School Daze question.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by orighu

are you sure about that? i'm gonna echo what others have said - PLEASE do some research. HBCU's were founded because blacks were not allowed to attend the white universities - but i would bet there are African American families that have college degrees older than your fraternity.

Yeah but there isn't a substantial amount of blacks who received college degrees in the 1800s and early to mid 1900s--so no need to debate a point based on what are perceived as outliers to a generality. Shinerbock's post was an exaggeration but I understand what he was getting at.

The general point is that blacks were overwhelmingly shut out of most social institutions back then. There was a very small percentage of blacks matriculating at historically white colleges and universities back then and a larger percentage matriculating at whichever HBCUs were already founded.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

Now did someone actually just say AmeriKKKan institutions? Thats the kinda shit that probably makes IFC people view some in NPHC's badly.

(since this thread is already way off topic....)

I typed "AmeriKKKan institutions" and it fits the context of the discussion. Some GC posters hate it when I type "AmeriKKKan institutions" or "KKKountry" but they can just ignore my posts when I'm discussing the exclusionary tactics of AmeriKKKa.

Why would anyone view the NPHC badly because I, as a patriotic individual, type AmeriKKKan? I actually adopted that spelling many years ago from a white colleague of mine who used it when discussing antagonistic race relations in this great KKKountry. I guess those IFC members you typed about should view socially conscious whites badly too then.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by KLPDaisy

For what it's worth, the poster who said "AmeriKKKan institutions" turned out to be a perp and has been gone from GC for a while.

Maybe you're talking about another thread.

[shinerbock]

Yeah, my point was that I don't think it was the IFC fraternities denying membership to blacks in the late 1800's. Thats not to say they would have been welcome, but I don't think the IFC fraternities at the time even had the opportunity to reject their membership.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

Yeah, my point was that I don't think it was the IFC fraternities denying membership to blacks in the late 1800's. Thats not to say they would have been welcome, but I don't think the IFC fraternities at the time even had the opportunity to reject their membership.

It is called a self-fulfilling prophecy. You (meaning: the powerful whites who hoarded the opportunities) don't allow them into your institutions of higher learning in the first place so you don't have to worry about them trying to join your fraternities and other organizations once they get there. It didn't have to be the IFC fraternity men themselves but they were a product of their environment and cashed in on their privilege.

[shinerbock]

You're right about the point I was trying to make. However, I think your association of the IFC guys benefitting from the University's actions is like someone calling me racist because my family had a plantation.

[tunatartare]

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS

Maybe you're talking about another thread.

Maybe, I dunno. I just remember PHA Shriner used to say things like that. Didn't he leave after he made another sn and tried to say that he's an Iota?

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

However, I think your association of the IFC guys benefitting from the University's actions is like someone calling me racist because my family had a plantation.

There's no denying that people both intentionally and unintentionally benefit from privilege and opportunity/resource hoarding. It happened back then and it happens now. It's not about playing the blame game so no need to fight for those IFC members' causes.

I see the point behind your (perhaps incomplete) analogy and for the record I do not use the terms "racist" and "racism" loosely. If your family owned a plantation (as many families in the South did--even some black families) then they are economic opportunists who participated in the exploitation of cheap labor in the form of slavery. It wasn't until later that the economic base became about race and racist ideology. So, no, neither your family nor you would necessarily be racist JUST because of the plantation----but this doesn't mean that your family or you aren't racist, I would have to know more about your family's situation and ideological foundation to make such a statement.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by KLPDaisy

Maybe, I dunno. I just remember PHA Shriner used to say things like that. Didn't he leave after he made another sn and tried to say that he's an Iota?

That's who I thought you were talking about. I don't want to speak him into existence again so I won't comment any further.

[tunatartare]

lmao got it

[shinerbock]

True. However, the idea that "opportunity hoarding" is negative is a new one to me. I don't know what the alternative would be, perhaps opportunity redistribution, which I would clearly stand against.

[hmd1014]

shinerbock, why are you here if GC is so antithetical to your "fratty" worldview? It's rich, really, to hear you complaining about knee-jerk thinking and lack of tolerance for different opinions when, if a self-professed liberal decided to stir things up on "your turf," he or she would be met with invitations to drink bleach cocktails, among the milder epithets.

[shinerbock]

my knee jerk and intolerant reactions? Perhaps you should reread my posts, I'm generally quite civil. As for my "fratty" worldview, I'm not sure what you mean by that. My worldview is a conservative one, where people should create their own success, or inherit it without penalty if life grants them that benefit. I am proudly from the South, and think the stereotypical prejudices that exist here are in no greater amount than the ones that exist in other parts of the country, against the southern United States. I also believe our society should have more class, that we should not glorify rappers, athletes and actors who lack personal responsibility are set bad examples for our young people. I also believe society should encourage young people to dress/act in a way which will prepare them for the real world, and not just one at the factory or at McDonalds. Perhaps if we treat them as if they'll actually have a chance to work on Wall St., some of them might actually make it there. I believe society should not frown upon or shy away from its Christian heritage. We have had that heritage in place for quite some time, and now suddenly it deeply offends a small minority of people? Get over it. Some things are larger than yourself, and of those are the history and traditions of this country. I do not believe the government is our personal fallback, and that neither Bush nor Nagin nor Blanco caused the destruction in New Orleans, nor should we angrily demand they fix it. Likewise I think people should not depend on the government for their welfare, but rather that it is our responsibility as citizens to take care of our own, on our own terms. If that is a "fratty" worldview, so be it.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

True. However, the idea that "opportunity hoarding" is negative is a new one to me. I don't know what the alternative would be, perhaps opportunity redistribution, which I would clearly stand against.

It is new to you because you haven't read the abundance of literature on class, gender, and racial inequality.

You stand against opportunity redistribution because you fall under the Functionalist paradigm of inequality (the status quo exists simply because it creates balance--similar to the biological/inherent inferiority models posited by Herrnstein and Murray's The Bell Curve and human capital arguments that argue that inequality exists simply because some people have better skills and try harder than others) and you don't understand that discrimination is based on outcome regardless of intent.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

my knee jerk and intolerant reactions? Perhaps you should reread my posts, I'm generally quite civil. As for my "fratty" worldview, I'm not sure what you mean by that. My worldview is a conservative one, where people should create their own success, or inherit it without penalty if life grants them that benefit. I am proudly from the South, and think the stereotypical prejudices that exist here are in no greater amount than the ones that exist in other parts of the country, against the southern United States. I also believe our society should have more class, that we should not glorify rappers, athletes and actors who lack personal responsibility are set bad examples for our young people. I also believe society should encourage young people to dress/act in a way which will prepare them for the real world, and not just one at the factory or at McDonalds. Perhaps if we treat them as if they'll actually have a chance to work on Wall St., some of them might actually make it there. I believe society should not frown upon or shy away from its Christian heritage. We have had that heritage in place for quite some time, and now suddenly it deeply offends a small minority of people? Get over it. Some things are larger than yourself, and of those are the history and traditions of this country. I do not believe the government is our personal fallback, and that neither Bush nor Nagin nor Blanco caused the destruction in New Orleans, nor should we angrily demand they fix it. Likewise I think people should not depend on the government for their welfare, but rather that it is our responsibility as citizens to take care of our own, on our own terms. If that is a "fratty" worldview, so be it.

Some of your Conservative viewpoints are on target but all things in moderation. Being too Liberal or too Conservative perpetuates inequality and can skew reality.