR is...my bad.
It might make the university look bad to some people...the people who just see "Oh, they make a porn magazine" or "Oh, they're just giving a scholarship to whites" without looking at what is actually being done. The porn was made to help students pay their way through college. Brilliant move, and raised the question of student sexuality. The magazine covers real issues and questions that students want to talk about. The white scholarship? We're already the home of a black scholarship, a latin one, an asian one, et. al. Why should "white" be any different? (Yes, I know...the point of the minority ones is to encourage and help minorities to make it into the university system...but they are no more or less racist)

should the scholarship system be used for political statements?



No. Disband the United Negro College Fund.

Why should a student who comes from a similar background as me have an easier time because he has minority status?

Firstly, "similar background" is questionable.

Secondly, it is in the interests of the university and of society to promote diversity. It's in the university's interest because it permits minority students an environment of acceptance, instead of having lopsided racial proportions enforce de facto segregation. It's in the interest of society because it gets minority and white students to associate with one another on equal terms, wearing down the racial barriers that lead to racial inequity in the first place.

Despite what some may like to think, not every white student comes from a two-parent middle class or upper class home, and not every white student has parents that are willing or able to support them either financially or emotionally. There are some who come from worse situations than their fellow non-white students.

Indeed, and those students, like analogous minority students, deserve needs-based financial aid.

No. Disband the United Negro College Fund.

*Throws Conservatiana a flame suit* I suppose you wouldn't mind if then if race didn't play any factor, nor anyones economic background?

Awww...those poor crackers, what with them being statistically marginalized in society, institutionally excluded, what with their historic lack and shortage of access. When, oh when, will we see a white man as president? Bless these brave little privileged children and their tizzy fit, standing up for the big guy!

:rolleyes:

This is BU. Work your ass off, get the grades to get an academic scholarship, play a sport and get an athletic scholarship, or get a job. The university provides plenty of ways for students to pay for school...race should not be one. We aren't looking to be equal and accept all students...we are looking for the best. Regardless of race.

1. Why should students have to compete to go to college in the first place? Limited resources, giving a college education to everyone would be wasteful.

2. Why should someone have a lower chance of going to college just because of the color of his/her skin? Or his/her economic background? Nobody believes that a person should have a lower chance of going to college JUST because of the color of their skin, and given the options for loans, scholarships, the push for higher education in high schools and the high pay-off of a college degree, people of a lower economic background should also go to college.

3. Why is college sports more important in many college's administration than the actual education going on? Furthermore, does athletic talent have anything to do with merit? I wouldn't say that they are more important than education, many schools with good sports teams also focus on their academics as well. The only thing is that college sports are a popular money-earner and athletic graduates can be good donors to schools or even be successful in their own right off the field.

4. Is the entire system valid if many people, black and white, will be denied a chance for higher education? Why should education be a private commodity?
Yes, not all people should receive a higher education, we do have a goal of allowing the people most likely to benefit from such an education in but to allocate too much resources to higher education would be wasteful. Education is a private commodity because it is individuals that benefit from education and it is individuals that should be responsible for their educational choices. Who benefits most from college education? The individual getting the degree. Who should make the choice over whether or not this education is a good idea? The individual choosing to get this degree. College is an investment, not a right.

:rolleyes:

Right. All whites are rich, educated, and have every advantage in the world. When they go to banks, they don't wait on line with everyone else; they are served caviar while roving bands of manicurists and pedicurists do their magic. Then they go to dinners that are comped simply because they are white, and are given beachfront condos for having blue eyes and blonde hair (which all whites have).

When you see whites working in manual labor, behind the counter at McFastfoods or living in trailer parks alongside people of color, it's because they WANT to, not because it's all that's available to them. Those wacky whites!

You're thinking of Jews. ;)

Sorry...I should have elaborated on what the BUCR is...my bad.
It might make the university look bad to some people...the people who just see "Oh, they make a porn magazine" or "Oh, they're just giving a scholarship to whites" without looking at what is actually being done. The porn was made to help students pay their way through college. Brilliant move, and raised the question of student sexuality. The magazine covers real issues and questions that students want to talk about. The white scholarship? We're already the home of a black scholarship, a latin one, an asian one, et. al. Why should "white" be any different? (Yes, I know...the point of the minority ones is to encourage and help minorities to make it into the university system...but they are no more or less racist)

since it must have come up as a result of this discussion...

how many students are at BU as a result of targetted minority scholarships?

im only asking because you might know.

Secondly, it is in the interests of the school and of society to promote diversity. It's in the school's interest because it permits minority students an environment of acceptance, instead of having lopsided racial proportions enforce de facto segregation. It's in the interest of society because it gets minority and white students to associate with one another on equal terms, wearing down the racial barriers that lead to racial inequity in the first place.

What if I just wanted to come to learn to be a biologist rather than join the Peace Corps and sing kumbaya with a bunch of wannabe social engineers?

What if my study group is disadvantaged by having the weak tit who got a bunch of admission points for not being white? Or fo they get extra test points too?

What if my kid becomes a bitter racist fanatic when it becomes clear that three weaker minority kids from his school took his slots at his chosen college because of their melatonin levels?

Despite what some may like to think, not every white student comes from a two-parent middle class or upper class home, and not every white student has parents that are willing or able to support them either financially or emotionally. There are some who come from worse situations than their fellow non-white students.[/devil's advocate]

Indeed, and those students, like analogous minority students, deserve needs-based financial aid.

And so.... why does the idea of a white scholarship then get people foaming at the mouth, sneering, and generally acting as if someone is raping their grandmother in front of them?

There are purely academically based scholarships that anyone can qualify for, black, Hispanic, Asian, white or Martian. There are ethnically, religiously, gender, and racially specific scholarships. Why is it then somehow evil to offer one for whites? Is it because it's politically correct to assume that non-whites are automatically disadvantaged and therefore entitled to more than their fellow students?

Any racially-based scholarship or preference is divisive -- and I find it hypocritical that there are those who will vigorously support some but not others.

All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.

Firstly, "similar background" is questionable.It is very easy to tell if they have a similar background (as you admit to kat). Similar background meaning they come from a similar family to mine

Secondly, it is in the interests of the university and of society to promote diversity. It's in the university's interest because it permits minority students an environment of acceptance, instead of having lopsided racial proportions enforce de facto segregation. It's in the interest of society because it gets minority and white students to associate with one another on equal terms, wearing down the racial barriers that lead to racial inequity in the first place.Race is not the only form of diversity. Yes, there should be minority students. However, the majority of BU's minority population comes from our massive international student base from Hong Kong, Shanghai, India, Pakistan. "Diversity" doesn't mean just "different from me". Different religions, political ideologies, nations, different family structures, SES's...all of that



Indeed, and those students, like analogous minority students, deserve needs-based financial aid.So why not just give need based, rather than race based?

*Throws Conservatiana a flame suit* I suppose you wouldn't mind if then if race didn't play any factor, nor anyones economic background?

What other way should it be?

Trying to make selected racial cuts winds up like a baby playing with razorblades -- blood everywhere, lots of shouting, nothing accomplished.

play a sport and get an athletic scholarship

This doesn't qualify as "racist," perhaps, but it's certainly up there in the "arbitrary" category.

No. Disband the United Negro College Fund.

there is nothing inherently wrong in making a scholarship for any group you wish. when the UNCF no longer has a reason to exist, people will stop giving money to it.

Race is not the only form of diversity. Yes, there should be minority students. However, the majority of BU's minority population comes from our massive international student base from Hong Kong, Shanghai, India, Pakistan. "Diversity" doesn't mean just "different from me". Different religions, political ideologies, nations, different family structures, SES's...all of that

That's true, but while diversity in all of those respects is a good thing, none of them play the same role in addressing the problem of racial inequality in this country, which is a significantly more compelling basis.

So why not just give need based, rather than race based?

I already explained why.

since it must have come up as a result of this discussion...

how many students are at BU as a result of targetted minority scholarships?

im only asking because you might know.

Honestly, it hasn't come up yet. I'm looking now, but BU's website is horrible. I do know that BU is incredibly stingy when giving scholarships, and I know we do have race-based ones...I just don't know how many or how much is given.

Two eyerolls. Rockin'
:rolleyes:

Right. All whites are rich, educated, and have every advantage in the world. When they go to banks, they don't wait on line with everyone else; they are served caviar while roving bands of manicurists and pedicurists do their magic. Then they go to dinners that are comped simply because they are white, and are given beachfront condos for having blue eyes and blonde hair (which all whites have).

When you see whites working in manual labor, behind the counter at McFastfoods or living in trailer parks alongside people of color, it's because they WANT to, not because it's all that's available to them. Those wacky whites!

That's why there are no scholarships or assistance to low income whites.

I mean, there are-but by all means we should act hysterically like there aren't. Nothing to vary from the "If Bart gets a lollipop I want a lollipop" narrow logic view. "I totally have a black friend so there is not issue with race in America!" Things like Jim Crow have no lasting effect, the statistics are just coincidences.

Limited resources, giving a college education to everyone would be wasteful.

Primary and secondary education are "limited resources", yet we somehow find a way to allow everyone the chance at it.

Nobody believes that a person should have a lower chance of going to college JUST because of the color of their skin, and given the options for loans, scholarships, the push for higher education in high schools and the high pay-off of a college degree, people of a lower economic background should also go to college.

Then why does the system still leave so many behind? College costs are exploding without any real rationale, and higher education is becoming a necessity for anyone to be competitive. The system is failing, and minorities are the ones who are feeling it the hardest.

I wouldn't say that they are more important than education, many schools with good sports teams also focus on their academics as well. The only thing is that college sports are a popular money-earner and athletic graduates can be good donors to schools or even be successful in their own right off the field.

Oh, now we have the evil of money. It still doesn't explain why college sports are becoming increasingly focused on while many thousands cannot afford college education.

Yes, not all people should receive a higher education, we do have a goal of allowing the people most likely to benefit from such an education in but to allocate too much resources to higher education would be wasteful. Education is a private commodity because it is individuals that benefit from education and it is individuals that should be responsible for their educational choices. Who benefits most from college education? The individual getting the degree. Who should make the choice over whether or not this education is a good idea? The individual choosing to get this degree. College is an investment, not a right.

Education is a social good, not a private good. The primary benefactor of an educated citizenry is private industry, who reaps a huge surplus value off an educated work force, and by to a similar extent the rest of the citizenry, who benefit from the work done by college educated people. So what we have is that costs for education are primarily passed on to the individuals, but the benefits are reaped by someone else. So that's why I argue that college should be treated just the same as primary education: as a social good, with both the costs socialized.

It is very easy to tell if they have a similar background (as you admit to kat). Similar background meaning they come from a similar family to mine

Race is not the only form of diversity. Yes, there should be minority students. However, the majority of BU's minority population comes from our massive international student base from Hong Kong, Shanghai, India, Pakistan. "Diversity" doesn't mean just "different from me". Different religions, political ideologies, nations, different family structures, SES's...all of that



So why not just give need based, rather than race based? Excellent point.

What other way should it be?

Trying to make selected racial cuts winds up like a baby playing with razorblades -- blood everywhere, lots of shouting, nothing accomplished.

The UNCF was created for the purpose of ending racism in higher education, and to help economically disadvantaged blacks band together to help themselves.

The way it should be is free college education for all.

there is nothing inherently wrong in making a scholarship for any group you wish. when the UNCF no longer has a reason to exist, people will stop giving money to it.

So by extension, there should be nothing inherently wrong with the poor little scholarship that's raised so much ire here today.

It However, the majority of BU's minority population comes from our massive international student base from Hong Kong, Shanghai, India, Pakistan.

so, assuming that somehow my US taxpayer dollars find their way into Boston University's coffers though grants, taxbreaks, etc, should I, as a white US taxpayer, be pissed off if the racial makeup of Boston University is dramatically different from the US population as a whole (i.e.: 80.2 percent white)?

Why is it then somehow evil to offer one for whites? Is it because it's politically correct to assume that non-whites are automatically disadvantaged and therefore entitled to more than their fellow students?

No, it's because there are good reasons to offer them to non-whites rather than to whites - promoting diversity and combating racial inequity.

Any racially-based scholarship or preference is divisive -- and I find it hypocritical that there are those who will vigorously support some but not others.

It isn't really racially-based. If blacks were the privileged majority, I would advocate the same for whites.

So by extension, there should be nothing inherently wrong with the poor little scholarship that's raised so much ire here today.

i think thats what i said originally.

there is nothing inherently wrong in making a scholarship for white people. if they can raise the money and take the political heat, go for it.

but its not really intended to help anyone raise the money to go to bu, the amount is too small, by extension it makes both the university and the republican party look bad. those are considerations. its up to those who are actually involved to deal with the implications of having such a scholarship.

You know, I hate it when the College Republicans make political statements like this. This is why I now am declaring that a state of war exists between myself (and anyone who will join me) and the College Republicans.

Two eyerolls. Rockin'


That's why there are no scholarships or assistance to low income whites.

I mean, there are-but by all means we should act hysterically like there aren't. Nothing to vary from the "If Bart gets a lollipop I want a lollipop" narrow logic view. "I totally have a black friend so there is not issue with race in America!" Things like Jim Crow have no lasting effect, the statistics are just coincidences.

I never said there was no scholarships or assistance. You haven't read what I said very carefully if you're characterizing what I say as "acting hysterically like there aren't." And please don't act as if the same assistance is not afforded to low income <ethnic group>. I said that if there are scholarships specifically for <ethnicity or race> then there should be no upset and ire about scholarships specifically for whites.

Are your characterizations the product of "hysterical kneejerk reactions to the idea of a white-only scholarship" or lack of reading comprehension?

I think many of you are missing the point. I'm sure there are poeple alive today who remember when women couldn't vote, even more who remember the black civil right movement. This traces far back since the founding of the country where it was far far easier for whites to get any sort of decent job. Centuries of money being passed down has resulted in a very wealthy white population where a hardly proportionate amount of of rich Hispanics or Blacks. Because of the very history of your country these scholarships are needed to level the playing field. I don't see it as catering to any sort of minority, I see it making up for centuries of less rights. It might not be fair to white kids today, but it sure as hell wasn't fair to people of colour back then.

No more racist than the United Negro College Fund. :rolleyes:

Actually, the United Negro College Fund isn't that racist. The UNCF gives money to "historically black schools."

When it got started Blacks had to start their own schools because Whites wouldn't let them into theirs. That's what made George Wallace famous.

Whites are allowed into most of UNFC's schools AFAIK, but few Whites choose to go to them.

This doesn't qualify as "racist," perhaps, but it's certainly up there in the "arbitrary" category.Not really. We're a huge sports school...Division 1, and a major hockey center. Alot of our donations come from former athletes, as well as forming a significant income base for the school through ticket sales, as well as drawing more students to the university. It is logical to have a strong athletic program.

That's true, but while diversity in all of those respects is a good thing, none of them play the same role in addressing the problem of racial inequality in this country, which is a significantly more compelling basis.The fact is that the university provides ample opportunities for _all_ students to pay for school. I see no reason why I need to work my ass off while a black or asian student in a similar standing can get a scholarship. I've worked just as hard to get to the same spot in the same university. We are equal students, and should be treated as such, regardless of how much melanin my skin produces.




Two eyerolls. Rockin'


That's why there are no scholarships or assistance to low income whites.

