I wonder who they are trying to stir up on this one

[mickeyd]

Let the Christmas season begin!!!

Joe Mroszczyk, president of the College Republicans at Boston University, admits he set out to stir up a hornet's nest when he came up with the idea of offering a whites-only scholarship at the school. But he got a little more buzz than he bargained for.

"To tell you the truth, we didn't see this coming," Mroszczyk said. "The Drudge Report picked it up yesterday, and today I just finished a round of national interviews. It's kind of overwhelming."

All the media attention is focused on a $250 Caucasian Achievement and Recognition Scholarship offered by Mroszczyk and the BU chapter of the College Republicans. Applicants must have a cumulative grade point average of 3.2 or higher; they must write two essays; and, here's the kicker, they must be at least one-quarter Caucasian.

The application itself offers an explanation: "We believe that racial preferences in all their forms are perhaps the worst form of bigotry confronting America today."

http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=2674267&page=1

 

[dusk_to_dawn]

I would guess that whomever runs this as a newsworthy story is trying to stir up minorities or liberals, but that's just my guess. The students at BU who are sponsoring this scholarhip are probably trying to get some debate going about scholarship requirements. It's odd that there are scholarships that require you be of a certain race or background like Hispanic, Italian, Alaska Native, African American, Female, Native American, Portuguese, Japanese, Jewish, Polish, Chinese...(the list goes on and on), but you make 25% caucasian as one of your requirements and it makes national news. I am the son of an Hispanic man and a Mexican immigrant mother. I would qualify for this scholarship (25% caucasian). I would not qualify for any of the other scholarships listed above (other than Hispanic) because I don't have the right race or background. So from my point of view, the scholarship that requires 25% caucasian is much more inclusive and than any of the other scholarships listed.

 

[Craig]

To understand this a bit better, attend a local college or university event where the many clubs come together to solicit members at the beginning of an academic year. It is amazing to find the Chinese Math Club, the African-American Engineering Association, the Latino Astronomy Club and so on.

I had a friend who was troubled by this kind of thing. Alan was quite vocal about his perspectives, and he frankly asked some of the students why there weren't any Caucasian, white, etc. groups. It was comical to see the response, but clearly some of the students were rethinking the logic and saw the irony.

I think any of these groups are just fine, but the reverse racism is blatant, and amusing. They're trying to provoke some thought about the expansive nature of racism, and the ironic exemption our society provides to some groups.

 

[lets-retire]

Old news my alma mater did something similar about three or four years ago. The ironic thing was the president of the campus student Republican club was black. It made the interviews rather interesting.

 

[Toejam]

Interesting. I generally believe in some, but not all, forms of affirmative action for hiring. But I think some caution needs to be exercised in admitting applicants to highly elite colleges (i.e. those with extremely rigorous and academically competitive standards) or highly technical jobs. If an applicant clearly does not have the capability to perform successfully, it doesn't make sense to hire him/her for the sake of being "politically correct". Just seems it makes more sense to hire or select the best and brightest regardless of race/gender/sex/color/nationality, etc.. Of course, usually there are no standardized measurements by which to judge an applicant, so the hiring process is very subjective and, often times, the "best" employee or candidate is often not selected. For general college admissions, it is good to know that one's g.p.a. and SAT scores are not the sole determinants used for selection.

I googled "reverse discrimination" and came up with this interesting piece of information. Don't know if it's accurate or true but, if it is, it seems Caucasians are not the only "victims" of reverse discrimination.

From Daniel Golden's The Price of Admission, chapter 7, "The New Jews, Asian
Americans Need Not Apply":
“In 1990, federal investigators concluded that UCLA's graduate department in mathematics
had discriminated against Asian applicants.”
“......... most elite universities have maintained a triple standard in college admissions,
setting the bar highest for Asians, next for whites, and lowest for blacks and Hispanics.
According to a 2004 study by three Princeton researchers, an Asian American applicant
needs to score 50 points higher on the SAT than other applicants just to have the same chance
of admission to an elite university. (Being an alumni child, by contrast, confers a 160-point
advantage.) Yale records show that entering Asian American freshmen averaged a 1493
SAT score in 1999-2000, 1496 in 2000-2001, and 1482 in 2001-2. For the same three years,
the average for white freshmen was about 40 points lower. Black and Hispanic freshmen
lagged another 100-125 points below whites. A Yale spokesman attributed the Asian-white
gap to more whites being recruited athletes, and said Asians and whites are held to the same
academic standards."

 

[samclem]

How do race-based scholarships verify that an individual is qualified? Do they ask for proof of the claimed ethnicity? If a person appears to be black, does that suffice? And, what about adopted kids? An African-American child adopted by a wealthy white family can get a race-based scholarship, but if a white child was raised by a poor black family he wouldn't quailify?

The whole racial preferences issue is a distasteful relic of a bygone era. In today's America, economic background is far more important than ethnicity in determining or denying opportunity (for education, etc). Who has greater challenges--the child of a white coal miner or the child of a black neurosurgeon?

 

[Craig]

Here, here, samclem ... so well put.

 

[bosco]

I googled "reverse discrimination" and came up with this interesting piece of information. Don't know if it's accurate or true but, if it is, it seems Caucasians are not the only "victims" of reverse discrimination.

I just love the term "reverse discrimination"

It's so white.....

discrimination is discrimination imo. It has no 'forward' or 'reverse.'

<sigh> I guess it's a commonly used term, and everyone knows what is meant. Almost as amusing as when someone calls an Arab "anti-Semitic" when he expresses disgust with Israel. Hello.....Arabs are Semites too.....

 

[Craig]

bosco, you've just taught me something ... never before felt the need to research the exact definition of Semite, but you are right.

Now, interestingly enough, Merriam-Webster defines "anti-Semitism" as

hostility toward or discrimination against Jews as a religious, ethnic, or racial group

Go figure ... the English language can surprise.

 

[youbet]

The whole racial preferences issue is a distasteful relic of a bygone era. In today's America, economic background is far more important than ethnicity in determining or denying opportunity (for education, etc). Who has greater challenges--the child of a white coal miner or the child of a black neurosurgeon?

Racial preferences might be distasteful, but they're not relics. They're alive and well.

I personally agree with you that economic circumstances are more important than ethnicity in the USA today. However..........

Doesn't that white child of a coal miner need to be taught a lesson? His/her ancestors were never slaves and therefore he/she has all the advantages, even compared to the black child of a neurosurgeon. Therefore, the child of the neurosurgeon should be given preferential treatment in relation to the coal miner's child, and that child's child, and on and on, until the inequities of the past stand corrected.