High School Girl proposes Caucasian Club

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by Deattribution

This is the kind of mentality that keeps this an issue, instead of learning to coexist people only want to 'be with their kind' and they have a way to do it. Race oriented clubs and schools will keep this fire going forever.

This isn't really news, as it's not the first time it's been brought up - but as long as these clubs are going to be around then caucasians shouldn't be excluded anyway.

When everyone is actually held accountable for their actions regardless of their skin color then we'll be getting somewhere, til then this is just more of the same.

exactly.

I like that this girl is bringing this up and our society is hearing about it. The most embarrasing part of our country is the history of judgement we have given towards people who have different tans. As pathetic as a caucasian group sounds it sounds just as bad as any other racial group. I hope we can all learn how our history has created such a unhealthy need to be proud of our tan and we can abolish our old habits and grow as modern Americans.

[Joe Canadian]

Schools shouldn't allow groups\societies based on race.

[LionsFan10]

Originally Posted by russiaboss

I like that this girl is bringing this up and our society is hearing about it. The most embarrasing part of our country is the history of judgement we have given towards people who have different tans. As pathetic as a caucasian group sounds it sounds just as bad as any other racial group. I hope we can all learn how our history has created such a unhealthy need to be proud of our tan and we can abolish our old habits and grow as modern Americans.

Ah what do you know, you're just a crazy Russian

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by Butter_of_69

They already have a Caucasian club... it's called "life".

Or "Laguna Beach"

[-Mojo Jojo-]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

So what? let them. They will lose. It is time people stand up and have some guts. I am sick and tired of all the people living in fear of the PC crowd. The hell with them.

I think it's funny you consider yourself to be living in fear...

[Raiders Army]

Originally Posted by -Mojo Jojo-

I think it's funny you consider yourself to be living in fear...

The terrorists will win if this club exists!

[TheOhioStateUniversity]

Racial clubs exist, in the example of say an African American Student Association, because we have issues as a race that are not exactly going to get much attention or discussion in other places. This is a means for us to organize and mobilize then take it to other sectors for action. I have never heard of a black organization where whites are prohibited from joining or attending meetings. I have heard white guys joining black fraternities, although rare. There is nothing wrong with these as long as they do not perpetuate the prejudice or racism they hope to combat. Also you "reverse racism" guys may have a point in some cases but don't give me the white man is being oppressed bullshit in the case of racial or ethnic clubs or organizations.

[fantastic flying froggies]

[IrishHand]

Originally Posted by TheOhioStateUniversity

Racial clubs exist, in the example of say an African American Student Association, because we have issues as a race that are not exactly going to get much attention or discussion in other places. ... There is nothing wrong with these as long as they do not perpetuate the prejudice or racism they hope to combat.

promoting racial issues = perpetuating prejudice/racism

[TheOhioStateUniversity]

ignoring racial issues = unrealistic in this society

[IrishHand]

focusing on racial issues = good way to ensure that prejudice/racism continue

You're not going to "cure" people of either - all you can do is set up a fair framework and trust that in the long haul it will work out. Basically - get rid of the systematic/administrative racism and trust that the at-home variety will die out - but bringing those issues/differences to the fore is a great way to promote the home-bred racism.

[TheOhioStateUniversity]

So yeah we should just ignore it and hope it goes away......Trust the system, hmmm how do you think the "fair framework" was advocated and set up...? Discussion and action is necessary. You make no sense and your flowers and daisies perception of the world is ridiculous, IMO.

[IrishHand]

Discussion and action is necessary against institutional racism, which was clearly a major problem earlier last century. I would argue that it is no longer - that the vast majority of those institutional issues have been legislated (or jurisprudenced - not a real word, I know) out of existence in the US.

Now, the bulk of what you're dealing with is individual racism, which you're not going to stop with racially-formed and -motivated subgroups - quite the opposite.

[TheOhioStateUniversity]

Not true at ALL. For instance, institutionally the racism is much more subtle and not as overt as in the past. In Ohio school funding is largely tied into property value and taxes. When you take into account minorities are disproportionately represented in lower income areas, it would be hard to ignore the racial implications of a system where educational quality is tied into socio economic status. Even beyond institutional racism there are issues that we as a people need to discuss and strategize against to close the large statistical gap in many areas between the majority (dominating class) and the minorities. You just cant ignore these things this is not Sesame Street even today though much progress has been made there is still a long way to go.

