Posts in "racism"

BenLevine16's picture
By Benjamin Levine at 10:04AM

Beating Racism with Individualism

The challenge for this generation is to keep our liberty. And the challenge is now upon us. - Peter Robinson

At Drake University I serve as a Peer Mentor/Academic Consultant.  Basically, my job is to act as a mentor for roughly 20 freshman (first-years, actually, because freshman is considered sexist and politically incorrect at Drake) in both their social and academic lives.  During one of our staff development sessions a board of professors discussed how to address the topic of diversity at Drake.  However, because diversity is a "buzz-word" that turns people off -- which I agree with somewhat -- they call it multicultural inclusion.  What the four professors asked us was this:  How can we beat prejudice at Drake and celebrate our multicultural environment at the same time?

image

Other PMACs chimed in and started to throw out their theories.  Don't use statistics about race, some argued, because it sounds very impersonal and callous.  Others said to talk about the diverse interests that students have on campus; the high number of student organizations shows our diversity yet does not go near the touchy issue of race.  But I was not fully satisfied with these answers.  Finally, the libertarian in me burst and I raised my hand.  "What if we simply treated every individual as if they were unique?"  The professors stared back blankly.  It seemed like an Earth shattering concept to them.  I continued by saying, "In a large group diversity is inherent because all individuals are different.  Even within our Coalition of Black Students there is a large amount of diversity.  So, I think the only way to truly beat racism, sexism, or any type of 'groupism' at Drake is to treat individuals as, well, individuals."


Read more here
Robert Bentley's picture
By Robert Bentley at 1:28PM

GOP Complicating Debt Debate because Obama Is Black?

Well according to the Congresswoman from Texas, Shelia Jackson Lee, the Republican Party is making the debt debate complicated for the simple reason of race.

Really?  They are complicating the debate because Barack Obama is black? It wouldn't have anything to do with the fact that we owe more than $46,000 in debt per citizen?

Now, I know there is still racism in this country, and I don't wish to minimize the gravity of that matter.  However, the majority of Americans want what is best for their country, and the farthest issue from their minds in the debt ceiling debate is the color of the president's skin.

Unfortunately, there are still people who hold power in this country who use racism as an excuse for doing wrong.  Yes, they are not the only reason for the debt being so high, but they are a major cause of our problems.  Here is a bold solution:  Stop blaming every thing on race and start responsibly doing your job! Stop screwing the American people for every dime they have left in their pockets.

Bonnie Kristian's picture
By Bonnie Kristian at 11:54AM

The War on Drugs is the new Slavery

A new book from an Ohio State law professor reports that there are now more black American men in prison, jail, on probation, or on parole than were enslaved in 1850.  This is largely due, the author has found, to the impact of the War on Drugs, which is "'waged almost exclusively in poor communities of color,' she said, even though studies have shown that whites use and sell illegal drugs at rates equal to or above blacks."  Here's an interview with the author:

Read more here.  Hat tip to Matt Cockerill.

Matt Cockerill's picture
By Matt Cockerill at 12:01PM

Zombie Raaaaacism vs Real Racism

Tom DiLorenzo's ultra-PC university (but I repeat myself) is considering disciplining him for ties to a "hate group." Must leftish organizations always comport themselves like zombies?

Incidentally, if the hate-sniffers of hyper-liberal academia and the left-wing Southern Poverty Law Center truly cared about ending racism (rather than employing the term as an epithet against dissidents who deviate from the Oprahized, Dr. Phil-approved PC line), they would turn their crosshairs on real racism: I.E. the War on Drugs, The Wars overseas, and The Federal Reserve.

The more uplifting elements of the left's platform are hobbled by their attachment to the state; they love it more than they hate racism (or love peace).

Shaun Bowen's picture
By Shaun Bowen at 3:08PM
Rachel Kania's picture
By Rachel Kania at 4:39PM

Are Tea Partiers Racist?

This video is from the Tax Day Tea Party rally back in April. I just found it at BreaktheMatrix.com and it had me thinking of an earlier post by Wes Messamore.

Wes Messamore's picture
By Wesley Messamore at 5:05PM
Cody London's picture
By Cody London at 11:44PM

Oxymorons

I know I should not even concern myself with such trifles as political baiting...but I will anyway. 

After viewing many comments made concerning the firestorm around Rand Paul's remarks about the Civil Rights Act, I can not help but to take a few steps back and rationalize the entire scope of the Red Herring presented by the Louisville paper and furthered by Rachel Maddow

Unfortunately it is not enough that these talking heads are nowhere close to completely understanding the philosophical rationale behind Rand's comments; they also enter the discussion with their minds already made up with this equation:

Libertarian+objection to portion of Civil Rights Bill= Racist

"Libertarian? Well you are probably racist."  Huh?


Read more here
Matt Cockerill's picture
By Matt Cockerill at 4:15PM

The many lessons of the Rand Paul "controversy."

Jacob Hornberger has written a great response to the liberal attacks on Rand Paul’s politically incorrect statements about Article II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which bars private businesses from discriminating on the basis of race.

Writes Hornberger,

Suppose a certain white homeowner in a community publicly announces that he is holding a weekly TGIF cocktail party at his home every Friday night. He publicly invites everyone who lives within a one-mile radius of his home to his parties, but with a big exception. He says: Blacks and Jews are not invited and will not be permitted into his home.

How would libertarians respond? We would say that that man has every right in the world to take that position. We might criticize him, we might condemn him, we might ignore him, we might boycott his parties. But we would defend his right to discriminate against anyone he wants, as a matter of principle. After all, we would argue, it’s his home — his private property. To paraphrase Voltaire, we might not agree with how he uses his property, but we would defend his right to use it any way he wants. That’s what private ownership and a free society are all about.


Read more here
Elliot Engstrom's picture
By Elliot Engstrom at 5:55AM

A Great Critique of Arizona Immigration Law

It did my heart good to see Linda Chavez's recent comments at the National Review critiquing the recent Arizona immigration law.  As a staunch localist, my disdain for this law does not necessarily mean that I think federal action should be taken to dismantle it.  However, I still think that it is the duty of society to condemn the recent actions of the Arizona state government, and to ensure that other states do not make similar mistakes.

Chavez contends that, contrary to the stereotypical compassionate left vs heartless right debate being put in the spotlight, conservatives and advocates of the free market should be the harshest critics of the recent Arizona law.  She writes:

...the whole defense of racial preferences in college admissions and employment rests on the notion that race is simply one of many factors taken into account. But as the Center for Equal Opportunity’s studies on racial preferences in college admissions have definitively shown, whenever race is taken into account — even as one of many factors — it always becomes the deciding factor. And it will here as well. We conservatives can’t have it both ways: either we’re for race-neutral justice or we’re not. We can’t be against using race when it helps minorities but for it when it harms them — at least not without legitimate criticism as to our motives.


Read more here