I mean, there are-but by all means we should act hysterically like there aren't. Nothing to vary from the "If Bart gets a lollipop I want a lollipop" narrow logic view. "I totally have a black friend so there is not issue with race in America!" Things like Jim Crow have no lasting effect, the statistics are just coincidences.Well, correlation =/= causation, of course...but I'm not meaning to imply that at some levels, there are issues with minorities and the like. My issue is that a student either has or has not proven that they deserve a spot at BU. This is regardless of race or ethnicity, gender or religion. Are there scholarships for low-income white students? Honestly, none that I have seen, atleast not as sweeping as "black" or "asian". Instead, you get "Italian" or "German" or "Irish". Sorry, I can't trace my bloodline back to any one country in high enough ammounts to qualify for a single loan based off ethnicity.

There is no reason why a black student should get a loan while a similar white student doesn't. We both worked our asses off to get into BU. We've both proven ourselves academically and extracurricularly. The university could, rather than giving extra aid to a black student, instead allow all students a fair chance to pay for college. We've proven ourselves equal by getting into BU. Now, it is time for the university to treat us as such.

I think many of you are missing the point. I'm sure there are poeple alive today who remember when women couldn't vote, even more who remember the black civil right movement. This traces far back since the founding of the country where it was far far easier for whites to get any sort of decent job. Centuries of money being passed down has resulted in a very wealthy white population where a hardly proportionate amount of of rich Hispanics or Blacks. Because of the very history of your country these scholarships are needed to level the playing field. I don't see it as catering to any sort of minority, I see it making up for centuries of less rights. It might not be fair to white kids today, but it sure as hell wasn't fair to people of colour back then.

Something is needed to level the playing field, but this isn't it.

Feminist studies has a term called the "glass cliff" as well as the "glass cieling." It means making it easy for people to get into elevated situations that they're not prepared for. Taking under educated people from poor neighborhoods with underfunded schools and putting them in the same colleges competing against White students from rich neighborhoods with well funded school systems creates a system where a dispropportionate number of minorities fail, which further down the line, serves to justify disenfranchising them all over again when political opinion turns the other way.

As Jared Diamond puts it, "it is immoral to treat people justly because they have been treated unjustly in the past. You should treat them justly because they are people."

so, assuming that somehow my US taxpayer dollars find their way into Boston University's coffers though grants, taxbreaks, etc, should I, as a white US taxpayer, be pissed off if the racial makeup of Boston University is dramatically different from the US population as a whole (i.e.: 80.2 percent white)?

BU is a private institution. You can be as pissed off as you want, there isn't a damned thing you can do about it.

We, the students of the university, have a much more vested interest in the direction our university travels than you, a tax payer who, in all likelyhood, is benefiting more than he is losing in those tax breaks.

I think that most of this is a non-issue, really. A scholarship program for blacks cannot undo 400+ years of instiutionalized slavery, subserviance, and racism. So the existence of a white's only scholarship, (which is enough to buy one college text book :headbang: ) will not undo fifty years of attempts at progress. It is an annoying political statement. But the message behind the political statement is that we still have a long way to go before we have racial equality, a long way before reactionaries will let the issue be resolved.

Primary and secondary education are "limited resources", yet we somehow find a way to allow everyone the chance at it. More people can handle primary and secondary and less resources are needed to have them. A teacher can just be a guy with a bachelors degree, however, a good professor tends to be a guy with a doctorates degree. That is a significant increase in the amount of training required, as well, we need special teachers for every mild difference in subject area. We can't just have the social studies professor but it must be broken down into many many categories such as economics, history, anthropology, political science, etc. The former can be done easily, the latter with greater difficulty.


Then why does the system still leave so many behind? College costs are exploding without any real rationale, and higher education is becoming a necessity for anyone to be competitive. The system is failing, and minorities are the ones who are feeling it the hardest. I don't think that significant numbers of good students are being left behind. Scholarships are not too uncommon and grants and loans simply need to be applied for. College costs are increasing because people put a higher emphasis on having a college with nice things and are willing to pay more for higher quality. Vocational school can still help many people, plumbers and electricians can get high pay. The system isn't failing, schools here are very high quality and people can still go to college and frequently do as well, poor people are the ones suffering not minorities, asians aren't necessarily suffering and poor whites are one of the groups more affecting by high prices.



Oh, now we have the evil of money. It still doesn't explain why college sports are becoming increasingly focused on while many thousands cannot afford college education. Money is simply a means to exchange value. I wouldn't say that the amount that sports are focused on has really increased dramatically though. More children waste time on the SATs than they do on sports and teams doing well in sports can help colleges give more scholarships.



Education is a social good, not a private good. The primary benefactor of an educated citizenry is private industry, who reaps a huge surplus value off an educated work force, and by to a similar extent the rest of the citizenry, who benefit from the work done by college educated people. So what we have is that costs for education are primarily passed on to the individuals, but the benefits are reaped by someone else. So that's why I argue that college should be treated just the same as primary education: as a social good, with both the costs socialized.
No, it is a private good, not a public good. The primary benefactor of an individual's education is that individual. Education is rival, excludable, and it is an investment made by a person in their own success. Private industry is not the primary benefactor, whether I choose to get a literature degree or if I choose to get an engineering degree, in fact, I don't see how private industry really benefits at all from me getting a literature degree. The notion of surplus value though is bullshit, both sides are getting value from trade in the first place. I get a huge salary, they get skilled labor. Because individual choice is so much of a factor and because so many degrees benefit only the individual getting them, I'd say that it is a private good. I don't benefit from somebody else's lit degree and although I might benefit from cheaper goods from another factory, factories are still private investments.

Then why does the system still leave so many behind?

As opposed to what other society on the planet?

So that's why I argue that college should be treated just the same as primary education: as a social good, with both the costs socialized.

Why not socialize the utilities? And hospitals? and HOUSING!! Maybe government run healthcare and education could be as exciting as govenrment housing !!!

America is the world's strongest society based on competition, not "socialization". Visit Brezhnev's grave if you missed the lessons of communism...

Why not socialize the utilities? And hospitals? and HOUSING!! Maybe government run healthcare and education could be as exciting as govenrment housing !!!

America is the world's strongest society based on competition, not "socialization". Visit Brezhnev's grave if you missed the lessons of communism...

In case you haven't read my sig, I do indeed want to socialise everything. I don't want government nationalization, I want collective ownership of society and direct democracy, not rule by property as we have now.

Take a good hard look at inner city slums if you missed the lessons of capitalism.

I think that most of this is a non-issue, really. A scholarship program for blacks cannot undo 400+ years of instiutionalized slavery, subserviance, and racism. So the existence of a white's only scholarship, (which is enough to buy one college text book :headbang: ) will not undo fifty years of attempts at progress. It is an annoying political statement. But the message behind the political statement is that we still have a long way to go before we have racial equality, a long way before reactionaries will let the issue be resolved.
So, what really is going to "get rid of" all of that? What needs to be done is actions to allow minorities to get a foothold and have academic success. My fear is that they are being held back by their culture though more than other things.

Take a good hard look at inner city slums if you missed the lessons of capitalism.
You mean the projects?? The result of government planning and housing subsidization? I mean, there is a reason why they were called the projects.

It might not be fair to white kids today, but it sure as hell wasn't fair to people of colour back then.

So some wannabe social engineer is going to jerk the wheel and tell us when equality is reached by applying more inequality?

African-American US Supreme Court Justiice Clarence Thomas said the following in dissenting on a college admnission racial quota system (to simplify the case) at the University of Michigan :

Frederick Douglass, speaking to a group of abolitionists almost 140 years ago, delivered a message lost on today's majority:

"[I]n regard to the colored people, there is always more that is benevolent, I perceive, than just, manifested towards us. What I ask for the negro is not benevolence, not pity, not sympathy, but simply justice. The American people have always been anxious to know what they shall do with us. . . . I have had but one answer from the beginning. Do nothing with us! Your doing with us has already played the mischief with us. Do nothing with us! If the apples will not remain on the tree of their own strength, if they are worm-eaten at the core, if they are early ripe and disposed to fall, let them fall! ... And if the negro cannot stand on his own legs, let him fall also. All I ask is, give him a chance to stand on his own legs! Let him alone! ... [Y]our interference is doing him positive injury." What the Black Man Wants: An Address Delivered in Boston, Massachusetts, on 26 January 1865, reprinted in 4 The Frederick Douglass Papers 59, 68 (J. Blassingame & J. McKivigan eds. 1991) (emphasis in original).

Like Douglass, I believe blacks can achieve in every avenue of American life without the meddling of university administrators. Because I wish to see all students succeed whatever their color, I share, in some respect, the sympathies of those who sponsor the type of discrimination advanced by the University of Michigan Law School (Law School).

In case you haven't read my sig, I do indeed want to socialise everything. I don't want government nationalization, I want collective ownership of society and direct democracy, not rule by property as we have now.

Take a good hard look at inner city slums if you missed the lessons of capitalism.

Well, you go move to Albania or Red China and drop me a line about the wonders of socialism. We'll see you when you need a neurosurgeon or a graduate degree.

You mean the projects?? The result of government planning and housing subsidization? I mean, there is a reason why they were called the projects.


I think he meant welfare. Or maybe food stamps. Or maybe it was the projects? Not clear...

So how about all the <ethnicity only> scholarships already out there?

those aren't openly racist political stunts. this isn't complicated.

No, they are doing it to bring attention to the racist (in its own sense, minority scholarships target one racial group and excludes others) minority-only scholarships already established.

your definition of 'racist' is both wrong and stupid

those aren't openly racist political stunts. this isn't complicated. How is it racist to offer a white student a scholarship just because he is white, but not racist to offer a black student a scholarship just because he is black?

your definition of 'racist' is both wrong and stupidActually, amazingly, "racist" means a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
It is discriminatory to offer a scholarship to just blacks, just whites, just jews, just catholics, just whatevers. There is no difference in the racism.

I don't believe in offering race-based (or anything-based) scholarships. Scholarships should be given to students who deserve them the most, not by virtue of their skin tone. If the student demonstrates the potential to succeed, is overall a good student in school, and is of good character, then they deserve it, regardless of who they are.

*claps*

Equality, means just that equality AT ANY TIME. A wrong done to those before you shouldn't gain you any privilage.

A wrong done to those before you shouldn't gain you any privilage.

No, and it doesn't.

How is it racist to offer a white student a scholarship just because he is white, but not racist to offer a black student a scholarship just because he is black?

because the intention of scholarships for minorities is to create a more egalitarian society. the intention of a 'whites only' political stunt is to whine about the darkies and play off of the still fresh cultural baggage of white privilege and keeping everybody else in their place.

It is discriminatory to offer a scholarship to just blacks, just whites, just jews, just catholics, just whatevers. There is no difference in the racism.

depends on how you are defining 'disciminatory'. if you are using it to mean unfair treatment, then no, it isn't the same for all of those. in order for all those things to be unfair, then we must already be in a situation of fairness and equality among the relevant groups.

it is not unfair to attempt to remedy unfairness.

because the intention of scholarships for minorities is to create a more egalitarian society. the intention of a 'whites only' political stunt is to whine about the darkies and play off of the still fresh cultural baggage of white privilege and keeping everybody else in their place.You want an egalitarian society? Fine. Then give people money based off their need or the fact that they worked their asses off to get into a good school. NOT because they have more melanin in their skin.

I worked just as hard as every black, hispanic, and asian student in my school, and I deserve just as many options to pay for my education. If you have toe grades to go to BU, fine. You are more than welcome to. But why do I have to take off massive loans while they get a scholarship? Because I'm white? Sorry, I haven't oppressed anyone. Egalitarian, my ass.



depends on how you are defining 'disciminatory'. if you are using it to mean unfair treatment, then no, it isn't the same for all of those. in order for all those things to be unfair, then we must already be in a situation of fairness and equality among the relevant groups.
groups don't have to be equal to discriminate. That phrase "reverse discrimination"? Yeah, it is still discrimination. The reverse is just to load the term.

It IS unfair that a minority student from an identical background gets more money than I do simply because they are minority. I did the same work. I made the same grades. I got the same SAT scores. I did the same extracurriculars. Why do they get a few thousand dollars because they were born into a racial minority and I wasn't? Did they ask to be a minority? No. Did I ask to be white? No. You want things to be equal? Then judge us off of our accomplishments. These aren't scholarships for people who might be accepted into any university. These are scholarships for students who have already been accepted into BU, and have shown an intent..
it is not unfair to attempt to remedy unfairness.
I didn't own a slave. I haven't discriminated against people based on race. My family hasn't. Sorry, I didn't commit this unfairness. Why am I paying for it?

You want to remedy unfairness? Give need-based scholarships. SES is more tied to student performance than race in the first place. Wealthy blacks succeed as much as wealthy whites, asians, and latinos. Give money based on need and achievement, not skin color.

You want an egalitarian society? Fine. Then give people money based off their need or the fact that they worked their asses off to get into a good school. NOT because they have more melanin in their skin.

until the level of melanin in your skin is not an excellent predictor of your position in society, then it will be a relevant factor to take into account in attempting to create said egalitarian society.

But why do I have to take off massive loans while they get a scholarship?

because you didn't apply for any?

groups don't have to be equal to discriminate. That phrase "reverse discrimination"? Yeah, it is still discrimination.

no, it isn't. that phrase is an empty bit of newspeak, deliberately intended to both make outright racist fucktards be able to speak in polite society and to confuse the issue by equivocating on the definition of discrimination.

It IS unfair that a minority student from an identical background gets more money than I do simply because they are minority.

no, it's not. and the reason it isn't is because our society still defaults to favoring whites when we don't have explicit programs in place to mitigate it.


I did the same work. I made the same grades. I got the same SAT scores. I did the same extracurriculars. Why do they get a few thousand dollars because they were born into a racial minority and I wasn't? Did they ask to be a minority? No. Did I ask to be white? No. You want things to be equal? Then judge us off of our accomplishments.

we already have judged you off of your accomplishments in your example. you are equal.

now we have move on to other means of distinguishing between you for the purposes of allocating resources. it turns out that there are other important social goals that we have that can better be fulfilled by giving a bit of extra funding to the minority. so we do.

as i said, not complicated.

I didn't own a slave. I haven't discriminated against people based on race. My family hasn't. Sorry, I didn't commit this unfairness. Why am I paying for it?

1) you personally aren't paying for anything
2) you benefit from the unfairness

because the intention of scholarships for minorities is to create a more egalitarian society. the intention of a 'whites only' political stunt is to whine about the darkies and play off of the still fresh cultural baggage of white privilege and keeping everybody else in their place.

Now, see THAT sounds like someone with TRUE racial hatred and issues in their heart.

But back to the topic...while we are ignoring a meriticracy and stacking the deck for the minority du jour, who decides when an "egalatairan" equilibrium is achieved and yanks the steering wheel back? So who is the last white kid to get screwed and the first black kid to have to play by the rules? Gets hard when you actually have to apply ivory tower platituides to the real world, huh?

it is not unfair to attempt to remedy unfairness.

You don't speak in an uneloquent non-manner.

Even a child knows two wrongs don't make a right. The problem here is that the "new wrong" is instilling a distinction of skin color into a few more generations.

I sure hope my neurosurgeon or air traffic controller wasn't the guy that got fudged into school on his gene pool.

Oh, and by the way, my grandparents didn't own slaves, they were over here not being hired because they were irish. Where are my reparations?

As Jared Diamond puts it, "it is immoral to treat people justly because they have been treated unjustly in the past. You should treat them justly because they are people."

Amen.

I sure hope my neurosurgeon or air traffic controller wasn't the guy that got fudged into school on his gene pool.


