Quote:
Originally Posted by Senusret I
First of all, I wish that white people wouldn't accuse black people of "playing the race card" just because race is mentioned. It is possible to have a conversation involving race without it being a race war.
Secondly, the only person I have ever heard saying A Phi Que is a separate organization IS Jesse Bridges. He is no more the leader of the Vikings than I am the leader of the Anti-Viking Brigade.
And as a matter of fact, the differences between the fraternal experiences of black people in APO and those who are not black very much do relate to DrPhil's point. Every time there is a meeting of the national alumni relations committee, there seems to be a stark divide between the black members of the committee and everyone else. I can't help but think, after I peel away the remaining layers, that race could be an issue. In fact, upon the inspection of the Program Director's reports about alumni relations, the level of cultural incompetence as it pertains to the issue of Vikings/A Phi Que is astonishing to the point of comedy.
That doesn't make the PD a racist, but I can definitely play "the race card" to uncover the level of ignorance and/or prejudice among national-level board members, which in-turn has made me think that yes, "some white folks don't want Black folks to get a substantive hold on historically (and/or predominantly) white organizations."
|
There are some white folks who feel uncomfortable when you don't call race something else and hide it in a unicorn's anal cavity. As naraht outlined, the racial make-up of the APO/A-Phi-Q distinction is no coincidence.
The fact of the matter is that I sometimes hold a negative opinion of how Black folks sometimes transform these organizations. We've had threads on that. There should be a compromise between the white folks who don't want Black folks to have a substantive hold; and the Black folks who transform these organizations into something almost unrecognizable (as far as some are concerned).
/lane swerve over