[Solecismic]

While that's a good point, what bothers me is solutions based on skin color rather than economic status.

One side wants to ignore the problem, and that's only going to make it worse. But making poverty a "black" issue only delays the moment until we can look at issues without worrying about trivial details like skin color.

It only distracts us with assinine compromise solutions like affirmative action, which only helps black people who don't need help. Affirmative action has to be the best liberal scam ever perpetuated. Let's make people think we're doing something about real inequality without costing us a penny.

I worry about statements like "institutional racism." That's a buzz word that demeans everyone. Everyone has to work together to solve this problem. Blaming everything on this vague racism bogeyman only worsens the problem by creating artifical barriers and excuses.

[TheOhioStateUniversity]

I understand poverty is not a black issue because as far as sheer numbers there are more whites in poverty than blacks but when you look at the fact that almost 25% of blacks are in poverty this becomes an issue we as black people would need to focus on. As far as affirmative action, while i commend its goals it is next to impossible to ever implement in a fair way. Also, lets not get confused white women and women in general have also benefited tremendously from that system.

[Young Drachma]

This isn't the first time this has happened. Not news, really. I think they find a kid every few years to do this, just so they can bring the debate back into vogue and get all the folks opposed to affirmative action and want to forget anything and everything that's ever happened in America because we're "all equal now" out in public to yell, scream and wave their arms around in a tizzy.

The school will likely flub this up, people will raise hell and in the end, nothing will change one way or another. I'd say, let the girl have the club, ignore the hoopla and like most student groups, it'd die within a year or so.

[WVUFAN]

Originally Posted by fantastic flying froggies

Agreed.

[Young Drachma]

Who do you blame? The choosers or the people getting chosen? It's human nature to expect that people are going to use a system 9 times out of ten to get ahead in any way they can.

Read the NY Times story today about J.C. Watts and how he's used his lobbying firm as a way to enrich himself and his business partners.

Corruption, power and such things don't have a race or a colour.

But to say that affirmative action fails to help the people who its designed to help is the fault of those folks, seems wrong to me.

Worse yet, to try to create a program to target the poor would be noble in its intent and yet, you'd just get a system where whites would disproportionately benefit. People who are doing the choosing would look, see someone who reminds them of themselves more often than not and feel like they deserve "a chance."

And I'd agree.

But because of all the (false) perceptions about how "easy" certain groups have it and which ones have the deck "stacked" against them, the same problems that exist in the status quo won't go anyway once you shift such programs from race/ethnicity based to based on economics.

Not to mention all the folks that will try to lie, cheat and steal to make themselves look worse, to get perceived benefits.

Schools fail kids miserably, but the most deplorable part of all of this, is our collective lack of understanding of each other. We are far more interested in relating things to our own experiences ("If I can do it, anyone can..") rather than trying to look at things from the other side.

At the same time, creating a culture that says "some people will never do well," is always going to adversely affect those on the bottom rung of society. And the alternative -- some massive form of socialism -- just isn't compatible with our America and I'm not sure it ever will be. Nor do I think it ought to.

But once we recognize that there are people in this society who we ignore simply because we don't really care about their experiences, scrutinize them in ways we don't scrutinize ourselves -- or our family members or friends -- and make judgments on their life choices as we have lived above the board in every form, shape or fashion.

Once we understand that, it'll be a lot easier to look at our policies and realize that while one way might be wrong-headed and unfair; the only way to fix the lingering issues and to eradicate them is to make a conscious effort to unite the country in every form and fashion.

But that's simply not going to happen anytime soon. But I agree that by putting blanket terms on it, we're not doing anyone any favours. I'm far more sick these days of black leaders exploiting other black folks under the guise of helping, than anything that the society has done. But that's not a story that anyone is really interested in covering.

And if they are, they write biased books and go about it the wrong way completely. Intellectual discourse and public discourse have seemingly checked out, never to return again.

[AlexB]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

So what? let them. They will lose. It is time people stand up and have some guts. I am sick and tired of all the people living in fear of the PC crowd. The hell with them.

If you told the PC brigade you were living in fear them, would they stop being PC because they are the PC brigade and they have to make sure nobody feels threatened?

