Is this racist?

Question

at my school there is a club called "brothas and sistas united" which is for students from African Desent. they said that it is racist to have a Caucasion United Club for White students. Is that worng?

Answer 1

You should be free to start one and I should be free to think it's racist.

Answer 2

It appears that you have brought forth a most volatile issue. Luckily I do not care for political correctness, so I shall simply say this. It is wrong for those individuals from the 'Brothas and Sistas United Club' (improperly spelled to boot) to claim it is wrong for you to start a Caucasians Unite Club. As those before me have already stated "It is a double standard". Feel free to start your own club and simply point to their own organization as an example of a group of people simply desiring to take pride in their cultural heritage. If anything, those in the 'Brothas and Sistas United Club' are the real racists.

Answer 3

It's a little unclear from you question what you mean by "is that wrong?", but I'll give you the best and most complete answer I can.

Racism involves the exercise of power. The dominant population in this country is Caucasian. Structures and institutions that support the dominant population to the detriment of minority populations are racist. Individual people can display bigotry, but only rise to the level of racist when they have the ability to exercise power to the detriment of minorities.

A white students club in your school would indeed be one type of racist organization, assuming that the only qualifying attribute is light skin. It would be one more expression of the dominant culture exercising power to the detriment of minorities. If you organized a club for people of Italian descent or Norwegian descent, or Irish descent, that would be different as each of these is a minority. You do of course realize that a club including members of African descent would include white South Africans as well as other lighter skinned persons from northeast Africa. You may not have such lighter skinned persons of African descent in your school, but that isn't the doing of the club members.

Really think about what your reaction would be if this club were for students of say French descent or Swedish descent, would you be reacting this strongly?

Answer 4

Is the club that is "for students from African Descent" closed to anyone else? Or is it a club that is a support group for students of African Descent but allows others to joint as well? To have a Caucasion Club for white students only seems racist or at least segregationist and prejudiced. Is the club for white students going to allow others to join? Mexican, Asian, etc? see the difference?

Answer 5

Such is the problem with political power in the USA: whether it's "persons of African descent" (which, arguably, is *everyone*) or partisans of the ultra-right (the "God-in-government" crowd, the anti-homosexuality crowd, etcetera ad nauseum),

people utterly unsuited to the role of influencing or directing any part of the processes of government tend to imagine that their particular views are immune from the principle of equality.

The so-called (and generally, self-appointed) "Christians" promoting the idea that the Pledge of Allegiance ought to include the phrase "under God" fail to appreciate that they won't always be in the majority -- and when another faith takes over, it will be "one nation under a (pagan, in their view) god."

They babble about the "Christian heritage" of the USA and tend to describe the USA as a "Christian nation," but they ignore the specific (and, for their point, inconvenient) disavowments of Christianity by the US government at least as early as the Treaty of Peace and Friendship (signed 1796, proclaimed 1797; article 11 of which states, in part, “As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion").

That the US government had by then been corrupted is an utterly indefensible position: of the 111 Founding Fathers of the United States of America, 75 were still available at that treaty’s signature, and 73 were still available when the treaty was proclaimed.

Of the 2 decedents, Daniel Carroll was until his death active in government despite illness. Nathaniel Gorham having made a fortune in Massachusetts real estate, retired in 1796 to Charlestown; it's incredible he'd have been silent if there had been committed a breach of the principles upon which the nation had been founded -- especially one by treaty.

Two were octogenarians, four were septuagenarians, sixteen were sexagenarians, twenty-seven were quinquagenarians, twenty-two were quadragenarians and the remainder were in their thirties: certainly, the group had the vitality, interest and authority to rectify so profound a grievance had it actually been a grievance.

The only logical and rational conclusion is that the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion, and that social and historical revisionists attempting to reinvent the USA as some sort of theocratic republic are seditious misanthropes of the worst sort.

Likewise with race: the USA owes not its existence to the white race any more than it owes its prosperity to the black race or its conquest of the land to the yellow race; neither any racial nor any ethnic group has any legitimate claim to the earth, but the earth ultimately exercises its dominion over mankind (and other forms of life) when it reclaims the elements from which the body was formed.

There are people whose company you probably don't want to share, and people who probably don't want to share company with you.

If they wish to exclude you because you or your views aren't "black enough" for them, and you feel a need to demonstrate their hypocrisy by forming an exclusively white club, go for it -- but don't expect their minds to be opened.

The best you can hope for is a court order banning their club from school property, but since the club's members are students and students obviously interact, any such order is meaningless and unenforceable.

.

Answer 6

If the club is for students from Africa, then it would not be the same to have a Caucasian club, as there is no country named Caucasia. If you had an American United Club, then THAT would be the same thing. Or a French Students Club, etc. Get it?

Answer 7

"Brothas and Sistas United" DOES NOT EQUAL "Black United"

so...

start any club you want but don't expect the school to endorse any club that would exclude people based on skin color

Answer 8

Racist! Will anything be done to change it? No, because then we would be oppressing the blacks! Will you get to do a Caucasion united Club? Probably not, that would be racist!

Answer 9

it is racist to allow a club for blacks and not one for whites and don't be told otherwise, if there is a club for blacks there is no reason there shouldn't be a club for whites - the only thing you have to keep in mind though is that you must be able to join whichever one you want, even if it is that black one and you are white - they cannot stop you or they are being racially discriminative

Answer 10

Absolutely. You know the old saying, "What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander"? Whites may be the largest ethnic group in the U.S., but they are no longer the majority (personally, I'm looking for the NAAWP). As long as you don't claim to be superior to others, everyone should be proud of their race and culture, and free to express it publicly.

Answer 11

Naaah ... it sounds like most golf clubs .... they just don't put obvious names on it like u guys do ... but I am sure they don't expect to may 'brotha's & sista's' to be joining.

It's not racist if white people can join... like the notting hill carnival.