One way or another, he wouldn't be any less qualified. Getting "fudged" into school isn't the same as graduating. Unless you believe the learning in between is meaningless.


Oh, and by the way, my grandparents didn't own slaves, they were over here not being hired because they were irish. Where are my reparations?

You want reparations because your grandparents didn't own slaves? Or because, and I'm making an assumption as to their ages here, they didn't manage to get jobs during the depression?

those aren't openly racist political stunts. this isn't complicated.

I submit that this is not racist, and the reason people are furiously flinging monkey poo is because they are seeing that their vaunted superior position is, in fact, discriminating based on race.

Now THAT's not complicated.

until the level of melanin in your skin is not an excellent predictor of your position in society, then it will be a relevant factor to take into account in attempting to create said egalitarian society.

There are far better predictors, such as not coming from a one parent home and not having a parent who is a felon.

no, it isn't. that phrase is an empty bit of newspeak, deliberately intended to both make outright racist fucktards be able to speak in polite society and to confuse the issue by equivocating on the definition of discrimination.

I agree. Discrimination is discrimination. Say it slowly after me. Rub it into your frontal lobe. Wash and repeat.

no, it's not. and the reason it isn't is because our society still defaults to favoring whites when we don't have explicit programs in place to mitigate it.

I don't believe a free society based on competition rather than government regulation defaults to anything but merit. But just for sport, let's say that was right. And maybe it was right about, say, Irish or Chinese before our time. How did they pull themselves to equality in our society ? By forcing hugs at gunpoint? No, they EARNED it. Hard work, two parents following the american dream, working within the system, instilling values, etc.

If it is all about racial prejudice, how do you account for the stunning success of Indians and Japanese and Koreans etc in the American culture, both academically and financially?

If it is all about racial prejudice, how do you account for the stunning success of Indians and Japanese and Koreans etc in the American culture, both academically and financially?

Because not all racial prejudice is of the same degree or character.

You want reparations because your grandparents didn't own slaves? Or because, and I'm making an assumption as to their ages here, they didn't manage to get jobs during the depression?

You've never heard of discrimintation against irish and catholics? Look up "No Irish Need Apply" and anti-catholic outrages by groups like the Klu Klux Klan and learn something.

Because not all racial prejudice is of the same degree or character.


and...what? It manifests itself against the Japanese by shutting them out of the NHL? What is your point? Minority admission standards are skewed agaisnt everyone but whites (see UofM Supreme Court case)

Yay! I'm at least 25% Caucasian! I'm also at least 25% Native. And I'm Hispanic!

I'll go see how much I can get.

What is your point?

That the fact that Japanese, Chinese, and Indian immigrants have succeeded does not mean that African Americans don't suffer from serious barriers to such success.

There are student loan for blacks, hispanics, asians, women, and disabled. There are many loans and grants that don't have a race or gender requirement.

I was a cofounder for an ESL practice club. We set up a grant that was only for ESL people.

If the repubs want a white only loan. I don't have a problem with it.

Yay! I'm at least 25% Caucasian! I'm also at least 25% Native. And I'm Hispanic!

I'll go see how much I can get.

See if you can also get tazed. Then you can really cash in.

That the fact that Japanese, Chinese, and Indian immigrants have succeeded does not mean that African Americans don't suffer from serious barriers to such success.

The other groups have all had barriers at one time or another.

Once in California, you could not own property if you were Japanese.

That the fact that Japanese, Chinese, and Indian immigrants have succeeded does not mean that African Americans don't suffer from serious barriers to such success.

So whay do white students have to be prejudiced against to the benefit of all those minorities, if the other races have demonstrated that it is not the system at fault?

Why do you believe that Japanese, Indian etc students do better than black students (or, hell, white students probably)?

So whay do white students have to be prejudiced against to the benefit of all those minorities, if the other races have demonstrated that it is not the system at fault?


Considering there are uncountable loans and grants available to anybody, it does beg the question of a white only loan.

There is no prejudice against whites in regards to student aid. Well there is the financial requirements.

Why do you believe that Japanese, Indian etc students do better than black students (or, hell, white students probably)?

Overall they do since they are instilled with the desire of education. Their parents tend to be involved with their childs studies.

There are many black familes that have the same ethic. However, there are a great deal that are not.....

i agree with this fund, i do beleive that only opening certain scholarships to certain groups is in fact discriminating. i have seen many cases of certain races getting a huge boost in their academic career strictly based off of their race.

what i would really like to see is college applications to not mention ethnicity or wealth. the only facotrs that should be on such document is potential of education.

I submit that this is not racist

that's way more credit than college republicans deserve.

and the reason people are furiously flinging monkey poo is because they are seeing that their vaunted superior position is, in fact, discriminating based on race.

only if you are equivocating on the meaning of discrimination. under the definition that makes the above sensible, discrimination is not a bad thing.

i agree with this fund, i do beleive that only opening certain scholarships to certain groups is in fact discriminating. i have seen many cases of certain races getting a huge boost in their academic career strictly based off of their race.

what i would really like to see is college applications to not mention ethnicity or wealth. the only facotrs that should be on such document is potential of education.

Discriminating? Well if access to aid was limited, then you would be right.

However, the gender and or races based aid is only about 2%(if I remember right) of the available loans and grants out there.....

The reason of ethnicity questions are an attempt to balance the student population.

When the day comes that we only see people, you will see the race questions go away.

The other groups have all had barriers at one time or another.

Certainly. So?

So whay do white students have to be prejudiced against to the benefit of all those minorities, if the other races have demonstrated that it is not the system at fault?

They have demonstrated nothing of the sort.

Why do you believe that Japanese, Indian etc students do better than black students (or, hell, white students probably)?

Lots of reasons - cultural, economic, etc.

I would cry racism but why the fuck not? Why shouldn't there be a white's only scholarship? There is for every other race and nationality. Besides, this is obviously a scholarship designed to start that exact debate on whether or not its fair for other races and nationalities to get money just for being this or that. $250? I don't know when the last time you went to college was or if you arn't in yet, but $250 would be lucky to cover a single book, or even an hour of credit.

Certainly. So?



They have demonstrated nothing of the sort.



Lots of reasons - cultural, economic, etc.

but...that is so subjective ! Why not Appalachians? Because they were cursed with their skin color to be white in a backwoods slum instead of black in an inner city one?

Okay....so, speaking to admissions, not to finances (while a "white scholarship" started this thread that was obviously a farce).

I'm not going to research this to death, but let's go with the assumption that by their percentage of the overall population, whites and blacks and latinos are underrepresented in college student enrollment and asians and indians are over represented (if that is factually wrong tell me I'm a racist I guess).

So if that is the data....why does that say everyone but whites should get a boost in admissions standards? Many programs actually give points for being non-white because they want a diverse campus....even though their present diversity may be wildly out of proportionate to the US population.

Why are whites singled out and discriminated against if the system data were to show Asians and Indians succeeding disproportionately anyway?

It is a slippery slope when you start discriminating by color. It is particularly heinous in the very institutions where our kids are forming their attitudes. If I were a minority student who got there on merit I would be a bit upset at the implications of non-merit based minority admissions.

but...that is so subjective ! Why not Appalachians?

there are appalachia specific scholarships...

there are appalachia specific scholarships...


Maybe, but I challenge you to find a school that would fudge SAT scores the way they do for blacks in order to give an appalachian brudda a break...

Maybe, but I challenge you to find a school that would fudge SAT scores the way they do for blacks in order to give an appalachian brudda a break...

UNSG wouldn't.

Why bother...

This scholarship doesn't exist for the point of racism. It exists to point out the hipocracy of all of the minority scholarships.

that's way more credit than college republicans deserve.



only if you are equivocating on the meaning of discrimination. under the definition that makes the above sensible, discrimination is not a bad thing.

You are the one equivocating on the meaning of discrimination. I am using the accepted sense of "the act, practice, or an instance of discriminating categorically rather than individually b : prejudiced or prejudicial outlook, action, or treatment <racial discrimination>" (m-w.com) and am saying that it is wrong no matter at whom it is aimed.

You have apparently redefined discrimination to make it a positive process -- as long as it is aimed at whites.

Boston University College Republicans (a university sanctioned group) has decided to give a $250 scholarship to only white students (the Caucasian Achievement and Recognition Scholarship).

The groups objective is to call attention to the idea that we give any scholarship based on race instead of achievement. Students applying for this scholarship must be at least 25% caucasian. The money will come from the College Republicans, not the university.
Awesome ! I'm 50% caucasian, and I would SO apply for this scholarship, and then wear full regalia to the ceremony, thanking them on behalf of my aboriginal ancestors :D

Seriously, I have no problem with this...some scholarships are incredibly narrow in scope...like you have to be the great-grandchild of a WWI vet who got shot in the right kneecap...who cares?

Awesome ! I'm 50% caucasian, and I would SO apply for this scholarship, and then wear full regalia to the ceremony, thanking them on behalf of my aboriginal ancestors :D

Seriously, I have no problem with this...some scholarships are incredibly narrow in scope...like you have to be the great-grandchild of a WWI vet who got shot in the right kneecap...who cares?

Indeed. And I'd applaud you like crazy for it. :D

I just want to make a few observations:


If policies intended specifically for minority groups give said groups an unfair advantage in admissions or scholarships and such, why is it that at my nationally ranked university (in the top 15 of all public universities in the United States, according to U.S. News & World Report), "Blacks/African Americans" constitute approximately 2% of the student population while "White/Caucasians" constitute approximately 27%? It is a very well established observation in the Political (of which I am an undergraduate major) and Social Sciences that minority groups, including African-Americans and Latinos/Hispanics, have consistantly low levels of income and education. The idea that they are profiting due to any kind of unfair advantage created by race-based scholarships or admissions policy is asinine. Sorry, but that's the simple fact of the matter.
I refused to answer the race/ethnicity section of my university application on principle, based on my belief that race/ethnicity ought to be irrevelant. However, I can also recognize that a society where this is actually true does not yet exist.
The scholarship issue is irrevelant to me anyway, as I don't really feel the desire to apply in the first place. The state already subsidizes a lot of my university tuition to begin with (with additional needs-based reductions). I also feel that the remainder of the cost belongs to me and me alone. Besides that, all these stupid scholarships have additonal "community service" or "essay writing" or other nonsense requirements. I've got enough work to do; if my actual scholarship isn't good enough to get a scholarship, then screw 'em.

Here's my question--why did the college republicans single out race as a qualifier, when scholarships, especially smaller ones of the size the College Republicans are offering, are more often based on ethnic background and nationality than race? I can't tell you the number of scholarships I've seen offered to Irish-American students or Vietnamese-Americans or Japanese-Americans or Italian-Americans--pick a national group and there's an organization offering a scholarship. The College Republicans could just as easily have made their point by doing something similar.

But they chose race instead, which makes me think that they had a different motive, the idea that the black community is getting something they don't deserve. It's very cleverly coded, but it seems to me like it's just the latest version of subtle racism. They can't scream "****** ****** ******" anymore because that's not allowed in polite society, so they do this instead.

Here's my question--why did the college republicans single out race as a qualifier, when scholarships, especially smaller ones of the size the College Republicans are offering, are more often based on ethnic background and nationality than race? I can't tell you the number of scholarships I've seen offered to Irish-American students or Vietnamese-Americans or Japanese-Americans or Italian-Americans--pick a national group and there's an organization offering a scholarship. The College Republicans could just as easily have made their point by doing something similar.

But they chose race instead, which makes me think that they had a different motive, the idea that the black community is getting something they don't deserve. It's very cleverly coded, but it seems to me like it's just the latest version of subtle racism. They can't scream "****** ****** ******" anymore because that's not allowed in polite society, so they do this instead.

I'm afraid I disagree. It seems more that everyone getting all riled up about this is screaming cracker cracker cracker. And somehow, that is socially acceptable, whereas the reverse is most assuredly not.

You are the one equivocating on the meaning of discrimination. I am using the accepted sense of "the act, practice, or an instance of discriminating categorically rather than individually b : prejudiced or prejudicial outlook, action, or treatment <racial discrimination>" (m-w.com) and am saying that it is wrong no matter at whom it is aimed.

you are aware that the above makes for two distinct definitions, yes?

It's very cleverly coded, but it seems to me like it's just the latest version of subtle racism. They can't scream "****** ****** ******" anymore because that's not allowed in polite society, so they do this instead.

yup

I'm afraid I disagree. It seems more that everyone getting all riled up about this is screaming cracker cracker cracker. And somehow, that is socially acceptable, whereas the reverse is most assuredly not.
It's not like you can look at this in a vacuum, Kat. The shift in race rhetoric from the Republican party is well documented. In the late 60's, it was "******, ******, ******." In the late 70's, it was Affirmative Action (which has stayed a whipping boy even though today it's barely a shadow of its former self). In the 80s and 90s, it was cadillac welfare queens, even though none could be presented as evidence and even though far more whites were on the program. So frankly, it's a little naive to say that this isn't racially motivated--there's too much history involved.

Did it every occur to the PC liberals here that this isn't racism?

Has it occured to you that it is possible that this is a good form to get publicity for a protest of affirmative action?

Affirmative action is nothing more than reverse racism. If you look on fastwebs or any other scholarship search engine, you will see a plethora of scholarships for African-Americans and Hispanics. Creating a White only scholarship points out the hipocracy of such scholarships. By calling them racists, you are proving their point.

Did it every occur to the PC liberals here that this isn't racism?

Has it occured to you that it is possible that this is a good form to get publicity for a protest of affirmative action?

Affirmative action is nothing more than reverse racism. If you look on fastwebs or any other scholarship search engine, you will see a plethora of scholarships for African-Americans and Hispanics. Creating a White only scholarship points out the hipocracy of such scholarships. By calling them racists, you are proving their point.

Apparently this is a part of the argument that is missed or ignored because it's a wee bit too inconvenient.

Nazz, you are saying the Republicans are the racist party?!?!?

Get your history correct here. The party was founded on ending slavery.

Also, your party is the one with a Ku Klux Klan member in the US Senate. Gov Wallace was also of your party. It seems to me that the Democrats are the party that kept the Blacks down and then used them for votes by making empty promises to them without any true intent of bettering their situation.

I recommend you stick to poetry.

Nazz, you are saying the Republicans are the racist party?!?!?

Get your history correct here. The party was founded on ending slavery.

Also, your party is the one with a Ku Klux Klan member in the US Senate. Gov Wallace was also of your party. It seems to me that the Democrats are the party that kept the Blacks down and then used them for votes by making empty promises to them without any true intent of bettering their situation.

I recommend you stick to poetry.

The republicans of today are not the party that ended slavery. The DixieCrats migrated to the Republicans during Trumans time. You mention two names, I will give you Jessie Helms and Trent Lott.....

Apparently this is a part of the argument that is missed or ignored because it's a wee bit too inconvenient.

Please explain why minorities, including African-Americans and Latinos/Hispanics, continue to achieve lower levels of education and income, as well as lower levels of representation in higher education, if they supposedly enjoy the benefits of unfair advantages in admissions or scholarships.

Seriously, what you need to do is flood the application office with latinos, blacks, asians, aboriginals, whatever, that had a grandparent that was white.

Hilarious! "One of my ancestors was white"...it's the best thing ever, considering how many people actually go out and get DNA TESTING done to prove they have a smidgen of African heritage so they can declare it on application forms.

Affirmative action is nothing more than reverse racism.

making empty promises to them without any true intent of bettering their situation.

Do you even see the irony?

The republicans of today are not the party that ended slavery. The DixieCrats migrated to the Republicans during Trumans time. You mention two names, I will give you Jessie Helms and Trent Lott.....