But if they do this, they would be being PC, and this is what is making you live in fear, so in being PC and stopping being PC, would this actually make you more afraid?

So maybe they ought to abandon their PC principles, because it would make you more afraid, and the only way to do this would be to carry on being PC to stop you becoming more afraid...

[clintl]

I think Peggy McIntosh nailed the disconnect between white attitudes on race relations in America and reality in this article:

http://seamonkey.ed.asu.edu/~mcisaac...Unpacking.html

I don't really see anything wrong with someone wanting to start a club celebrating the history and culture of those of us who descended from Europeans, but I understand completely why this touches such a nerve with some people. First of all, it's redundant - the school curriculum and everyday life is overwhelmingly dominated by the contributions of white people. For a white person to complain of being culturally deprived is whining of the most obnoxious order. Furthermore, these kinds of clubs and organizations can quite easily morph into white supremacist groups. They would certainly be a magnet for white supremacists if you're not careful.

[Grammaticus]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

What is White Culture though? Nascar, guns, and booze?

Okay, I gotta ask this now. What is YOUR answer to "what is black culture"?

[famatu]

Originally Posted by TheOhioStateUniversity

Racial clubs exist, in the example of say an African American Student Association, because we have issues as a race that are not exactly going to get much attention or discussion in other places. This is a means for us to organize and mobilize then take it to other sectors for action. I have never heard of a black organization where whites are prohibited from joining or attending meetings. I have heard white guys joining black fraternities, although rare. There is nothing wrong with these as long as they do not perpetuate the prejudice or racism they hope to combat. Also you "reverse racism" guys may have a point in some cases but don't give me the white man is being oppressed bullshit in the case of racial or ethnic clubs or organizations.

The University of Michigan gives more admission points to a prospective student who has brown skin than they give to a prospective student who gets a perfect score on the SAT. I think that is repressing the white man if he happens to be the guy who doesn't get in because he is not black and he scored a 1500 on the SAT and the black guy scored an 950.

[Klinglerware]

Originally Posted by famatu

The University of Michigan gives more admission points to a prospective student who has brown skin than they give to a prospective student who gets a perfect score on the SAT. I think that is repressing the white man if he happens to be the guy who doesn't get in because he is not black and he scored a 1500 on the SAT and the black guy scored an 950.

Umm... did you actually follow the case? Michigan hasn't used that point scoring system in years. And besides, if you actually look at the chart, the primary admissions determinant is GPA.

http://www.umich.edu/~mrev/archives/...mmer/chart.htm

[Klinglerware]

Also, the reality is that removing admissions preferences will not increase the percentage of white students on campus. In fact, there is evidence that if you remove preferences, the percentage of white students may actually go down in many cases (especially, if the elimination of legacy and athletic preferences are also factored in).

See http://opr.princeton.edu/faculty/Tje...adeSSQPtII.pdf, for a very interesting study on this subject.

The admissions profile of UC Berkeley seems to support this. Before race-based state university admissions were discontinued in California in 1996, Berkeley's student makeup looked like this (admitted prior to the enactment of prop 209):

White 31.1%
Asian 40.9%
Black 5.8%
Hispanic 13.7%
Other 8.4%

By 2004, with preferences largely eliminated from Berkeley's admissions, the student makeup looked like this:

White 30.7%
Asian 42.7%
Black 4.1%
Hispanic 10.8%
Other 11.7%

So, it seems that, while the elimination of affirmative action would certainly hurt Black and Latino applicants, the benefit would largely be seen by Asian-American applicants, while White applicants are unlikely to see much gain (and may even lose, as well).

An interesting corollary to this is that white males actually are getting admissions preferences now at many small private liberal arts colleges. The admissions pool has been skewing heavily female in recent years, and many of these schools are desperate for male applicants. In an ironic twist, a few of these schools are actually starting football programs, in hopes of attracting more males (which seems to be working).

[Ragone]

If there was a naac trying to be formed today(National association for the advancement of caucasians)

can you imagine the kinda uproar from groups like the naacp?

What it comes down to is.. any group that seperates itself from others based on race/creed/sex is biased/racist to its own racial needs.

