Dialogue in the Public Square
Throughout the Old Testament Israelites prophets performed symbolic acts to shed light on the problems of their wicked society. It would appear that Americans have become such a hard hearted lot that extreme acts are required to get our attention as well. Charlie Rangel has proposed military draft legislation that neither he nor his own party supports and liberal bloggers argue that he merely wants to "start a conversation". Hmmm. I wonder how they will view the discourse demanding act that has gained attention at Boston University. Following the example set two years ago at Roger Williams University, the college Republicans have initiated a caucasion scholarship to spark public debate over the failure of racial profiling with respect to college admissions and financial aid.
According the the ABC report, the application itself makes the point of the scholarship apparent.
"We believe that racial preferences in all their forms are perhaps the worst form of bigotry confronting America today."
According to Mroszczyk, his group is offering the scholarship to point out "how ridiculous it is to have any sort of racially based scholarship."
No doubt this act will be seen as racist but as a graduate of a historically and predominantly black college, I can assure you that the scholarship in question is hardly unusual. My alma mater offered minority scholarships to white students regularly. White students were actively recruited. Every semester I made the Chancellor's list and every semester I was offered a full ride because I wasn't African-American. I never took the money. I found other scholarships and grants to pay for the part of my education that I couldn't cover myself. That's because, like the kids at BU, I believe that I shouldn't be rewarded for the color of my skin but for the quality of my work.
But, I digress. The really important questions surrounding thie issue will probably be neither asked or answered. Instead charges of racism will be leveled. But just ask yourself, for curiosity's sake, if nothing else... (1) Does it really take this kind of gimmick to draw attention to substantive issues? (2) Will Charlie Rangel's supporters consider this whites-only scholarship a public ice-breaker or an insult? and (3) Are racial quotas a form of bigotry that you are comfortable living with?
Comment(s) »
» Leave a comment
- Your E-mail address is never displayed. If you enter it, it will only be visible to the blog author
- Since there already are comments to this post, your eventual comment might trigger a notification e-mail to the persons that commented before you.
- The line and paragraph breaks automatically
2) Most likely roll their eyes at a Republican stunt that, once again, completely misses the point.
Let me put it in terms a Republican might understand. If a company has a product that is already well-established within a certain demographic, for that company to grow market share, a good tactic is to market towards other new demographics. This might mean McDonald's taking out Spanish ads on Univision, Oldsmobile trying to look hip and cool to the skateboarding crowd, or Boston University placing ads in "Ebony" or "Jet." In this paradigm, scholarships are another marketing device- giving away free samples, if you will. Your own example speaks volumes. A "historically and traditionally black" institution may very well seek to expand to draw in more white attendees. Is it morally wrong of a company to try and attract more business?
3) Quotas are a different beast from incentives. Admissions are distinct from scholarships. Mandates are distinct from encouragement. But... even making that distinction, I am okay with looking at guidelines and benchmarks, because while the system ought to be color-blind, reality is that some people aren't. Hard and fast rules don't fix that problem any more than pretending it doesn't exist. Any good process, though, ought to have checks upon its performance, benchmarks to compare against.
Comment by Michael— 2006/11/27 @ 08:57 AM — (Reply)
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2006/12/01 @ 08:34 PM — (Reply)