And what of Robert "KKK" Bird?

IIRC, he used the N word a ton during an interview back in 2002.

I'm afraid I disagree. It seems more that everyone getting all riled up about this is screaming cracker cracker cracker. And somehow, that is socially acceptable, whereas the reverse is most assuredly not.

Would some of todays students think "Ritz?"

;)

I don't know when the last time you went to college was or if you arn't in yet, but $250 would be lucky to cover a single book, or even an hour of credit.

$250 for a single book? That book had better be thicker then my desktop PC.

Seriously, that was a joke, right? Hyperbole?

And what of Robert "KKK" Bird?

IIRC, he used the N word a ton during an interview back in 2002.

No party is void of racists.

Helms actually worked to separate people. Lott bemoaned the fact Helms didn't succeed.

Nazz, you are saying the Republicans are the racist party?!?!?Yes, that is precisely what I am saying. Not every Republican is racist, mind you, but they cater to southern racism, and have since the late sixties, the age of the Dixiecrats. A recent study cited by Tom Schaller noted that the best indicator of the southern voting population was race--not socially conservative issues, not hot-button topics, not economics. Race. And speaking as a son of the south, let me tell you that from my personal experience, that is certainly the case, and furthermore, looking at the electoral map after the 2006 election, it's clear that the Republican party is well on its way to becoming a regional party, and one in which racism will play an integral electoral strategy.

Get your history correct here. The party was founded on ending slavery.Yep, and a hell of a job they did at it as well. Of course, after Grant left office, they basically told freed slaves they were fucked and turned them over to the former Confederacy. Seems Republicans have a habit of not finishing the job, huh?

Also, your party is the one with a Ku Klux Klan member in the US Senate. Gov Wallace was also of your party.
Ah, yes. The Byrd slur. Knew it would come out. Seems to me that Republicans always throw him out there while never mentioning that he left the Klan shortly afterward, renounced them publicly, and became a champion for civil rights, unlike Republican stalwarts Jesse Helms or Trent Lott or Strom "Don't tell nobody I've got a nigra daughter" Thurmond.

And Governor Wallace. Indeed, let's talk about him--another "Dixiecrat" who broke from the national party over racism. Why? Because they told him his views were not the views of the national party. So who represented the real soul of the party? Not Wallace.

It seems to me that the Democrats are the party that kept the Blacks down and then used them for votes by making empty promises to them without any true intent of bettering their situation.
Of course it would seem that way to you. :rolleyes:

I recommend you stick to poetry.
I can do more than one thing at a time. After all, I hand you your ass without even breaking a sweat.

$250 for a single book? That book had better be thicker then my desktop PC.

Seriously, that was a joke, right? Hyperbole?

No the medical books can run that easily. My Primate books can run $100 on the average. One I have been looking for is $232 on ebay.

My computing books ran about $60 on the average......

you are aware that the above makes for two distinct definitions, yes?

Right. They are not in any way related. One is not saying "discriminating for or against a category" and "a prejudicial outlook, action or treatment" as in racial discrimination is NOT discriminating because a person belongs to a particular category.

But of course there is no particular reason that the dictionary groups them as subsets of the same definition except that I of course wrote the dictionary definition JUST to argue with you.

Do you honestly have nothing better to do than to make mountains out of non-existent molehills and argue semantic differences that are insignificant to the argument, or is this a tactic to cover the discrimination inherent in your own argument?

$250 for a single book? That book had better be thicker then my desktop PC.

Seriously, that was a joke, right? Hyperbole?

While there has been a lot of meaningless hot air in this thread, that was entirely accurate.

$250 for a single book? That book had better be thicker then my desktop PC.

Seriously, that was a joke, right? Hyperbole?

Hmmm, $250 would actually get me a book and a half.

Not really hyperbole then...I don't think the exaggeration meets the standards of hyperbole.

Please explain why minorities, including African-Americans and Latinos/Hispanics, continue to achieve lower levels of education and income, as well as lower levels of representation in higher education, if they supposedly enjoy the benefits of unfair advantages in admissions or scholarships.

And what, pray tell, is wrong with offering scholarships based solely on economic need and education level without defining them as "for <ethnic group> or for <religious group> or for <gender>"?

Why is it proper to have scholarships for some groups and not all?

The problem IS economics and education level, correct? No one here is seriously saying that by virtue of one's race a person can be categorized as inferior?

yes, obviously. their only aim is to stir up racial animosity. nice move, fucktards.

Yes, because we know leftists never try to do the same thing.

And what, pray tell, is wrong with offering scholarships based solely on economic need and education level without defining them as "for <ethnic group> or for <religious group> or for <gender>?


You'll often find that <ethnic group> also happens to corespond with a signifigant number of the population of people constituting <poor> and <uneducated>. Are there "white" people in <poor> and <uneducated>. Yes there are. But there are a whole lot more <ethnic group> in <poor> and <uneducated>. Thus, people desire to specifically direct their support to where the need is greatest: <ethnic group>.

Now that I've answered your dodge ( ;) ), answer my question: why are race/ethnicity-based scholarships and admissions policies a bad thing when continuing low levels of education, and membership in higher education, among targeted groups indicate that such scholarships and policies provide no unfair advantage; why are they a bad thing when the statistics demonstrate a continuing overwhelming advantage for those groups not targeted by said scholarship and admissions policies? The accusation of "reverse racism" needs substantiation; as far as I can see, the facts and statistics provide no such thing.

And what, pray tell, is wrong with offering scholarships based solely on economic need and education level without defining them as "for <ethnic group> or for <religious group> or for <gender>"?

Why is it proper to have scholarships for some groups and not all?

The problem IS economics and education level, correct? No one here is seriously saying that by virtue of one's race a person can be categorized as inferior?

Somehow, I doubt that there are no scholarships based solely on economic need and education level. In fact, without even knowing the system at BU, I'd wager that most scholarships the university offers are based on economic need and academic achievement. That's generally the way most universities work.

No one here is seriously saying that by virtue of one's race a person can be categorized as inferior?

What is being said is that historical discrimination has created severe and long lasting effects that have disadvantaged certain groups of the over all population. These effects have yet to be corrected. When they are corrected, I will be first in line to abolish race/ethnicity-based scholarships and admissions policies; the tool will have completed its purpose and will no longer be necessary.


But not before then.

I'm afraid I disagree. It seems more that everyone getting all riled up about this is screaming cracker cracker cracker. And somehow, that is socially acceptable, whereas the reverse is most assuredly not.

Unless I'm missing posts, I'm the one who is saying "cracker cracker cracker," though I think I only used the word once. And it wasn't because I was riled, but because I did in fact 'get' what the College Republicans where doing, thought it was silly and ill concieved and thus made light of it.

I am in fact a cracker, about as cracker as you can get, the word amuses me, I'm not offended by calling myself cracker (I'll grant that I was calling them crackers).

Maybe it's because as a majority population I'm not really worried about being marginalized by the word.

until the level of melanin in your skin is not an excellent predictor of your position in society, then it will be a relevant factor to take into account in attempting to create said egalitarian society.Skin is NOT the primary determinant of standing in society. This has been proven time and time again. The primary factor is, in fact, socio-economic standing. Poor children tend to do worse, rich tend to do better. By a huge majority. This is regardless of race. A wealthy black child will, on average, do as well as a wealthy white or asian. Interestingly, if you wanted to look at race as a factor, you would find that Asians perform equal to whites. However, they also tend to have comparable income to their white counterparts, unlike black and hispanic families.

because you didn't apply for any?
Nice try, but wrong.


no, it isn't. that phrase is an empty bit of newspeak, deliberately intended to both make outright racist fucktards be able to speak in polite society and to confuse the issue by equivocating on the definition of discrimination.The definitions are inseperable. Discrimination is discrimination, whether you like it or not.

While speaking of language, I just realized how horribly I titled this thread..."white's" instead of "whites" and "loan" instead of "scholarship"...christ. That is bad.



no, it's not. and the reason it isn't is because our society still defaults to favoring whites when we don't have explicit programs in place to mitigate it.Wrong. I did the same work. I worked my ass off just as much as every single one of my classmates. I filled out the same applications, took the same tests. It isn't my fault I'm not hispanic. SES is still a better predictor than race, incidentally.




we already have judged you off of your accomplishments in your example. you are equal.

now we have move on to other means of distinguishing between you for the purposes of allocating resources. it turns out that there are other important social goals that we have that can better be fulfilled by giving a bit of extra funding to the minority. so we do.

as i said, not complicated.If we are equal, then why are we not treated as such? Why do we need a "black" scholarship and a "hispanic" scholarship and an "asian" scholarship? Why not need based? The point of affirmative action programs is to level the playing field so that students can get the same educational opportunities. These scholarships in no way change the students accomplishments and the fact that they have made it into BU. The field is level. The money given should be given based off accomplishment and need, not because you are a minority.



1) you personally aren't paying for anything
2) you benefit from the unfairnessI pay 36,000 a year to the university. Don't tell me I'm not paying. And I am not benefiting. The same students would be there regardless. Want to know why? Because, instead of giving money because a child is black, the money would go to a family that needs it, regardless of race. Or a student that earned it. Overall, BU would benefit more because we would truly have the kids who want it more than anything. Not to mention, we have a significant number of international students. Want diversity? How about Fatima, the Somali girl on my floor last year. Or Jordan, the Nigerian kid on my floor freshman year. Or half of our schools of engineering and business. They're all different races, and from different countries. Amazingly, scholarships based off of race will never impact them.

Awesome ! I'm 50% caucasian, and I would SO apply for this scholarship, and then wear full regalia to the ceremony, thanking them on behalf of my aboriginal ancestors :D

Seriously, I have no problem with this...some scholarships are incredibly narrow in scope...like you have to be the great-grandchild of a WWI vet who got shot in the right kneecap...who cares?I'm fine with there being race based ones, as long as every race has one and it offers the same amount to the same number of students. Beyond that, it is nothing but university-sponsored discrimination. Personally, I think it should be entirely need, athletic, and academic based (not in that order).

I just want to make a few observations:


If policies intended specifically for minority groups give said groups an unfair advantage in admissions or scholarships and such, why is it that at my nationally ranked university (in the top 15 of all public universities in the United States, according to U.S. News & World Report), "Blacks/African Americans" constitute approximately 2% of the student population while "White/Caucasians" constitute approximately 27%? It is a very well established observation in the Political (of which I am an undergraduate major) and Social Sciences that minority groups, including African-Americans and Latinos/Hispanics, have consistantly low levels of income and education. The idea that they are profiting due to any kind of unfair advantage created by race-based scholarships or admissions policy is asinine. Sorry, but that's the simple fact of the matter.
So why not make them NEED BASED scholarships? I'm not arguing that we shouldn't give minorities any scholarships. What I am saying is that they should be competing against the rest of the student body. They are profiting off of it, because they are getting more of the university resources than I am. We pay the same tuition. We deserve the same benefits.
I refused to answer the race/ethnicity section of my university application on principle, based on my belief that race/ethnicity ought to be irrevelant. However, I can also recognize that a society where this is actually true does not yet exist.Yet, SES is the more important factor.
The scholarship issue is irrevelant to me anyway, as I don't really feel the desire to apply in the first place. The state already subsidizes a lot of my university tuition to begin with (with additional needs-based reductions). I also feel that the remainder of the cost belongs to me and me alone. Besides that, all these stupid scholarships have additonal "community service" or "essay writing" or other nonsense requirements. I've got enough work to do; if my actual scholarship isn't good enough to get a scholarship, then screw 'em.
And that is fine for you. However, if any student wants a scholarship, they should have the same chances at that money, particularly from the specific universities.

Here's my question--why did the college republicans single out race as a qualifier, when scholarships, especially smaller ones of the size the College Republicans are offering, are more often based on ethnic background and nationality than race? I can't tell you the number of scholarships I've seen offered to Irish-American students or Vietnamese-Americans or Japanese-Americans or Italian-Americans--pick a national group and there's an organization offering a scholarship. The College Republicans could just as easily have made their point by doing something similar.The size isn't the issue. BUCR are partially funded by undergrad fees. They clearly couldn't use that money, as it is directly associated with BU. They can, however, raise their own money. The point wasn't to give a huge scholarship. It was to raise questions about how BU allocates our money. BU doesn't give scholarships out for such small groups, but they do give out race-based ones. This is an argument about BU. Does it have implications for other scholarships? Of course. But this is primarily a fight about how BU is using the money we give them.

But they chose race instead, which makes me think that they had a different motive, the idea that the black community is getting something they don't deserve. It's very cleverly coded, but it seems to me like it's just the latest version of subtle racism. They can't scream "****** ****** ******" anymore because that's not allowed in polite society, so they do this instead.I call bullshit on that. BU is heavily liberal, including our republicans (most of which hail from California and New England). Do we have extreme conservatives? Of course. I roomed with one. However, the majority of BUCR are not the racists you paint them to be.

It's not like you can look at this in a vacuum, Kat. The shift in race rhetoric from the Republican party is well documented. In the late 60's, it was "******, ******, ******." In the late 70's, it was Affirmative Action (which has stayed a whipping boy even though today it's barely a shadow of its former self). In the 80s and 90s, it was cadillac welfare queens, even though none could be presented as evidence and even though far more whites were on the program. So frankly, it's a little naive to say that this isn't racially motivated--there's too much history involved.This isn't the republican party. This is BU College Republicans. The Republican party has spoken against them because of this issue.

Somehow, I doubt that there are no scholarships based solely on economic need and education level. In fact, without even knowing the system at BU, I'd wager that most scholarships the university offers are based on economic need and academic achievement. That's generally the way most universities work.Truth be told, most are economic need. Then athletic and academic. However, there are still race-based ones. That is what is being questioned. There is no reason why BU should be giving money based on race. That money is better spent in the form of the other scholarships, or better spent improving BU itself.

So why not make them NEED BASED scholarships? I'm not arguing that we shouldn't give minorities any scholarships.

The point everybody is overlooking is the fact these scholarships aren't usually your tax money at work.

Any organization that does the proper paperwork can set up a scholarship. For example, the ESL one my club setup. We arranged a deal with a couple jewlers to come on campus and sell stuff, the club got a percentage and they used it for scholarships.

As mentioned the race and or gender based scholarships make up about 2% of all student aid avenues.

Most don't care about race or gender.

The point everybody is overlooking is the fact these scholarships aren't usually your tax money at work.

Any organization that does the proper paperwork can set up a scholarship. For example, the ESL one my club setup. We arranged a deal with a couple jewlers to come on campus and sell stuff, the club got a percentage and they used it for scholarships.

As mentioned the race and or gender based scholarships make up about 2% of all student aid avenues.

Most don't care about race or gender.
Trust me, I'm not overlooking that at all.
This issue is directly about the scholarships my university (a private institution) awards. I have issues with race-based scholarships in general, but it particularly bothers me that it plays any role within my university. Yes, a private group can create any scholarship they want...more power to them. United Negro College Fund and the like are fine.

The scholarships directly in question might not be your tax money, but they are my tuition.

Now, I like that this has opened into a discussion outside of just my university, and that is truly what I intended. What I argue against are those scholarships that do take race into account and come from universities or the feds. Private scholarships are just that: private.

I actually got a scholarship becuase I was catholic. Which is funny because I'm not.

My dad's a jew and my mother is C of E.

Background checks people. Background checks.

Trust me, I'm not overlooking that at all.
This issue is directly about the scholarships my university (a private institution) awards. I have issues with race-based scholarships in general, but it particularly bothers me that it plays any role within my university. Yes, a private group can create any scholarship they want...more power to them. United Negro College Fund and the like are fine.