[ISiddiqui]

Yet, on a certain level, I think you must admit that when the NAACP was formed, there was a great need for an organization biased to the racial needs of black people. Some may say there is still a need (albeit not nearly as great) today for such an organization for certain cases.

[Ragone]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Yet, on a certain level, I think you must admit that when the NAACP was formed, there was a great need for an organization biased to the racial needs of black people. Some may say there is still a need (albeit not nearly as great) today for such an organization for certain cases.

Most certainly i can get on board with that. However if that group was to try and form fresh today.. you can see how the reaction to that would be similar to the reaction to the "Caucasian club"

[Raiders Army]

Originally Posted by famatu

The University of Michigan gives more admission points to a prospective student who has brown skin than they give to a prospective student who gets a perfect score on the SAT. I think that is repressing the white man if he happens to be the guy who doesn't get in because he is not black and he scored a 1500 on the SAT and the black guy scored an 950.

How fast can that perfect SAT guy run the 40?

[Klinglerware]

Originally Posted by Raiders Army

How fast can that perfect SAT guy run the 40?

Yep, when that girl sued the University of Michigan, one of the perceived weaknesses of her case was that about 2000 or so white applicants with worse academic credentials than her were accepted by the University the year she applied. One of those 2000 was none other than Tom Brady.

Of course, Brady eventually became an academic all-big 10 winner...

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by Jari Rantanen's Shorts

If you told the PC brigade you were living in fear them, would they stop being PC because they are the PC brigade and they have to make sure nobody feels threatened?

But if they do this, they would be being PC, and this is what is making you live in fear, so in being PC and stopping being PC, would this actually make you more afraid?

So maybe they ought to abandon their PC principles, because it would make you more afraid, and the only way to do this would be to carry on being PC to stop you becoming more afraid...

When I speak of being afraid of the PC crowd, I guess I am really saying people are scared to death of lawyers.

[Subby]

TO DEATH

[-Mojo Jojo-]

Originally Posted by Ragone

If there was a naac trying to be formed today(National association for the advancement of caucasians)

can you imagine the kinda uproar from groups like the naacp?

When I was a kid I remember asking my mom once why there's a Mother's Day and not a Kid's Day. She said, "But sweetie, every day is Kid's Day!"

There is a NAAC. They call it Congress.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Klinglerware

Also, the reality is that removing admissions preferences will not increase the percentage of white students on campus. In fact, there is evidence that if you remove preferences, the percentage of white students may actually go down in many cases (especially, if the elimination of legacy and athletic preferences are also factored in).

See http://opr.princeton.edu/faculty/Tje...adeSSQPtII.pdf, for a very interesting study on this subject.

The admissions profile of UC Berkeley seems to support this. Before race-based state university admissions were discontinued in California in 1996, Berkeley's student makeup looked like this (admitted prior to the enactment of prop 209):

White 31.1%
Asian 40.9%
Black 5.8%
Hispanic 13.7%
Other 8.4%

By 2004, with preferences largely eliminated from Berkeley's admissions, the student makeup looked like this:

White 30.7%
Asian 42.7%
Black 4.1%
Hispanic 10.8%
Other 11.7%

So, it seems that, while the elimination of affirmative action would certainly hurt Black and Latino applicants, the benefit would largely be seen by Asian-American applicants, while White applicants are unlikely to see much gain (and may even lose, as well).

An interesting corollary to this is that white males actually are getting admissions preferences now at many small private liberal arts colleges. The admissions pool has been skewing heavily female in recent years, and many of these schools are desperate for male applicants. In an ironic twist, a few of these schools are actually starting football programs, in hopes of attracting more males (which seems to be working).

I've gotta point out that you're making huge sweeping claims based on percentage moves of less than 2% out of 100. Frankly, those numbers look about the same with the only "major" statistical move being Hispanics adding quite a bit but I'm guessing the makeup of California has a lot more to do with that.

SI

[Bubba Wheels]

The irony in all this is that with California's rapidly changing demographics, caucasians will be the minority in the forseeable future. And that being the case, all the rationalizations being thrown up by those advocating every kind of group but caucasian ones become hypocritical based on an obsolesent model.

But, of course, then the new rationalizations will start...whites may be minority, but hold all the institutional power; then when that changes...you get the picture. Far better to just scrap all race-based organizations now.

