Kilmer17 Posted February 19, 2003 Share Posted February 19, 2003 http://www.dailybruin.ucla.edu/news/articles.asp?ID=22913 An affirmative action bake sale organized by the Bruin Republicans last week has provoked impassioned responses from a top California Democrat and political student groups on campus. The sale, held on Bruin Walk on Feb. 3, offered cookies at different prices depending on the customer's race and gender. Black, Latina and American Indian females were charged 25 cents for cookies that cost males of minority descent 50 cents. White females were charged $1, and white males and all Asian Americans were charged $2. Students selling the cookies were assigned name tags portraying them as "Uncle Tom," "The White Oppressor" and "Self-Hating Hispanic Race Traitor." Chairman of the California Democratic Party Art Torres voiced his disapproval in a Monday press release. "I am deeply saddened and disheartened at the activities of the Bruin Republicans," he said. Torres, a former California state senator, believes UCLA Republicans have been "emboldened" by the recent race-sensitive remarks by various Republican leaders, specifically citing Trent Lott's, R-Miss., comments and Congressman Howard Coble's, R-N.C., praise of internment camps for Japanese Americans during World War II. "It is a shame that Republicans at UCLA have chosen to mimic the extreme views of their Republican leaders," Torres said. Andrew Jones, president of the Bruin Republicans and a former Daily Bruin Viewpoint columnist, resents the chairman's association of his student group with national Republican controversies. "This is just Torres being a bully. He doesn't know us. We have never stood behind Trent Lott," Jones said. The intent of the sale, Jones said, was to "bring the issue (of affirmative action) down to everyday terms. We wanted to show how affirmative action is racial division, not racial reconciliation." As for the name tags of the vendors, Jones said many people would look at a black or Latino student taking part in a Bruin Republicans anti-affirmative action sale and either think to themselves or say out loud that the student is a traitor to his race. Therefore, the Bruin Republicans decided to "turn it on its head" and use the names themselves, before passers-by had a chance. Jones asserted his objective was to incite discourse on the issue, not to provoke anger. "We want people to have an opinion, one way or another," he added. Though the Bruin Democrats did not protest the event or respond to it publicly, president Kristina Meshelski, a former Daily Bruin contributor, felt the sale served to confuse students. "They're focusing only on how it can hurt. A diverse student body is something we should strive for, and affirmative action can help," she said. Kevin Acebo, a press aide for Torres, called the bake sale a clear example of "race-bating." Juan Carlos-Orellana, president of the Democratic Law Students Association, responded to the event with similar indignation, referring to the bake sale as an "insulting trivialization of the serious issue of race and gender equality." Orellana sees the effort by the Bruin Republicans as detrimental to the discussion of affirmative action. "By reducing the complexity of this issue into dollars and cents and cookies they are working to stop discourse," he said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted February 19, 2003 Share Posted February 19, 2003 Good article... I think they brought up an interesting way to explain their view to the average person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted February 19, 2003 Share Posted February 19, 2003 This is outstanding! :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted February 19, 2003 Share Posted February 19, 2003 Maybe someone can explain how this bake sale relates to affirmative action. Does affirmative action mean that minorities pay less than whites do for something? Which essentially the point that this bake sale was giving off to the average non-politically charged student. I think the answer is no - thats not what affirmative action means. But I dont know the subject that well. Perhaps I am in complete error? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted February 19, 2003 Share Posted February 19, 2003 To carry this on a bit - perhaps a more accurate display against affirmative action would have been if the UCLA GOPers would have held a bake sale and only sold to white males for the first hour. Then they could have sold to all people who came, with a growing percentage of their sales being reserved to minorities as time progressed. Rejecting white people, mainly males, in the later stages of their bake sale would have been a more accurate portrayal of affirmative action, imho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted February 19, 2003 Share Posted February 19, 2003 Originally posted by The Evil Genius Maybe someone can explain how this bake sale relates to affirmative action. Does affirmative action mean that minorities pay less than whites do for something? Which essentially the point that this bake sale was giving off to the average non-politically charged student. I think the answer is no - thats not what affirmative action means. But I dont know the subject that well. Perhaps I am in complete error? I will make a lame attempt to explain. The point they are trying to make is that a black person "pays less for cookies" ie: gets a job with less qualifications, than a white or asian person who "pays more for the same cookies", ie: is held to a higher standard. Anyone, please correct me if I'm wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted February 19, 2003 Share Posted February 19, 2003 TEG- your anger and indignation at the "affront" are the point. Funny how the "years of oppression" and "need for diversity" arguments, both of which could theoretically justify this bake sale, seem not to blunt the insult, eh? And isn't that the point? Isn't affirmative action, above all else, an insult to the very people it's meant to assist? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted February 19, 2003 Share Posted February 19, 2003 Originally posted by redman TEG- your anger and indignation at the "affront" are the point. Funny how the "years of oppression" and "need for diversity" arguments, both of which could theoretically justify this bake sale, seem not to blunt the insult, eh? And isn't that the point? Isn't affirmative action, above all else, an insult to the very people it's meant to assist? My anger and indignation? :laugh: Did you pull that out of you *** or something? Kind of like you quote yesterday where you thought I said the war was only about oil. What I said was this was a poor attempt to bring forth discussion on a major issue that needs much discussion (and much change). If anyone is angry here Redman, its you buddy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted February 19, 2003 Share Posted February 19, 2003 Originally posted by codeorama I will make a lame attempt to explain. The point they are trying to make is that a black person "pays less for cookies" ie: gets a job with less qualifications, than a white or asian person who "pays more for the same cookies", ie: is held to a higher standard. Anyone, please correct me if I'm wrong. Thank you code - dumbing it down for me made sense. I am kinda slow sometimes. I still think my version of the bake sale (i.e. selling more to minorities at the end and rejectibng whites, mostly white males with greater frequency) makes more sense. But what do I know - obviously nothing since I am angry and indignant. :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted February 19, 2003 Share Posted February 19, 2003 They're focusing only on how it can hurt. A diverse student body is something we should strive for, and affirmative action can help," she said. the whole point, by definition, is that someone is hurt to the benefit of someone else. at a deeper level....once one digs through the mush of leftist thinking on this stuff........is the conflict of values at play..........what criteria are acceptable for deciding who the winners and losers are? the point the students make is that affirmative action reinforces the very racial notions the policy is intended to overcome......in fact, in another venue, it's application can be extremely racist: look at nfl football. when cochran et al are talking equal opportunity for minorities...they don't really mean minorities....they mean african americans..... then, of course, there is the amusing and very true idea that minorities who don't support these accepted norms for behavior and beliefs as set by the left are lambasted as racial Uncle Toms..... nice take on it Code... either way.....I'm tired of all these issues!!!!!! when does serious football start again?!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted February 19, 2003 Share Posted February 19, 2003 Originally posted by The Evil Genius My anger and indignation? :laugh: Did you pull that out of you *** or something? Kind of like you quote yesterday where you thought I said the war was only about oil. What I said was this was a poor attempt to bring forth discussion on a major issue that needs much discussion (and much change). If anyone is angry here Redman, its you buddy. Sorry. I projected quotes from Torres in the article onto you. Change him to be the object of my comments, and I'll otherwise stand by them. As far as rational discourse goes, the left has a problem with name calling against the right, which is what this little exercise also points out. Funny how the opponents of this bake sale had all their thunder stolen from them when the students ridiculed this very aspect of the left by going ahead and calling themselves names. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BG Posted February 19, 2003 Share Posted February 19, 2003 I see and I don't see. It would make more sense as far as making a point towards sex discrimination in althletics. You pay more for the big cookie then you would for the smaller cookie that has no chocolate chips---uhh, I mean like a small plain cookie. There fore you would make bigger cookies and sell more of them......ok I'll stop with that one It seems they were trying to simplify the issue by breaking it down to a financial prespective which I don't feel is valid. I don't agree with them but I'm glad to see that they are doing something somewhat constructive whereas most situatoins like this can prove to be counter-productive. I mean they will make sense but serve no purpose except to inflame fear and ignorance ie: PEACE RALLIES RIGHT NOW!!!!!!!!!! dumbasses Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavyDave Posted February 19, 2003 Share Posted February 19, 2003 I like it. A great mix of humor and the truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckydevil Posted February 19, 2003 Share Posted February 19, 2003 I love it, I laughed out loud when I read it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted February 19, 2003 Share Posted February 19, 2003 Originally posted by fansince62 either way.....I'm tired of all these issues!!!!!! when does serious football start again?!!! Right on!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.