The scholarships directly in question might not be your tax money, but they are my tuition.

Now, I like that this has opened into a discussion outside of just my university, and that is truly what I intended. What I argue against are those scholarships that do take race into account and come from universities or the feds. Private scholarships are just that: private.

Ok it's late for me after a long day.

I am not getting your point.

How do these scholarships affect you? Are they the only things available to you?

Ok it's late for me after a long day.

I am not getting your point.

How do these scholarships affect you? Are they the only things available to you?

There are other options (there always are), and I have taken the ones I need, specifically, loans and a job. That isn't the issue.

The issue is that my university chooses to give money based off of race to "encourage diversity" rather than giving that money to any child who needs it (need based scholarship), who has earned it (academic scholarship), or is very good in a sport (athletic). These should all be regardless of race. The university accepts who it does without considering race, so I fail to see why, exactly, it should give money based on race, instead of just need, academics, and athletics.

Can, and more over, did I get other scholarships and loans [mind you, none are through my university]? Yes. Is this me trying to get more money out of the system? No. If it was, I wouldn't be going to a 33,000 a year school. I figured out my way to pay for it.

My issue is that these students are being given money because of the color of their skin, regardless of the fact that there is potentially a student who needs or deserves it more. Race should not be a factor.

There are other options (there always are), and I have taken the ones I need, specifically, loans and a job. That isn't the issue.

The issue is that my university chooses to give money based off of race to "encourage diversity" rather than giving that money to any child who needs it (need based scholarship), who has earned it (academic scholarship), or is very good in a sport (athletic). These should all be regardless of race. The university accepts who it does without considering race, so I fail to see why, exactly, it should give money based on race, instead of just need, academics, and athletics.

Can, and more over, did I get other scholarships and loans? Yes. Is this me trying to get more money out of the system? No. If it was, I wouldn't be going to a 33,000 a year school. I figured out my way to pay for it.

My issue is that these students are being given money because of the color of their skin, regardless of the fact that there is potentially a student who needs or deserves it more. Race should not be a factor.

Ah.

Well I can't answer for your school. Only mine. I don't know of any grant, scholarship or aid that is handed out only for skin color or gender. It is simply one of the requirements. The rest usually depend on income of the family, grades of the student, etc......

Ah.

Well I can't answer for your school. Only mine. I don't know of any grant, scholarship or aid that is handed out only for skin color or gender. It is simply one of the requirements. The rest usually depend on income of the family, grades of the student, etc......

That is the issue. I wish I could say the same for BU, and it really just became known that race impacted loans. For possibly the first time in my college carrear, I support the college republicans.

This is a sad day in my life :( haha

I just want to make a few observations:

[LIST=1]
If policies intended specifically for minority groups give said groups an unfair advantage in admissions or scholarships and such, why is it that at my nationally ranked university (in the top 15 of all public universities in the United States, according to U.S. News & World Report), "Blacks/African Americans" constitute approximately 2% of the student population while "White/Caucasians" constitute approximately 27%?

so 71 percent of your student population are neither black nor white?

And what of Robert "KKK" Bird?

IIRC, he used the N word a ton during an interview back in 2002.

Chris Rock uses it all the time, and he is a Democrat.

The issue is that my university chooses to give money based off of race to "encourage diversity" rather than giving that money to any child who needs it (need based scholarship), who has earned it (academic scholarship), or is very good in a sport (athletic).

in other words, you just disagree with the promotion of diversity as a societal goal. too bad.

What is being said is that historical discrimination has created severe and long lasting effects that have disadvantaged certain groups of the over all population. These effects have yet to be corrected. When they are corrected, I will be first in line to abolish race/ethnicity-based scholarships and admissions policies; the tool will have completed its purpose and will no longer be necessary. But not before then.

what a liberal tool of a statement. You are so in control of society that you will time the exact second when overt racisim evens out the scales, and create the equality necessary to balance the inequality.

But wait! Congress was out at the time, so we overshot and there was a bit too much inequality dumped on the white people. Better give the white people...say...7 months of inequality slanted toward them.

Yeah, that's it.

Great way to teach our kids than skin color doesn't matter.

There are other options (there always are), and I have taken the ones I need, specifically, loans and a job. That isn't the issue.

The issue is that my university chooses to give money based off of race to "encourage diversity" rather than giving that money to any child who needs it (need based scholarship), who has earned it (academic scholarship), or is very good in a sport (athletic). These should all be regardless of race. The university accepts who it does without considering race, so I fail to see why, exactly, it should give money based on race, instead of just need, academics, and athletics.

Hold on--"rather than" or "in addition to?"

in other words, you just disagree with the promotion of diversity as a societal goal. too bad.

It destroys the meritocracy that makes our culture (the US) such a powerful machine.

So, you want diversity. Well I'm Scottish. Where are the Scots in the NBA? So what if we all average 5'7". It's fucking prejudice. My kids have no one to look up to, not that they would look up to most Scots anyway at 5'7".

And the local neurology team seems to be all Japanese and Indian. Fucking racists. Let's boycott them! Drive a few of those doctors who are there on merit out of the pratice, and back fill in with some slackers so we look ethnically diverse in the annual report photo.

Oh, and back to us short Scots. What the fuck is up with that? I go to my local car wash -- all tall people! What are they prejudice against hiring short guys? Let's protest, I'll bet they cave in immediately.

And blue eyes? I might as well as have a scarlet letter around my neck if the wait staff at the local Starbucks is any measure! Where is the diversity there?

All teams, departments, companies, divisions, classrooms, boards of directors, boards of education, and boards of diverstiy need to correctly reflect the US population of 80.2 percent white etc. Each year when the population pie chart changes we cut some heads off.

Fucking brilliant. Liberalism at its most idiotic.

It destroys the meritocracy that makes our culture (the US) such a powerful machine.

So, you want diversity. Well I'm Scottish. Where are the Scots in the NBA? So what if we all average 5'7". It's fucking prejudice. My kids have no one to look up to, not that they would look up to most Scots anyway at 5'7".

And the local neurology team seems to be all Japanese and Indian. Fucking racists. Let's boycott them! Drive a few of those doctors who are there on merit out of the pratice, and back fill in with some slackers so we look ethnically diverse in the annual report photo.

Oh, and back to us short Scots. What the fuck is up with that? I go to my local car wash -- all tall people! What are they prejudice against hiring short guys? Let's protest, I'll bet they cave in immediately.

And blue eyes? I might as well as have a scarlet letter around my neck if the wait staff at the local Starbucks is any measure! Where is the diversity there?

All teams, departments, companies, divisions, classrooms, boards of directors, boards of education, and boards of diverstiy need to correctly reflect the US population of 80.2 percent white etc. Each year when the population pie chart changes we cut some heads off.

Fucking brilliant. Liberalism at its most idiotic.
You're joking, right? You don't actually think this is an argument. You're just having a laugh, right?

Please explain why minorities, including African-Americans and Latinos/Hispanics, continue to achieve lower levels of education and income, as well as lower levels of representation in higher education, if they supposedly enjoy the benefits of unfair advantages in admissions or scholarships.

Who cares ?

Is it the governments job to chop the populace up into a hash of ethnic traits and then run around boosting their life chances like a plate juggler?

Should I pay my taxes and then find that they are paying for a diversity program at a state university that screws my kid out of his earned spot? Should I then go be the best bidder on a state project only to find out it went to a women/minority owned business to fill a quota?

To the extent government has a role in any of this, it is there to OUTLAW discriminations made on skin color, not dream them up and institutionalize them.

Who cares ?

people that aren't racist fucktards

Who cares ?

Is it the governments job to chop the populace up into a hash of ethnic traits and then run around boosting their life chances like a plate juggler?

Should I pay my taxes and then find that they are paying for a diversity program at a state university that screws my kid out of his earned spot? Should I then go be the best bidder on a state project only to find out it went to a women/minority owned business to fill a quota?

To the extent government has a role in any of this, it is there to OUTLAW discriminations made on skin color, not dream them up and institutionalize them.
Dude--you're only fourteen. You don't even pay taxes. Besides, quotas and set-asides have been gone from the educational system for years now. If you weren't busy listening to people who lie to you about the subject because they have an agenda, you'd know that.

Should I pay my taxes and then find that they are paying for a diversity program at a state university that screws my kid out of his earned spot? Should I then go be the best bidder on a state project only to find out it went to a women/minority owned business to fill a quota?

also,

1) in the u.s. there ain't a quota system.

2) universities turn away loads and loads of people who meet the qualifications. pretty much everybody meets the basic criteria. once that is done, then choices have to be made based on other things. in other words, if your kid didn't get accepted, then he didn't earn a spot. there were hundreds or thousands of other people with essentially the same qualifications as him that also didn't get in. too bad.

If you weren't busy listening to people who lie to you about the subject because they have an agenda, you'd know that.

the weirdest thing about american conservatism is how completely anti-factual it is. like all of it - every single position and talking point. it fucking scares me.

people that aren't racist fucktards

So, in 11,000 posts have you ever made a relevant point? Or do you just fall back to name-calling like "racist fucktard" when you're asked a question you can't immediately answer? Because I'll be damned if I've ever read anything of value from you.

So, in 11,000 posts have you ever made a relevant point?

nope

the weirdest thing about american conservatism is how completely anti-factual it is. like all of it - every single position and talking point. it fucking scares me.

Now now! It's his kind of conservatives.

Many are actually smart.....

Many are actually smart.....

those ones are worse. they make up the lies in the first place, and cynically do so purely for their own benefit.

Fucking brilliant. Liberalism at its most idiotic.

That was the most irrelevant, ridiculous rant and in light of the inability to make it relevant, the stupidest ending statement I have ever heard. No wonder conservative shows don't make any fucking sense. Their logic meters are broken.

$250 for a single book? That book had better be thicker then my desktop PC.

Seriously, that was a joke, right? Hyperbole?

Believe me, I wish it was.

You'll often find that <ethnic group> also happens to corespond with a signifigant number of the population of people constituting <poor> and <uneducated>. Are there "white" people in <poor> and <uneducated>. Yes there are. But there are a whole lot more <ethnic group> in <poor> and <uneducated>. Thus, people desire to specifically direct their support to where the need is greatest: <ethnic group>.

Now that I've answered your dodge ( ;) ), answer my question: why are race/ethnicity-based scholarships and admissions policies a bad thing when continuing low levels of education, and membership in higher education, among targeted groups indicate that such scholarships and policies provide no unfair advantage; why are they a bad thing when the statistics demonstrate a continuing overwhelming advantage for those groups not targeted by said scholarship and admissions policies? The accusation of "reverse racism" needs substantiation; as far as I can see, the facts and statistics provide no such thing.

You'll find that I never uttered "reverse racism." That was several others in this thread. Personally, I do think treating any group differently on the basis of their cultural/ethnic identity is discrimination. I think it is a bad thing because it perpetuates the stereotype that <cultural group> is inferior, and because giving preferential treatment to all members of <cultural group> regardless of need, and barring similar treatment to members of <cultural group2> regardless of need perpetuates hatred and stereotyping. But rather than try to look at individuals and say, "Ok, the school that he went to underperforms consistently, and this person cannot afford higher education on his own, let's subsidize him and give him a chance," people would rather say, "Oh! A woman! Well, let's offer money because as a woman she obviously cannot POSSIBLY have the same cognitive powers as a MAN."

If you read carefully, I have never said I had a problem with the United Negro College fund or similar. I did not say that we should take away other scholarships. I did say that I am disgusted that people are freaking out and acting as if it is racist to designate a whites only scholarship when no one thinks it is bad to have a latino only scholarship.

Somehow, I doubt that there are no scholarships based solely on economic need and education level. In fact, without even knowing the system at BU, I'd wager that most scholarships the university offers are based on economic need and academic achievement. That's generally the way most universities work.

I did not say there were NO scholarships of this kind. I am saying that economic and educational need should be, if we are speaking frankly about equality, the factors that determine subsizing education. Not melanin level or gender.

Since we DO have cultural identity specific scholarships, then someone bitching because a particular cultural identity is also offering a scholarship is hypocritical.

What is being said is that historical discrimination has created severe and long lasting effects that have disadvantaged certain groups of the over all population. These effects have yet to be corrected. When they are corrected, I will be first in line to abolish race/ethnicity-based scholarships and admissions policies; the tool will have completed its purpose and will no longer be necessary.


But not before then.

And how will perpetuating the idea that "you cannot possibly do this on your own, so we have to help you," correct the problem?

So, in 11,000 posts have you ever made a relevant point? Or do you just fall back to name-calling like "racist fucktard" when you're asked a question you can't immediately answer? Because I'll be damned if I've ever read anything of value from you.

Please drop the "holier than thou" stance. It's unbecoming.

Please drop the "holier than thou" stance. It's unbecoming.

Don't lecture me. When he's capable of making a coherent post that doesn't include the word "Fuck" in it, I'll stop looking down on him.

The point everybody is overlooking is the fact these scholarships aren't usually your tax money at work.

Any organization that does the proper paperwork can set up a scholarship. For example, the ESL one my club setup. We arranged a deal with a couple jewlers to come on campus and sell stuff, the club got a percentage and they used it for scholarships.

As mentioned the race and or gender based scholarships make up about 2% of all student aid avenues.

Most don't care about race or gender.

I have not overlooked that. My entire point is that to be angry over a whites only scholarship because it is for whites only and obviously whites do not deserve one whereas other groups do is a hypocritical position.

I think it is a bad thing because it perpetuates the stereotype that <cultural group> is inferior, and because giving preferential treatment to all members of <cultural group> regardless of need, and barring similar treatment to members of <cultural group2> regardless of need perpetuates hatred and stereotyping.

is there any evidence of this promotion of stereotyping among people who didn't already believe the stereotypes?

also, which is worse - some people believing that <cultural group> is inferior while <cultural group>'s position within society materially improves, or some people believing that <cultural group> is inferior while materially maintaining <cultural group>'s inferior social position?

is there any evidence of this promotion of stereotyping among people who didn't already believe the stereotypes?

also, which is worse - some people believing that <cultural group> is inferior while <cultural group>'s position within society materially improves, or some people believing that <cultural group> is inferior while materially maintaining <cultural group>'s inferior social position?

What's worse is that <cultural group> itself as a result of all this extra help feels inferior, and worse, entitled to the extra help in perpetuity because they are <cultural group>.

Don't lecture me. When he's capable of making a coherent post that doesn't include the word "Fuck" in it, I'll stop looking down on him.

He's made tons of them. That you choose to dismiss him out of hand because he drops an f-bomb or notes another's idiocy in blunt terms is your failing, not his.

I have not overlooked that. My entire point is that to be angry over a whites only scholarship because it is for whites only and obviously whites do not deserve one whereas other groups do is a hypocritical position.Where did that come in? I think you're reading in something that at least I haven't been saying. My criticism of the young Republicans here has always been that they decided to beat the old drum of white entitlement while disguising it in equal rights language. It's a more dressed up form of what David Duke did with the NAAWP, but the basis is the same. That's the problem, not the scholarships themselves.

He's made tons of them. That you choose to dismiss him out of hand because he drops an f-bomb or notes another's idiocy in blunt terms is your failing, not his.

You can believe whatever you want, and I'll continue to dismiss him out of hand based on my experiences with him. And please drop the "holier than thou" stance. It's unbecoming. It amuses me that you can be best friends with someone on this forum when they agree with your views, but when they don't, not so much.