[Bubba Wheels]

Originally Posted by clintl

I think Peggy McIntosh nailed the disconnect between white attitudes on race relations in America and reality in this article:

http://seamonkey.ed.asu.edu/~mcisaac...Unpacking.html

I don't really see anything wrong with someone wanting to start a club celebrating the history and culture of those of us who descended from Europeans, but I understand completely why this touches such a nerve with some people. First of all, it's redundant - the school curriculum and everyday life is overwhelmingly dominated by the contributions of white people. For a white person to complain of being culturally deprived is whining of the most obnoxious order. Furthermore, these kinds of clubs and organizations can quite easily morph into white supremacist groups. They would certainly be a magnet for white supremacists if you're not careful.

Which begs the question, aren't race-based organizations existing now a magnet for supremacist groups? Isn't La Raza hispanic for 'the race?' How much more racial can you get? And exclusionary to those of another race?

[Klinglerware]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

I've gotta point out that you're making huge sweeping claims based on percentage moves of less than 2% out of 100. Frankly, those numbers look about the same with the only "major" statistical move being Hispanics adding quite a bit but I'm guessing the makeup of California has a lot more to do with that.

SI

The big claim I'm making here is that white applicants aren't really affected whether there is an affirmantive action policy or not. As you state, the stats show little movement, and that does support my statement about how little these policies affect white applicants.

My post was directed at those who believe that affirmative action screws white applicants excessively--the stats just don't bear it out...

[sterlingice]

Well, but the other important point that can be taken from it is that it really doesn't affect any other group either. That said, we're probably also talking small sample size (comparing 2 classes 10 years apart from 1 school)

SI

[Klinglerware]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Well, but the other important point that can be taken from it is that it really doesn't affect any other group either. That said, we're probably also talking small sample size (comparing 2 classes 10 years apart from 1 school)

SI

Fair enough, though I do think that UC Berkeley did try to re-jigger their admissions (de-emphasize test scores, emphasize class rank, etc) a little to minimize the impact. I see that might also muddy the comparison as well.

In any case, check out the pdf file I linked, it is a pretty interesting study which offers a cleaner statistical read on the issue...

[clintl]

Originally Posted by Bubba Wheels

Which begs the question, aren't race-based organizations existing now a magnet for supremacist groups? Isn't La Raza hispanic for 'the race?' How much more racial can you get? And exclusionary to those of another race?

My guess is that you didn't bother to read the article I linked to. From your post right above that one, I think it's also a pretty good guess that you don't know anything at all about California culture, nor about the dynamics of California state politics. Our last two assembly speakers, for example, have been Hispanic. One of them is now the mayor of Los Angeles, and is a probable contender for governor in 2010. The longest-serving assembly speaker in state history was black. California is adjusting just fine to not having a majority race.

[Bubba Wheels]

Originally Posted by clintl

My guess is that you didn't bother to read the article I linked to. From your post right above that one, I think it's also a pretty good guess that you don't know anything at all about California culture, nor about the dynamics of California state politics. Our last two assembly speakers, for example, have been Hispanic. One of them is now the mayor of Los Angeles, and is a probable contender for governor in 2010. The longest-serving assembly speaker in state history was black. California is adjusting just fine to not having a majority race.

California culture...think SNL had a good take on that Saturday night. One question: Why is it ok for the Mayor of L.A. to be a current member of La Raza (I understand he never did offiically leave the organization) but not for a white person to be a member of the KKK? Your answer can be nothing but rationalizations.

There is no difference between any Hispanic member of La Raza engaging in politics or David Duke. None.

Any group based on race is supremacist in nature and exclusionary at the same time.

[clintl]

For one thing, La Raza is not a comparable organization to the KKK. La Raza doesn't go around lynching white people. Furthermore, "raza" has more than one meaning in Spanish, and considering that Hispanics are not a homogeneous race (in general, they are usually a mix of two or more races, as the races have been defined), the alternate meaning (clan) is probably closer to what members mean it to be, which is as a cultural identity.

Wikipedia's take on La Raza:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Raza

As for Villaraigosa - he has never committed any act or made any statement in his political career that I can remember that could be in any way be considered racist.

