SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (60827)12/10/2002 1:42:55 AM
From: LindyBill  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 281500
 
If they had done this when I was on campus, the screams of "Segregation" would have filled the air. From The Washington Times.

The soft bigotry of campus paternalism
Suzanne Fields
THE WASHINGTON TIMES

Published 12/9/2002

George Wallace, Orval Faubus and Ross Barnett were men before their time. They were merely infamous Southern governors, trying to keep their public schools segregated. They failed, but only because they never got an education at Stanford, Penn or MIT.
Jim Crow is back, only he's supposed to be kinder, gentler and mellower. You might call him Jimmy Crow (or in some places, Jaime Crow). Whatever you call him, he's the new big man on campus. Administrators have freshened up the label, and their dorms are not segregated houses, but "ethnic theme houses." Nevertheless, these are living accommodations determined by race, the latest trend in the soft bigotry of campus paternalism.
At Stanford, these dorms require a glossary for identification. Muwekma-tah-ruk is Native American, Ujamaa is African-American and Casa Zapata is Chicano/Latino. The Asian-American house is called Okada, named for the author of a book about the treatment of Japanese Americans during World War II, when they were sent to live in ethnic-themed resettlement camps. Stanford students and administrators have been mildly embarrassed ? there may be hope yet ? since a civil rights organization exposed them in a study titled: "The Stigma of Inclusion: Racial Paternalism/Separatism in Higher Education." The New York Civil Rights Coalition reports that color-coded universities encourage a "balkanized campus environment" and that minority students at Stanford are "indoctrinated" into a separate track for "special treatment" that many of them did not ask for, or expect, when they applied for admission.
"From those who believe that theme dorms represent a divisive form of self-segregation, to those who see them as paternalistic attempts by universities to improve minority students' chances of success in college," the Stanford Daily reports, "the system has a wide range of detractors."
Descriptions of segregated theme dorms at other colleges could fill a primer on diversity doublespeak. Some of the new segregationists suggest that an ethnic theme house is no different from clustering students in dancing, music, art, language or food. But "Chocolate City" at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology," a black dorm, is not about brownies and chocolate fudge cake, but a dorm to promote black culture, identity and support for "our brotherhood." The Latino Living Center at Cornell offers salsa and meringue, which may sound like a dip and lemon pie, but they're the popular Latin dances. In between the fancy footwork, the Latino students at Cornell discuss the future of immigration policy and the problems of gang warfare in inner-city barrios.
The University of Pennsylvania calls its segregated dorm the W.E.B. Dubois College House, named for the famous black sociologist, to promote African-American culture. There's even a hip-hop group. One resident likes the wide diversity based on skin color: "I was exposed to a real mixture ? to Africans, African-Americans, and other black Americans like myself."
Stanford administrators say their multi-ethnic approach has evolved since the first black theme house was established in 1970. Thirty years ago, the purpose was to provide an ethnic neighborhood away from the ethnic neighborhood. Today, the emphasis, according to Thom Massey, assistant dean of the graduate life office, is on the positive celebrations of African-American culture for whites as well as blacks.
Students who like such arrangements say they choose ethnic houses because they feel "safe" and appreciate a comfortable support system provided by their own kind that gives them time to adjust to the larger culture on campus. This sounds to those of us with long memories like making sure some people know their place.
The New York civil-rights report finds ethnic theme houses part of a larger disturbing "educational" problem. Their survey of colleges reveals a segregationist agenda of race and ethnicity permeating every facet of campus life ? academic courses, counseling, remedial programs and socializing, all hiding behind clever euphemisms and pretty facades of diversity. Ethnic houses actually encourage what they decry, by infantilizing students, pampering them in their ethnic insecurities and creating a divisiveness through racial stereotyping.
A Latino student gives away the insidiousness of this approach, describing how he found his blood roots at Amherst. "For me, there's more consciousness of my background as a Latino male," he says. "Before I came to Amherst, I wasn't thinking about race or class or gender or sexual orientation, I was just thinking about people wanting to learn."
All this, says the New York Civil Rights Coalition, is a giant step backward for the civil rights movement. "The purpose of higher education is to remove narrow constrictions of the mind, to extirpate prejudice, to remove barriers to the open pursuit of knowledge. Separatism in all of its forms, but especially when it is aided and abetted by college and university officials and resources, is a betrayal of that mission."
Shame on them.



To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (60827)12/10/2002 2:31:03 AM
From: Karen Lawrence  Respond to of 281500
 
Hard-liners tighten grip on Likud, oppose Palestinian statehood Innocent young Palestinian woman machine gunned to death leaves behind baby
By Nazir Majally, Arab News Staff
arabnews.com

OCCUPIED JERUSALEM, 10 December 2002 — The party tipped to become the dominant force in Israeli politics after the January general election swung further to the right yesterday, as the army continued its operations in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon found himself under attack from right-wingers within his own party and faced diehard opposition to the very notion of any Palestinian state.

Palestinian President Yasser Arafat, also expressed no-confidence in Sharon’s declared peace intentions, saying in a Reuters interview on Sunday the Israeli leader wanted to escalate military operations against the Palestinians.

Foreign Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who failed to beat Sharon in party leadership elections two weeks ago, opposes the creation of a Palestinian state and supports the expulsion of Arafat.

Hard-liners who back the tough policies of Netanyahu got the upper hand in the selection of Likud candidates for Jan. 28 legislative elections, according to a list published yesterday.

The 2,940 members of Likud’s central committee voted Sunday night to draw up the definitive list of party members running for one of the 120 seats in Parliament, where the right-wing powerhouse is expected to double its number of MPs.

The latest polls predict that Likud will increase its presence from 19 to around 40 seats, while Labor, currently the largest political party in the Knesset, is expected to drop five or six seats from the 25 it currently holds.

While Sharon and Netanyahu took the top two places as of right on the list of candidates for the Jan. 28 poll, some of the prime minister’s staunchest supporters were bumped way down.

In other developments, Israeli troops killed a Palestinian who suffered from mental problems near Tulkarm and the Palestinian Authority said yesterday the PA had gone bankrupt and it may have to postpone elections slated for next month. The Palestinian, Basel Al-Qoa, 28, from the village of Beit Lid, was shot dead near the neighboring Jewish settlement of Einav.

Israeli troops also killed a Palestinian woman in the West Bank town of Nablus late yesterday. Rihan Al-Arda, 25, was driving in a car with her husband and mother when Israeli troops opened fire with automatic weapons, killing the woman and slightly wounding the others, they said.