Not to interrupt the rant thread here, but if you really want to understand why this move by BUCR is misguided, go to the ostensible source of the controversy and see how UNCF scholarships are REALLY administered:

UNCF website:

http://www.uncf.org/?gclid=CO6dsI_f4ogCFR0FUAodTx2nhg


UNCF FAQ's explaining the scholarships ARE open to all ethnic groups (whites included) :

http://www.uncf.org/aboutus/faqs.asp


Then do a bit of research into why UNCF was founded, the social climate that existed at the time, the widespread, rampant discrimination against minorities seeking higher education, and whether those forces affecting minority participation in colleges and universities still exist.

If you pay attention and do your own homework, you'll have a nice starting point for sincere dialogue on this question. BUCR is not really interested in a legitimate debate---thus the $250.00 figure. They're interested in provoking an argument, and did so without genuinely comparing the history of white vs black students in post-secondary education in the US.

Think for yourselves, please.

is there any evidence of this promotion of stereotyping among people who didn't already believe the stereotypes?

also, which is worse - some people believing that <cultural group> is inferior while <cultural group>'s position within society materially improves, or some people believing that <cultural group> is inferior while materially maintaining <cultural group>'s inferior social position?

Your well-reasoned and insightful point will no doubt be missed by those intent on comparing the social dynamics underlying a $250.00 whites-only scholarship with funds sets up to counteract more than a century of intentional discrimination against minorities which was designed to prevent them from attented colleges and universities, much less pay tuition.

Glad to see at least one person gets it. I won't hold my breath for the rest. And certainly not for BUCR.

You can believe whatever you want, and I'll continue to dismiss him out of hand based on my experiences with him. And please drop the "holier than thou" stance. It's unbecoming. It amuses me that you can be best friends with someone on this forum when they agree with your views, but when they don't, not so much.
Free Soviets and I disagree as much as we agree. He's way more radical than I am. And I get along with people who I disagree with all the time--even you, on occasion, when you're not being self-righteous and acting like you've never turned the flame-thrower on. To put this in religious parlance, "we have all flamed, and have all fallen short of the glory of the mods." So don't pretend you're superior. Stay around here long enough and everyone turns into an asshole on occasion.

Dude--you're only fourteen. You don't even pay taxes.

No, I'mm mid 40s, but that does seems to be a line directed at Cartman at some point.

I own a business and I have actually paid over $250,000 in federal taxes several different years.

[quota] Besides, quotas and set-asides have been gone from the educational system for years now. If you weren't busy listening to people who lie to you about the subject because they have an agenda, you'd know that.[/QUOTE]

Semantics. When admission directors are adding points to minority applications, somnebody somewhere has some diversity number in mind.

I think people in my situation are justifiably angry. 41 percent of people filing federal taxes pay zero. the rest of us pay for everything, welfare, defense, highways, food stamps. and now our kids get screwed on top of it.

I raise my kids to be blind to color and they are. Now as they get to college age the state forces it to permeate every aspect of their lives. It is liberal social engineers grabbing a tiger by the tail.

The system should be a colorblind meritocracy. that is how the Irish and the chinese and the indians fought their way up the american economic scale -- on merit and hard work. It has to be earned to build the broad-based respect needed in society. You can't EARN things that are handed to you. To do it any other way is not only racist but an insult to the "handicapped" races that need a paternal helping hand.

Perhaps rather than expanding a comfy safety net for some cultures it should be pared back to encourage initiative. No one was paying my grandmother's trent, and she was kicking my parents ass to get to school and make good grades.

Dude--you're only fourteen. You don't even pay taxes.

No, I'm mid 40s, but that does seems to be a line directed at Cartman at some point.

I own a business and I have actually paid over $250,000 in federal taxes several different years. so i know from taxes.

[quota] Besides, quotas and set-asides have been gone from the educational system for years now. If you weren't busy listening to people who lie to you about the subject because they have an agenda, you'd know that.[/QUOTE]

Semantics. When admission directors are adding points to minority applications, somnebody somewhere has some diversity number in mind.

I think people in my situation are justifiably angry. 41 percent of people filing federal taxes pay zero. The rest of us pay for everything, welfare, defense, highways, food stamps. And now our kids get screwed on top of it.

I raise my kids to be blind to color and they are. Now as they get to college age the state forces it to permeate every aspect of their lives. It is liberal social engineers grabbing a tiger by the tail.

The system should be a colorblind meritocracy. That is how the Irish and the chinese and the indians fought their way up the american economic scale -- on merit and hard work. It has to be earned to build the broad-based respect needed in society. You can't EARN things that are handed to you. To do it any other way is not only racist but an insult to the "handicapped" races that need a paternal helping hand.

Perhaps rather than expanding a comfy safety net for some cultures it should be pared back to encourage initiative. No one was paying my grandmother's rent, and she was kicking my parents ass to get to school and make good grades.

Assume discriminating on the basis of race is wrong.

Therefore any decision made on the basis of race is wrong. Why? Because you can't be selectively racist. Every time one of these scholarships is awarded, it is blatant racial discrimination against those not eligible for the scholarship due to race.

The argument for these scholarships is that it is more difficult for minority students to pay for college. This is irrelevant; financial aid should be blind. The most needy students should be awarded the most financial aid. Admissions processes should be blind as well. Forcibly diversifying a university simply to reach a quota is also quite offensive; how do these minorities feel being nothing more than statistics? If a university is truly diverse and welcoming to minority students, they will come without being given an extra boost during the admissions process.

Free Soviets and I disagree as much as we agree. He's way more radical than I am. And I get along with people who I disagree with all the time--even you, on occasion, when you're not being self-righteous and acting like you've never turned the flame-thrower on. To put this in religious parlance, "we have all flamed, and have all fallen short of the glory of the mods." So don't pretend you're superior. Stay around here long enough and everyone turns into an asshole on occasion.

And there's a distinct difference between occasionally turning on the flame-thrower and having the flame-thrower be your primary weapon of choice. One would think with your extensive dealings with Eutrusca you'd appreciate this distinction.

Me and Kat agree: not surprising.
Me and Wilgrove agree: Slightly more surprising.;)

ETA: me not agreeing with Dean Elmore: quite surprising, and a little unsettling. One of the men I respect the most at my university. :(


Then perhaps Dean Elmore has a better understanding of the issue than you do, Sarkhaan.

Assume discriminating on the basis of race is wrong.

Therefore any decision made on the basis of race is wrong. Why? Because you can't be selectively racist. Every time one of these scholarships is awarded, it is blatant racial discrimination against those not eligible for the scholarship due to race.

The argument for these scholarships is that it is more difficult for minority students to pay for college. This is irrelevant; financial aid should be blind. The most needy students should be awarded the most financial aid. Admissions processes should be blind as well. Forcibly diversifying a university simply to reach a quota is also quite offensive; how do these minorities feel being nothing more than statistics? If a university is truly diverse and welcoming to minority students, they will come without being given an extra boost during the admissions process.

This actually has nothing to do with the admissions process. These students have all already been accepted to Boston University. This is the university choosing how to distribute their resources.

What's worse is that <cultural group> itself as a result of all this extra help feels inferior

without 'extra help' <cultural group> will remain materially and socially worse off as <cultural group> even longer. better for some to feel bad and fix the actual problem than for people to feel bad for longer due to the continuing existence of said problem.

so how exactly would extra help for <socioeconmic group> avoid making those individuals feel inferior?

is there any evidence of this promotion of stereotyping among people who didn't already believe the stereotypes?

also, which is worse - some people believing that <cultural group> is inferior while <cultural group>'s position within society materially improves, or some people believing that <cultural group> is inferior while materially maintaining <cultural group>'s inferior social position?

Point made, but missed during the debate about whether X-poster using the F-word makes him a moron or not.

So is anyone going to actually address the fact that UNCF scholarships are NOT black-only?

http://www.uncf.org/?gclid=CO6dsI_f4ogCFR0FUAodTx2nhg

http://www.uncf.org/aboutus/faqs.asp

And there's a distinct difference between occasionally turning on the flame-thrower and having the flame-thrower be your primary weapon of choice. One would think with your extensive dealings with Eutrusca you'd appreciate this distinction.And if Free Soviets turned on the flame thrower as often as you suggest he does, he'd have been long gone by now and you know it.

No more racist than the United Negro College Fund. :rolleyes:

Is that not a PRIVATELY funded college fund?

I agree public institutions should not take race into a factor for proportioning college loans but there should be no such restriction on privately funded loans

I did say that I am disgusted that people are freaking out and acting as if it is racist to designate a whites only scholarship when no one thinks it is bad to have a latino only scholarship.

nobody freaks out about polish-american only scholarships. or german, swedish, french, azerbaijani, or whatever. these are all just fine. when right-wingers start things that exist to benefit whites as whites then they are talking explicitly in barely coded racism.

Point made, but missed during the debate about whether X-poster using the F-word makes him a moron or not.

So is anyone going to actually address the fact that UNCF scholarships are NOT black-only?

http://www.uncf.org/?gclid=CO6dsI_f4ogCFR0FUAodTx2nhg

http://www.uncf.org/aboutus/faqs.asp

Show me the data. Couldn't find anything about how many white scholarships they were handing out.

Or does "not black only" mean like, Derek Jeter ?

And if Free Soviets turned on the flame thrower as often as you suggest he does, he'd have been long gone by now and you know it.

nah, i've clearly got super-secret mod clearance and a license to flame. also, any post you may see from time to time written by 'free soviets' that seem reasonable and full of content are actually just part of my cover. of course, having told you this i now have to kill you. sorry about that.

when right-wingers start things that exist to benefit whites as whites then they are talking explicitly in barely coded racism.

Frankly, I could care less what private scholarships go where. If someone wants to put in a scholarship for Alabama residents convicted of drunk driving, well, it is a free country.

Ginning up admission standards are more what infuriates me.

Hey, wait a minute. Why is the topic title "White's only..."?

Hey, wait a minute. Why is the topic title "White's only..."?

poor guy only got the one. had to work three shit jobs and go part-time to afford school at all.

No, I'mm mid 40s, but that does seems to be a line directed at Cartman at some point.

I own a business and I have actually paid over $250,000 in federal taxes several different years.


Myrm why you hiding behind a puppet?


The system should be a colorblind meritocracy. that is how the Irish and the chinese and the indians fought their way up the american economic scale -- on merit and hard work. It has to be earned to build the broad-based respect needed in society. You can't EARN things that are handed to you. To do it any other way is not only racist but an insult to the "handicapped" races that need a paternal helping hand.

Perhaps rather than expanding a comfy safety net for some cultures it should be pared back to encourage initiative. No one was paying my grandmother's trent, and she was kicking my parents ass to get to school and make good grades.

EEEKKKK ITS THE COMMIE LIBERAL (now racist) FAGS AGAIN!

:rolleyes:

I have not overlooked that. My entire point is that to be angry over a whites only scholarship because it is for whites only and obviously whites do not deserve one whereas other groups do is a hypocritical position.

I should have wrote "just about" before everybody. ;)

Just because I'm white, doesn't mean that I don't need scholarship. It pisses me off that a black family that makes more than my family gets twice as many scholarships than me, just because of skin color. IT'S A DIFFERENCE IN THE MELANIN IN OUR SKIN!!! I wonder if I could get a scholarship for being albino....

Just because I'm white, doesn't mean that I don't need scholarship. It pisses me off that a black family that makes more than my family gets twice as many scholarships than me, just because of skin color. IT'S A DIFFERENCE IN THE MELANIN IN OUR SKIN!!! I wonder if I could get a scholarship for being albino....

Or you could just do what I did because my family made too much money. Suck it up stop bitching and pay your own way. (specially stop bitching using random made up numbers in your arguement)

I had no problems doing it and finishing up my undergrad work and then going back and getting two more masters.

Just because I'm white, doesn't mean that I don't need scholarship. It pisses me off that a black family that makes more than my family gets twice as many scholarships than me, just because of skin color. IT'S A DIFFERENCE IN THE MELANIN IN OUR SKIN!!! I wonder if I could get a scholarship for being albino....

Maybe the real handicapping in the race of life (as it were) is to make the white graduates stagger under the load of student loans as they try to launch their way into careers or start businesses or families or buy a home. And the non-white graduates helped by scholarship money can launch the healthier business and buy the sharper interview suit and outbid for that starter dream home.

But as long as it all isn't racist :rolleyes:

We have only just begun to correct the injustices perpetrated on African Americans in this country. What's been done up till now has not evened the playing field. Cultural racism in the U.S. still exists. It is still in the interest of the government and society to offer need-based financial assistance to some minorities and will continue to be until everyone has an equal opportunity.

Someone said earlier that it's wrong for a black kid from a $40,000 home to get a scholarship when a white kid from a $40,000 home can't get it. What he's ignoring is that there are far fewer black kids from $40,000 homes. You want a better picture? In 2003, the real median income for white households was $48,000 while black households came in around $30,000. Gee, $18,000 difference.

http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/income_wealth/002484.html

I applaud the Republicans for wanting to bring the issue to national attention but I question their motives. Race questions in this country should always be open to discussion. But if this is going to be another round of Rove-worthy word twisting and painting a picture like racism is gone and we all live in happy rainbow land, then it's disgusting and I hope they fail.

in other words, you just disagree with the promotion of diversity as a societal goal. too bad.
Wow. Way to put words in my mouth. I support diversity. As I have said before, race-based scholarships won't change our diversity levels for several reasons, among which are the fact that we have a massive international student population, and the fact that DIVERSITY IS NOT ONLY ABOUT RACE.

Hold on--"rather than" or "in addition to?"My mistake. In addition to. However, I fail to see why race should be a factor at all.

What's worse is that <cultural group> itself as a result of all this extra help feels inferior, and worse, entitled to the extra help in perpetuity because they are <cultural group>.QFT

Then perhaps Dean Elmore has a better understanding of the issue than you do, Sarkhaan.Perhaps he does. Perhaps he doesn't. I'll be seeing him around campus for Coffee With The Dean, so I'll raise the question then, although, I would much rather discuss grade deflation.

Hey, wait a minute. Why is the topic title "White's only..."?I covered how crappy my thread title was somewhere back around page 9 ;)

We have only just begun to correct the injustices perpetrated on African Americans in this country.

Then arrest those responsible. My kids are innocent. Assigning blame and exacting financial pounds of flesh based on skin color is the moral equivalent of the original sin.

It is still in the interest of the government and society to offer need-based financial assistance to some minorities and will continue to be until everyone has an equal opportunity.

Oops! My kids don't have an equal opportunity. They aren't equal in college admissions. They aren't equal in scholarships. When they interview for a corporate job they aren't equal there. whom do I sue?

Someone said earlier that it's wrong for a black kid from a $40,000 home to get a scholarship when a white kid from a $40,000 home can't get it. What he's ignoring is that there are far fewer black kids from $40,000 homes. You want a better picture? In 2003, the real median income for white households was $48,000 while black households came in around $30,000. Gee, $18,000 difference.

Who cares? What is this Soviet Russia? In our society you strive to do better, you don't have it handed to you by the government.

Wow. Way to put words in my mouth. I support diversity. As I have said before, race-based scholarships won't change our diversity levels for several reasons, among which are the fact that we have a massive international student population, and the fact that DIVERSITY IS NOT ONLY ABOUT RACE.

My mistake. In addition to. However, I fail to see why race should be a factor at all.

QFT

Perhaps he does. Perhaps he doesn't. I'll be seeing him around campus for Coffee With The Dean, so I'll raise the question then, although, I would much rather discuss grade deflation.