[Bubba Wheels]

Originally Posted by clintl

For one thing, La Raza is not a comparable organization to the KKK. La Raza doesn't go around lynching white people. Furthermore, "raza" has more than one meaning in Spanish, and considering that Hispanics are not a homogeneous race (in general, they are usually a mix of two or more races, as the races have been defined), the alternate meaning (clan) is probably closer to what members mean it to be, which is as a cultural identity.

Wikipedia's take on La Raza:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Raza

As for Villaraigosa - he has never committed any act or made any statement in his political career that I can remember that could be in any way be considered racist.

Tell the Irish in northern Ireland just how 'homogeneous' they are with the British. Or the Russians and the Poles. You prove my point...white folks are no more as 'homogeneous' as anybody else...even if we all do look alike!

You can probably name the true homogeneous cultures on one hand: Japanese, Korean, Scandanavian...not even Germans are 'homogeneous' anymore.

[clintl]

Where did I say anything about homogeneous cultures? Most towns don't have a homogeneous culture.

[famatu]

Originally Posted by clintl

For one thing, La Raza is not a comparable organization to the KKK. La Raza doesn't go around lynching white people. Furthermore, "raza" has more than one meaning in Spanish, and considering that Hispanics are not a homogeneous race (in general, they are usually a mix of two or more races, as the races have been defined), the alternate meaning (clan) is probably closer to what members mean it to be, which is as a cultural identity.

Wikipedia's take on La Raza:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Raza

As for Villaraigosa - he has never committed any act or made any statement in his political career that I can remember that could be in any way be considered racist.

A bit from LaRaza
Open Borders group
Contends that the mythical land of "Atzlan" was stolen from Mexico by the United States
"We see no human being as 'illegal.' Those who have arrived to the U.S. with heritage indigenous to the Americas, and specifically those crossing the southern border, are migrants on their own continent."
"We have an aging white America. They are not making babies. They are dying. It's a matter of time. The explosion is in our [Hispanic] population." - Founder Jose Angel Gutierrez


La Raza Unida ("the Unified Race"), also known as the La Raza Unida Party, is an association of groups formed in the late 1960s and early 1970s with chapters throughout the Southwest, especially in California, Colorado and Texas. As the organization itself explains, "La Raza Unida [in Texas] organized around electing Chicanos to Boards of Education and City Councils. . . . The spirit and force of La Raza Unida was truly embodied in Texas under the leadership of Jose Angel Gutierrez, a student and [the] president of the Mexican American Youth Organization (MAYO)."

Gutierrez, who founded La Raza Unida, is currently an attorney and a political science professor. He formerly headed the Mexican-American Studies Center at the University of Texas' Arlington campus. In January 1995 Gutierrez made a passionate case for open borders to a Hispanic audience at the University of California's Riverside campus. An advocate of mass, unchecked migration between Mexico and the United States, Gutierrez complained, "The border remains a military zone [a reference to the presence, albeit meager, of agents patrolling the vast southern border of the United States]. We [Mexicans] remain a hunted people. Now you think you have a destiny to fulfill in the land that historically has been ours for forty thousand years. And we're a new Mestizo nation. And they want us to discuss civil rights. Civil rights. What law made by white men to oppress all of us of color, female and male. This is our homeland. We cannot - we will not - and we must not be made illegal in our own homeland. We are not immigrants that came from another country to another country. We are migrants, free to travel the length and breadth of the Americas because we belong here. We are millions. We just have to survive. We have an aging white America. They are not making babies. They are dying. It's a matter of time. The explosion is in our population."

Gutierrez has established a reputation as a sometimes crude and offensive speaker. "We have an aging white America," he said on another occasion. ". . . They are dying. . . . They are sh---ing in their pants with fear! I love it! . . . We have got to eliminate the gringo, and what I mean by that is if the worst comes to the worst, we have got to kill him." "Our devil," Gutierrez has said many times since 1970, " has pale skin and blue eyes."

La Raza Unida held its first convention in 1972. In addition to Gutierrez, prominent members were Corky Gonzalez, Reyes Lopez Tijerina, and Cesar Chavez. The group's mission statement, according to its official website, is "Re-Commit, Re-Direct, Re-Organize and Re-Claim our past Chicano activism. . . . We will seek group ascendancy and solidarity among persons of Mexican American ancestry in this century."

La Raza Unida opposes school voucher programs, advocates youth education programs designed to "enhance the education they are currently receiving in the public education system," opposes the North American Free Trade Agreement, and, most importantly, supports an open borders policy. In other words, it advocates unrestricted immigration; the effective dissolution of American borders; and amnesty, civil liberties protections, and expanded rights for those who have already violated immigration laws to enter the United States.

La Raza Unida also professes "a commitment to the advancement of people of indigenous heritage," an advancement to be achieved by means of "the complete reworking of the current [capitalist] economic system." It further seeks what it calls "fair taxes for all," which, in the lexicon of groups advocating wealth redistribution, means ever-spiraling tax hikes for middle-to-higher-income earners, and a bloated welfare state. Moreover, La Raza Unida asserts that the U.S. government should "drastically reduce the amount of taxes used to fund military purposes," and calls for "an end to the militarization of society, including the borders." The organization articulates its immigration philosophy as follows: "We see no human being as 'illegal.' Those who have arrived to the U.S. with heritage indigenous to the Americas, and specifically those crossing the southern border, are migrants on their own continent."

La Raza Unida's contention that its homeland was stolen by white Americans is a central reason for its militant posture. In fact, the group openly claims that large regions of the American Southwest do not rightfully belong to the United States. This premise was demonstrated in the summer of 2004, when La Raza Unida produced an ad to publicize an August 24 rally to be held in a venue it identified as "East Los Angeles, Califaztlán." The significance of this merging of the words "California" and "Atzlán" cannot be overstated. Radical Hispanic groups such as La Raza Unida and MECha (an acronym for Movimiento Estudiantil de Chicanos de Aztlan, or the Student Movement of Aztlan Chicanos) commonly refer to a mythical place called Atzlan. This is supposedly the cradle of Aztec civilization which was unjustly seized by the United States following the Mexican-American War, and which ought now be returned to its alleged rightful owners: the people and government of Mexico.

On its website, La Raza Unida "pledges to seek and offer support to other organizations performing actions mirroring those we address." La Raza Unida went through a period of re-organization and restructuring after 1975, and for some time it lacked cohesiveness. However, the group appears to be much more active of late and proudly claims to be "doing outreach via the Internet as well as in person in events, demonstrations, and individual contact."

I believe African Americans should be given every advantage that can be offered considering for over 400 years they were not allowed to read even one page in a book. In the future there should be changes made when it is identified that African American's have made tremendous strides in key areas of finance,education and lack of criminality. They deserve as many "breaks" as possible and if your unhappy with that you should look at people from the past who used their power to destroy African American's humanity. I wish i could see the future my great grandchildren will see.

[st.cronin]

Look, it's quite simple: Whites are not allowed to be racist. For anybody else, it's not a big deal.

Originally Posted by st.cronin

Look, it's quite simple: Whites are not allowed to be racist. For anybody else, it's not a big deal.

Thats not the world I live in. Any man who is not caucasian and is at his job if he were to say anything racial about a caucasian would lose his job before he finished his statement.

[Bubba Wheels]

Interesting, this Gutierrez seems to meld the Aztec people's destiny with that of the Mexican people of Spanish descent, weather mixed or not, and that of the Mexican government, for his own personal interests...whereas I distinctly remember reading/hearing about revolts and uprisings against these self-same Mexican peoples/government by the indigenous peoples of some of the outlying provinces claiming 'oppression' and 'lack of fair income distribution.'

So it seems, in the end, that these La Raza folks are quick to find the 'gringos' guilty of the same things they themselves would turn a blind eye towards in their own native country. But given the Mexican policy regarding illegal immigration (a felony violation, with Mexican troops on the Guatamalun border) this is hardly surprising. Hypocracy never seems to hinder the zealot.

Yep, one google search revealed trouble in a province called Chiapis, including a massacre of the indigenous folks in a place called Acteal. Sure there's plenty more on it.

"Long live the Zapitistas and the indigenous peoples" sign held by Spanish protestor according to a Washington Post article dated 1998. Seems the Mexican government is playing fast and loose with who should be considered 'indigenous peoples' and how they should be treated depending on weather its in the U.S. or in Mexico.

http://www.zapatistarevolution.com

Suddenly very interested in this, thanks to Mr. Gutierrez