I covered how crappy my thread title was somewhere back around page 9 ;)

if you really want to know...

there are race based scholarships for the same reason there are athletic scholarships.

if athletes were accepted to BU on an equal basis to all other candidates and given scholarships on the basis of need or academic brilliance, how many great athletes would go to BU?

some but no where near as many as you get now.

given that you said that students are accepted on a colorblind basis and that race scholarships are handed out after acceptance, the purpose of giving them out is to get those minority students to choose BU over someplace else that will give them a better deal.

if you dont want an upperclass lilly white student body, you have to do what it takes to get those minority students to choose you. just the same as wanting an excellent athletic squad means giving athletes an incentive to choose you.

(sure you can get all your "minority needs" met by taking foreign students but that will do nothing for BU's image as a school that desires diversity)

or to put it more succintly

POLITICS

Then arrest those responsible. My kids are innocent. Assigning blame and exacting financial pounds of flesh based on skin color is the moral equivalent of the original sin.


Yea just shove it under the table and not talk about it!


Oops! My kids don't have an equal opportunity. They aren't equal in college admissions. They aren't equal in scholarships. When they interview for a corporate job they aren't equal there. whom do I sue?

If you paid $250000 in taxes then your kids are alrealy excluded from many scholarship programs and most financial aid.

Poor widdle rich kids.


Who cares? What is this Soviet Russia? In our society you strive to do better, you don't have it handed to you by the government.

You are the one doing all the complaining.

are there all black colleges in america? people actually give scholarships due to race!
you should pick the system of the most fantastic races education system. we dont have interviews for college. when we enter we are just a number. they no nothing about us.

Or you could just do what I did because my family made too much money. Suck it up stop bitching and pay your own way. (specially stop bitching using random made up numbers in your arguement)

I had no problems doing it and finishing up my undergrad work and then going back and getting two more masters.

Couldn't have said it any better. :)

I guess is just easier to bitch about it.....

Wow. I turned on the news and see this white loan thing is pissing off people....

Hmm? If people had said "whatever", do you think the Repubs would have continued it?

are there all black colleges in america? people actually give scholarships due to race!
you should pick the system of the most fantastic races education system. we dont have interviews for college. when we enter we are just a number. they no nothing about us.

there are predominantly black colleges in the US. i dont think there are any that have a race test and dont admit those of less than <some percent> black african origins.

Wow. I turned on the news and see this white loan thing is pissing off people....

Hmm? If people had said "whatever", do you think the Repubs would have continued it?
That's the thing that has been bothering me more than anything else...
a white scholarship gets labled racist, when it is no different than any other race based scholarship.

If they had said "whatever", the BUCR would still have done it because it is still relevant to our campus. From the BUCR's that I've talked to about it, their intent wasn't national attention.

Slow news week anyone?

(sorry if I missed any posts that are directed at me...I'm behind on the thread and don't have time to catch up)

if you really want to know...

there are race based scholarships for the same reason there are athletic scholarships.

if athletes were accepted to BU on an equal basis to all other candidates and given scholarships on the basis of need or academic brilliance, how many great athletes would go to BU?

some but no where near as many as you get now.

given that you said that students are accepted on a colorblind basis and that race scholarships are handed out after acceptance, the purpose of giving them out is to get those minority students to choose BU over someplace else that will give them a better deal.

Having strong athletic programs is a financial boost to colleges. Giving aid to minority students is not a financial boost to colleges.

[quote[If you dont want an upperclass lilly white student body, [/quote]

What an incredibly racist statement. What the hell is wrong with people prejudice over skin color? You should be ashamed.

That's the thing that has been bothering me more than anything else...
a white scholarship gets labled racist, when it is no different than any other race based scholarship.



Bingo. I love this scholarship. It opens people's eyes to the inherent racism that liberals bring to their social assumptions. This "white man's burden" shit has got to stop. it teaches our kids that some races can't compete on merit and need a helping hand. What a horrible legacy for our generation.

That's the thing that has been bothering me more than anything else...
a white scholarship gets labled racist, when it is no different than any other race based scholarship.


You forget the intent of this scholarship. Was it to help white kids or was it to expose something.

If they had said "whatever", the BUCR would still have done it because it is still relevant to our campus. From the BUCR's that I've talked to about it, their intent wasn't national attention.


I doubt it.


Slow news week anyone?

(sorry if I missed any posts that are directed at me...I'm behind on the thread and don't have time to catch up)

You have some links to you financial aid and scholarship programs?

I am just having a hard time believing that there is an effort to exclude white kids and that non-white kids are given money simply because they are non-white.

Having strong athletic programs is a financial boost to colleges. Giving aid to minority students is not a financial boost to colleges.

If you dont want an upperclass lilly white student body,

What an incredibly racist statement. What the hell is wrong with people prejudice over skin color? You should be ashamed.

Hold up a mirror good buddy.

Then arrest those responsible. My kids are innocent. Assigning blame and exacting financial pounds of flesh based on skin color is the moral equivalent of the original sin.

Okay, we're assuming your kids are white, correct? I just want to make sure we have our assumptions on the table before we get down to talking.

Your children, as individuals, are not to blame for the oppression suffered by minorities. They did not kill any Native Americans nor did they enslave any African Americans (at least I hope they didn't). White children in general, however, benefit from a racial preference in this country. They also don't start with the disadvantages that come from having ancestors who were enslaved or oppressed by the United States throughout its brief history.

This isn't about persecuting your children. This isn't about demonizing white kids. Your talk of taking pounds of flesh is the worst kind of rhetoric. I'm talking about the government acting in the interest of the people to level the playing field. If you know a better way to do that than with money, I'm open to suggestions.

Oops! My kids don't have an equal opportunity. They aren't equal in college admissions. They aren't equal in scholarships. When they interview for a corporate job they aren't equal there. whom do I sue?

Until you admit the overwhelming racial prejudice in favor of your children, you're just going to simmer in your anger about this. African Americans comprise roughly 13% of the U.S. population and, even with assistance, comprise roughly 6% of those who attend college. Are you going to argue that it's because black people don't want to go to college or are too stupid to get in?

With the average white household earning $18,000 more than the average African American one, I'm going to agree that your kids aren't equal when they interview for a corporate job. In fact, I'm going to argue that they're more likely to get it and be paid more to do it. Do you know how much more likely it is for an African American to be unemployed than a white kid? Twice. The current unemployment rate for whites is 4.3% and for blacks is 9.3%. Do you think this is because black people don't want to hold onto their jobs?

Who cares? What is this Soviet Russia? In our society you strive to do better, you don't have it handed to you by the government.

Do you know why white millionaires outnumber black millionaires by an absurd margin? It's because our economic principles are based on land ownership and white people got a hell of a jump on owning land in this country when we started taking it from the Native Americans 300+ years ago (a whole other topic of injustice we've failed to correct). Combine that with a cultural bias toward white employment, poor funding for minority schooling, and bigots like yourself who feel persecuted every time anyone attempts to make up for hundreds of years of bungling the issue of race in this country and you've got problems.

You want to talk about striving to do better and being equal? Let's have a little competition to see who can sell more lemonade. I'll start with the stand my parents gave me, $50 seed money, and the safer neighborhood. You start with $10 and your wits. If you don't win, you should be aware that I'm going to say you aren't striving hard enough and if anyone attempts to give you any help, I'll call them a commie.

Wake up, my friend. Your country isn't working right and, though you didn't cause it, pretending everything is equal and hunky-dory isn't helping.

Having strong athletic programs is a financial boost to colleges. Giving aid to minority students is not a financial boost to colleges.

If you dont want an upperclass lilly white student body,

What an incredibly racist statement. What the hell is wrong with people prejudice over skin color? You should be ashamed.

oh im so ashamed that i support the idea of diversity.

i dont think you can make a claim of financial boost without doing a study on it. or at least quoting one.

besides, as the OP said, some things that happen at BU are outside the realm of making money for the university. diversity may well be one of them

The White Man's Burden:

Knowing he is inherently better than everyone else, but no one will just shut up and admit it!!!

(sorry if I missed any posts that are directed at me...I'm behind on the thread and don't have time to catch up)

im still hoping that you know how many racially targetted scholarships are given out and the details of how they work. (as in, are they in addition to the non-racial financial aid or instead of?)

Okay, we're assuming your kids are white, correct? I just want to make sure we have our assumptions on the table before we get down to talking.

Scots, Irish, English, German, Italian. Of course, if maybe a Moor slipped into Italy we hit the student aid lottery, huh?

Your children, as individuals, are not to blame for the oppression suffered by minorities. They did not kill any Native Americans nor did they enslave any African Americans (at least I hope they didn't).

No, they have enslaved some turtles and frogs. No African Americans. I'd remember that.

White children in general, however, benefit from a racial preference in this country. They also don't start with the disadvantages that come from having ancestors who were enslaved or oppressed by the United States throughout its brief history.

My children's Italian and Irish ancestors were oppressed here. And their Catholic ones -- they were lynched in the south. Damn papists. We also caught a lot of crap in England. Get out your checkbook.

This isn't about persecuting your children. This isn't about demonizing white kids.

No, see but IT IS. that is exaclty what it is. Laying the sins of slavery on my family's head? Fuck you! We didn't even get here until 1915!

Your talk of taking pounds of flesh is the worst kind of rhetoric.

Really? Is it worse than blaming white's for soming that happened 5 generations ago because it happens to benefit you financially? (or deliver political votes?)

I'm talking about the government acting in the interest of the people to level the playing field. If you know a better way to do that than with money, I'm open to suggestions.

Here's a wild idea. It isn't the government's job to 'level the playing field". It is the government's job to prosecute injustice. It is the government's job to halt criminal activity. It is the government's job to pave the streets. It is not the government's job to play out social theory with entitlement experiments, or pit skin color versus skin color. That is just votes and politics.

African Americans comprise roughly 13% of the U.S. population and, even with assistance, comprise roughly 6% of those who attend college. Are you going to argue that it's because black people don't want to go to college or are too stupid to get in?

Beats me. What is your theory? That for the last two decades college admission officers and financial aid programs have been keeping the black man down? What are you kidding?

If I had to guess what was keeping the african-american community (comparatively, on average) from prosperity on our society it would be their own cultural issues and too many one parent families. Knocking my kid back on a college admission list isn't going to fix that.

With the average white household earning $18,000 more than the average African American one, I'm going to agree that your kids aren't equal when they interview for a corporate job. In fact, I'm going to argue that they're more likely to get it and be paid more to do it.

Why? Do you think corporations research and hire employees based on the least need?

Do you know how much more likely it is for an African American to be unemployed than a white kid? Twice. The current unemployment rate for whites is 4.3% and for blacks is 9.3%. Do you think this is because black people don't want to hold onto their jobs?

So is this a "minority" issue? Certainly there is no recession going on in employment. I doubt the unemployment rate is soaring among the Japanese and Indian population. Perhaps there is a AA subculture not driven to financial motivations and more likely to rely on social safety nets like welfare. I doubt the Native Americans are any better off. There is no law that says a people or sub culture gets to thrive in America, and no law that says someone can choose to be non-productive rather thna productive.

If civil rights are being violated, if hiring prejudices are in the workplace or colleges,we SURELY have A TON of measures and laws to deal with that and NO SHORTAGE of lawyers and advocates ready to make a public spectacle.

The premise of America is the OPPORTUNITY for success, not a guarantee of success. You aren't guaranteed happiness - you are guaranteed the ability to pursue it.

Just because a minority constitutes 12 percent of the population DOES NOT mean the government has to ensure that they are 12 percent of the hockey players and recording artists and lawyers and college students.

Do you know why white millionaires outnumber black millionaires by an absurd margin?

Who cares? You aren't guaranteed to be a millionaire in America.

Combine that with a cultural bias toward white employment, poor funding for minority schooling, and bigots like yourself who feel persecuted every time anyone attempts to make up for hundreds of years of bungling the issue of race in this country and you've got problems.

There seems to be no line the race baiters won't cross and finally admit that there is no future in racial prejudice. If it meant a financial advantage, 500 years from now someone would be saying they were owed some money or advantage due to slavery.

Wake up, my friend. Your country isn't working right and, though you didn't cause it, pretending everything is equal and hunky-dory isn't helping.

Wallowing and braying about racial hatred just brands it on the children of the next generation of both races. Of course it makes a living for inner city politicians and government liberals and professional protesters and the Jesse Jacksons and Al Sharptons of the world, so they will ignore the psychological damage it does to their own children.

As long as their is a dime or a vote in promoting racial hatred it will get humped dry by those with something to gain. And it becomes a self-fulfilling prophect, because it breeds hatred and draws lines between all races.

Again, if whites are so evil and biased and oppressive why are Indians and Koreans writing their own fantastic American success story?

Again, if whites are so evil and biased and oppressive why are Indians and Koreans writing their own fantastic American success story?

You're going to ignore of course how I didn't say whites are evil. You'll also probably ignore that I didn't suggest we should give Indians and Koreans racial preference in college admissions and financial aid.

Here's where it breaks down: you think this is about bringing whites down and I think this is about bringing blacks up. And you're right, this will remain a topic for "inner city politicians and government liberals" until the suburban elite realize there's really a problem.

You're going to ignore of course how I didn't say whites are evil. You'll also probably ignore that I didn't suggest we should give Indians and Koreans racial preference in college admissions and financial aid.

So you aren't for "diversity" on campus, you are just for helping blacks?

Well at least that is honest.

Here's where it breaks down: you think this is about bringing whites down and I think this is about bringing blacks up.

You can't you it both ways. You raise one person up and someone gets lowered down.

There is only one pie and it is supposed to be divided by effort and talent and hard work. You want to make it divided by skin color.

That is racism.

I can live with need/ability based scholarships, far more easily than I can live with race based scholarships. They're less...random, less arbitrary. I'd rather see something that rewards people who drag themselves up, over something that has the possibility might just give free cash to some rich black kid. I've always maintained that the arena in which the government has the most legitimate claim is education, and it should at least partially support education for everyone who is academically capable of getting it.

without 'extra help' <cultural group> will remain materially and socially worse off as <cultural group> even longer. better for some to feel bad and fix the actual problem than for people to feel bad for longer due to the continuing existence of said problem.

so how exactly would extra help for <socioeconmic group> avoid making those individuals feel inferior?

How will they remain materially worse off if they are being granted scholarship based on need?

How are they to remain socially worse off if they are granted scholarship based on need?

How is it "fixing the problem" if no one has any clue when it will not longer be necessary to say, "You need help because you're <cultural group> rather than, "You need financial help -- like most people coming to this college."

Why do you call it a loan when its a scholarship? A loan you have to pay back, a scholarship is a gift.

Why do you call it a loan when its a scholarship? A loan you have to pay back, a scholarship is a gift.

The OP posted back around page 9 that he realised he had typed the wrong thing into the title.

nobody freaks out about polish-american only scholarships. or german, swedish, french, azerbaijani, or whatever. these are all just fine. when right-wingers start things that exist to benefit whites as whites then they are talking explicitly in barely coded racism.

This is the attitude I am talking about. The United Negro College fund covers a wide variety of ethinic backgrounds so long as they are black, correct? And scholarships for Hispanics cover people from a gamut of Spanish-speaking ethnicities. Scholarships for women cover people of any ethnicity so long as they are female. Therefore, a scholarship that exists for any variety of white should not be any less worthy.

I think that a lot of private donors want to feel some sort of personal connection to their recipient so they look for students with similar heritage. For most people white is too broad. Maybe even British is too broad (unless you mean british immagrant). Because there are a lot more white people than anything else. Or maybe thats just the situation in my part of the world.
But this has nothing to do with what we are talking about because it is not from a private donor but from an institution.

The White Man's Burden:

Knowing he is inherently better than everyone else, but no one will just shut up and admit it!!!

Now that's not fair: no one has said whites are better. Or at least, none of us who are arguing that this scholarship should be a non-issue are.

I can live with need/ability based scholarships, far more easily than I can live with race based scholarships. They're less...random, less arbitrary. I'd rather see something that rewards people who drag themselves up, over something that has the possibility might just give free cash to some rich black kid. I've always maintained that the arena in which the government has the most legitimate claim is education, and it should at least partially support education for everyone who is academically capable of getting it.

Indeed.

How do they decide which black student gets a scholarship set up for blacks?

How do they decide which black student gets a scholarship set up for blacks?

coin toss /joking

I have no idea actually.

Now that's not fair: no one has said whites are better. Or at least, none of us who are arguing that this scholarship should be a non-issue are.

Oh come on now, Kat...I think it's a good generalisation. Those who whine about the white man's burden are generally actually thinking this.

I wasn't saying anyone here was doing that...or that they weren't, actually...just putting it out there because it deserves a 'tru dat'.

This is the attitude I am talking about. The United Negro College fund covers a wide variety of ethinic backgrounds so long as they are black, correct? And scholarships for Hispanics cover people from a gamut of Spanish-speaking ethnicities. Scholarships for women cover people of any ethnicity so long as they are female. Therefore, a scholarship that exists for any variety of white should not be any less worthy.

except, of course, that blacks in america do form a single ethnic group - unless they are recent immigrants (and even those are largely pushed into and treated as if they were members of the african-american ethnic group). latinos have been largely treated as a single group too and actually consciously adopted a universalizing identity as a means of empowerment. and women have been the victims of the patriarchy without much regard to ethnicity, so that's a different story altogether.

on the other hand, the identity of 'white' only has existence as a relic of policies explicitly aimed at disempowering and abusing various 'non-whites'. outside of that it is a completely empty concept. and the faster we abolish it, the better.

except, of course, that blacks in america do form a single ethnic group

Really? Want to tell a Haitian that he's the same as a Dominican, or a Sudanese?

Are they all not entitled to the same consideration in the UNCF?

This is a live action reason of why this whole debate is insane.

I was just watching the old Chris Rock show. They had on some guy -- didn't even catch his name, immaterial. Black guy, Affirmative Action advocate.

So he lists the people that need Affirmative Action --Blacks. Latinos. Asians. Arabs. Women. Jews.

Jews? Jews are getting financially screwed in America?

Excuse me if I'm missing something, but everything but white men.

Then, Chris Rock says "Oh, but it is worse than that. Go into any restaurant in New York and try to find a hostess who is more than 140 lbs. And heavy guys too. They have to be in the back".

Okay, so everyone but white men within 20 lbs of their optimal weight should get an advantage in college admissions, job hiring, etc.

It is crazy. That is why a perhaps once reasonable idea has gone INSANE.

Really? Want to tell a Haitian that he's the same as a Dominican, or a Sudanese?

yes, really. did you miss the second half of that sentence?

This is a live action reason of why this whole debate is insane.

I was just watching the old Chris Rock show. They had on some guy -- didn't even catch his name, immaterial. Black guy, Affirmative Action advocate.

So he lists the people that need Affirmative Action --Blacks. Latinos. Asians. Arabs. Women. Jews.

Jews? Jews are getting financially screwed in America?

Excuse me if I'm missing something, but everything but white men.

Then, Chris Rock says "Oh, but it is worse than that. Go into any restaurant in New York and try to find a hostess who is more than 140 lbs. And heavy guys too. They have to be in the back".

Okay, so everyone but white men within 20 lbs of their optimal weight should get an advantage in college admissions, job hiring, etc.

It is crazy. That is why a perhaps once reasonable idea has gone INSANE.

Soo much static......

Really? Want to tell a Haitian that he's the same as a Dominican, or a Sudanese?

Are they all not entitled to the same consideration in the UNCF?

You want to ask your average redneck if he thinks there's a difference between a plain old-fashioned ****** and one that came from Jamaica? He won't care. He'll just see the skin color.

So, are the BUCR being racist with this? Is it not racist, but not right? Is it the right move?


1. It's their money. It's a human right to give your money to whomever you want. Even IF you are being racist.

2. It's obvious that $250 doesn't get anybody through college. Obviously the move is purely symbolic and meant to spur debate.

Boston University College Republicans (a university sanctioned group) has decided to give a $250 scholarship to only white students (the Caucasian Achievement and Recognition Scholarship).

The groups objective is to call attention to the idea that we give any scholarship based on race instead of achievement. Students applying for this scholarship must be at least 25% caucasian. The money will come from the College Republicans, not the university.



Dean of Students Ken Elmore has spoken against the scholarship, stating that it undermines the goal of the university: to provide an increasingly diverse student population. Boston University has a majority of white students.





I'll start by saying that I support this. BU is a top university. I understand need-based financial aid and academic/sports-based scholarships. Those should clearly be available to all students. What I do not understand is why the university wants to give a certain group of students more money based off of what race they are. A white student whos family makes $40,000 a year needs just as much financial aid as a black student whos family makes $40,000 a year.

There is more to diversity than just race. Does that make some impact? Of course. Will not offering a race-based scholarship stop minorities from coming to the school? No.

What is interesting is that the school does not publish the racial makeup of the university, but does publish the academic makeup (SAT/ACT scores, GPA's, etc).


So, are the BUCR being racist with this? Is it not racist, but not right? Is it the right move?

Personally, I think that yes, it is racist (as are black scholarships et. al.), but it is a good thing. It has opened tons of dialogue, and has gotten the BUCR a chance to talk with the head of African-American studies, as well as Dean Elmore.


The CNN article (http://www.cnn.com/2006/EDUCATION/11/22/caucasian.scholarship.reut/index.html)
Boston University Daily Free Press (Freep) article (http://media.www.dailyfreepress.com/media/storage/paper87/news/2006/11/21/News/Bu.Group.Offers.White.Scholarship-2505837.shtml?sourcedomain=www.dailyfreepress.com&MIIHost=media.collegepublisher.com)

Well whites in USA will soon be a minority:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/09/AR2006050901841.html

When those children grow up, with immigration and all...So it's time they get some "minority funds"....

I think it's interesting to give scholarships to minorities (of course, that isn't racist) and not to whites because of race.

Well whites in USA will soon be a minority:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/09/AR2006050901841.html

When those children grow up, with immigration and all...So it's time they get some "minority funds"....

But will they continue to argue that whites don't need it? Women get classed as a minority but they outnumber men. See the information below from the census:

Table showing number of men per 100 women (http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/GRTTable?_bm=y&-geo_id=01000US&-_box_head_nbr=R0102&-ds_name=ACS_2005_EST_G00_&-format=US-30)


United States
96.0 men per 100 women
error +/-0.1

Sidenote:
It intersesting to see that if a man is looking for a single woment the best chance is in the District of Columbia (ratio 89.0 +/-0.4). For the opposite the single woman should head to Alaska (ratio: 103.1 +/-1.2).

First of all, thank you to whichever mod edited my title...I'm guessing it was Kat since she is in this thread, but :fluffle: to whomever it was

second, once again, I am terribly sorry. I thought I would have more time over this break than I have had, and have only had a very brief scanning over the thread. Unfortunatly, it is almost 6 AM, and I have to get to sleep so I can get back up to school tomorrow. I assume that I am missing lots of important posts, and I will do my best to catch up when I am back in Boston. Now, onto what I did catch.
You forget the intent of this scholarship. Was it to help white kids or was it to expose something.Can it not be both? Its primary function was to expose something. I admit this. But it also functions to help white kids.

You have some links to you financial aid and scholarship programs? I have been searching our website a bit, and cannot find any information about financial aid of any sort beyond basic info. I'll keep looking, and ask Dean Elmore when I get the chance.

I am just having a hard time believing that there is an effort to exclude white kids and that non-white kids are given money simply because they are non-white.I admit, BU does not give scholarships purely off of race. However, there are scholarships and loans that are awarded primarily off of race (IE, in order to get scholarship A, you must be black). That is wrong.

im still hoping that you know how many racially targetted scholarships are given out and the details of how they work. (as in, are they in addition to the non-racial financial aid or instead of?)As I stated above, I'm trying to find links to this data, and, if I can get dean Elmore to speak on-record ( I will be talking to him within the month, but if it is off record, I will not post it here) then I will let you know. There are race-based scholarships, and they do not replace standard loans to the best of my knowledge.

This is the attitude I am talking about. The United Negro College fund covers a wide variety of ethinic backgrounds so long as they are black, correct? And scholarships for Hispanics cover people from a gamut of Spanish-speaking ethnicities. Scholarships for women cover people of any ethnicity so long as they are female. Therefore, a scholarship that exists for any variety of white should not be any less worthy.
Well stated. "Black" is nothing like "Irish" or "Italian". Is someone from Nigeria the same as someone from South Africa? That is like asking if that Irishman is the same as an Italian. Are they both white? yes. Are they the same? no,

You want to ask your average redneck if he thinks there's a difference between a plain old-fashioned ****** and one that came from Jamaica? He won't care. He'll just see the skin color.
And therein lies the issue. White scholarships have to be divided into "French" or "German" or "Italian". Why don't black scholarships have to do the same (Yes, I understand the reasoning. Don't waste your time answering that). However, if we can offer a scholarship to ALL blacks, ALL latinos, ALL women, why not all whites? We aren't talking about rednecks. We are talking about BU. Do we have some rednecks? Yes. Is that even a minor part of our population? No.

Interestingly enough, if you want to increase the diversity at BU more, then you just need another hurricane Katrina. Since our acceptance of Tulane students, we have increased our black population (one of our smallest) by huge numbers.


sorry if that didn't make sense, and I will try to make time for this topic. If I find any new info that doesn't make national news (as I most likely will) I'll post it in the OP.

I don't see what the issue is considering you only have to be 25% caucasion, that leaves a good 75% open to any other race.

The problem I have is the all-Black schools. They want and allegedly have equal rights. I say allegedly because of the fact in Reality they have more. They have their all-Black schools (all-White schools were condemned and now I don't think they're are any all-White schools left) They have their Black only scholarships. They have their Black month. The police must hire a certain quota of Blacks even if the Blacks that apply do poorly on written and physical tests than the Whites) The have BET (I dare anybody to come up with WET (White Entertainment Television) and the list goes on and on and on. Now that's discrimination.

I don't see what the problem is with students wanting to give out scholarships to someone who has atleast 25% Whiteness. That sounds to be offering a scholarship to pretty mixed people to me.

I don't see what the issue is considering you only have to be 25% caucasion, that leaves a good 75% open to any other race.

The problem I have is the all-Black schools. They want and allegedly have equal rights. I say allegedly because of the fact in Reality they have more. They have their all-Black schools (all-White schools were condemned and now I don't think they're are any all-White schools left) They have their Black only scholarships.

Inform yourself--there are few, if any, all-black public universities. There are majority black schools--places like Grambling or Jackson State--but those schools have a number of white students, and guesss what? White students get minority status and bumps on their financial aid when they attend there, which is only fair--minority is minority, after all.
They have their Black month.
No, they have Black history month, and considering that every other fucking month is White History month, I'd say they're being awfully gracious at limiting it to just one.

The police must hire a certain quota of Blacks even if the Blacks that apply do poorly on written and physical tests than the Whites)
Prove it. Hiring quotas have been gone for years.

The have BET (I dare anybody to come up with WET (White Entertainment Television) and the list goes on and on and on. Now that's discrimination.Again, damn near every other channel on television is white-dominated. How many sitcoms star white actors as opposed to black ones? Or hispanic ones? Or Asian ones? How many dramas feature people of color as main characters or leads as compared to white ones? Most television, most film, most music is white dominated, and to act like black people are somehow even because they have BET is not only stupid, it's disgusting.

I don't see what the problem is with students wanting to give out scholarships to someone who has atleast 25% Whiteness. That sounds to be offering a scholarship to pretty mixed people to me.
The students have a right to do what they will with their money. It's not federal money involved--it's private. But just as they have the right to use that money as they wish, others have the right to point out the racism inherent in the act.

Hiring quotas have been gone for years.

That really ought to be plastered onto the walls, because I don't know if it will sink in any other way.

That really ought to be plastered onto the walls, because I don't know if it will sink in any other way.
As Al Gore paraphrased in "An Inconvenient Truth," it's hard to convince a person of a thing when his livelihood depends on believing the complete opposite. Quotas have been such a race-coded boogeyman for so long and have been so effective that there's no way that they'll stop using them anytime soon.

Actually this whole thread and title is stupid. If someone is only 25% white, s/he isnt white. S/he is either mixed or some other non-white race. I guess the organizers were so afraid of being labelled Nazis by villagers with torches (aka PC police), they couldnt make a % like 100% or 95+%....

That really ought to be plastered onto the walls, because I don't know if it will sink in any other way.


Chief of Soon-to-be Metropolitan Police Department Defends Hiring Practices
Oct 26, 2006 12:33 AM

Hiring practices for the new consolidated police department are in question. The union president wants an investigation while the chief is defending the process.

Fifty-five men and women want to patrol Indianapolis streets. They are the members of the first recruit class of the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department. The class is scheduled to start training November 13th.

"We want a class that represents the community we serve," said Chief Mike Spears.

The recruit class has 55 candidates. Of those, 33 are white males, 15 African American males, five white females, one African American female and one Hispanic candidate. The class exceeds the consent decree requirement of 20 - 25 percent African American.

"We have fallen behind in that and we are doing everything we can to make certain we abide by the law by the consent decree," said Chief Spears.

The chief admits candidates for the second recruit class were considered for the first class.

"City legal said we were well within the law to do that, we reviewed it with the merit board, the merit board was given a presentation and voted to approve the process as well," Chief Spears said.

FOP president Vince Huber alleges qualified white candidates were bumped in favor of minority candidates.

"And by doing so we think it creates a very adverse problem for candidates going through a process that is supposed to be color blind and the fact that it is not color blind and they are showing preferential treatment towards minority applicants," Huber said.

"There were no white candidates who were not given a seat in class because a black candidate took their place. That's just not true," Chief Spears said.

The local branch of the NAACP supports the city's current hiring practices, including the consent decree.

"Even though there have been some advancements there is still room to grow as far as hiring African Americans and minorities," said Daryl Mickens, NAACP Indianapolis Branch President.

Huber says he wants an independent impartial investigation into hiring practices, something he has requested of the city. But the city maintains they followed proper procedure and all candidates are qualified.

http://www.wishtv.com/Global/story.asp?S=5589849

http://www.wishtv.com/Global/story.asp?S=5589849

That's not a quota. That's an objective.

"There were no white candidates who were not given a seat in class because a black candidate took their place. That's just not true," Chief Spears said.

Actually this whole thread and title is stupid. If someone is only 25% white, s/he isnt white. S/he is either mixed or some other non-white race. I guess the organizers were so afraid of being labelled Nazis by villagers with torches (aka PC police), they couldnt make a % like 100% or 95+%....

*smack* stop and think about it for a minute

how are black, native americans, hispanics, whatever qualified for scholarships targeted to them?

to be considered <one of the above> you have to be a certain percent of that heritage, seldom is it 50% or above.

the makers of the scholarship patterned theirs after other racially qualified scholarships.