A rose is a rose…

“Daniel Whittle, you have been found guilty of the crimes of thinking for yourself and not being a proper minority. Your sentence is to be subjected to politically correct self-righteous banter of people who obviously did not read your article thoroughly or carefully before responding. And might I add, we were very disappointed.”

Okay, maybe no one actually said that, but someone might as well have. As smart as Benjamin Bhatti is (and I’ll assume Carl Dorvil is as well, though I’ve never met him), I don’t see why he has to use a form letter-type argument to anyone who dares to question the multiculturalist movement. There has to be a better way. Doesn’t there? Or did I just answer my own question?

So, I have a brilliant idea. Why don’t we look at race relations in reality instead of the doom and gloom the politically correct police want to see or the rosiness that Bhatti and Dorvil claim Whittle sees?

If we do this, things become a lot clearer. Lunch tables and social groups at the crossing are still separated by race. This, according to Bhatti and Dorvil, is a problem. Save for the official school status (and the portion of the school budget they receive because of it), what is the difference between those and cultural student unions? People associate with those whom they feel the most connected to. Whether it is done under the guise of diversity (or exclusivity, if the students are white) or by purely social choice, it isn’t any different. Well there is one more difference; the university-sanctioned groups wear the badge of ethnic unity as the official name of their group. So why exactly are the culture clubs perfectly acceptable, but “segregated” informal social groups are not? I defy anyone to give me a logical answer. (My e-mail address is on the left if you want to try.) The fact of the matter is that a lot of people of all races don’t feel comfortable around people of different ethnicity.

Likewise, bigotry goes way beyond the Caucasian race. I remember in eighth grade being taught in my social studies class that “the biggest Holocaust in history was the African Slave Trade.” I think that is as big of a problem as whites not getting a “diverse education,” if not bigger. Yet, in the PC system, minority ignorance gets a free pass.

Diversity is also relative in the multiculturalist world. If you had a group of people who wanted to “add diversity”, and they got an application from a person who prefers baseball to basketball or football, whose favorite musician is Paul Simon, and who was once a proud Republican before he joined the Libertarian Party, chances are that person would be rejected, right? That person obviously does not fit the diversity profile. But, as you might have guessed, that person is me. My skin color fits what diversity is supposed to be, but not my personality.

Diversity is valued, but diversity within that diversity is a problem. In the multiculturalist viewpoint, minorities are supposed to be different that Caucasians. Fine. As a general statement, it makes sense. But then all people of a minority group are treated like carbon copies of each other, because it is skin color that represents diversity, not actual people. So, using deduction, white people are all the same and people of each minority group are all the same. Yet, this stereotyping is A-OK if it is done for a politically correct reason, but when whites do it, it’s ignorance.

I went to a private school for my first year in college to get away from being picked on for “acting too white.” When I got to the private school, a friend of mine (who was also black) and I noticed that quite a few of the white students had negative stereotypes of the black students who were there. But then we looked at those black students, and thought about it. We figured it was no wonder they had bad impressions of blacks; the most prominent black students there were the embodiment of those stereotypes – and the same things they didn’t like about them, we didn’t like about them. But that didn’t make us white. I haven’t sold anyone out (I never got my 30 pieces of silver). I just call things as I see them without prejudice or bias toward anyone.

So, when I say I wholeheartedly agree with Daniel Whittle when he said that special minority scholarships are a bad idea, it is because they place race as the focus of the scholarship. Making race the focus of a decision is racist. If you said you were giving a scholarship to the poorer populations, that would be fine; at least that isn’t racially motivated (even if most of the recipients would end up being minorities). I’m sure Whittle would agree.

Diversity does not create equality. Unity does. And if you think we are going to get equality through people who sugarcoat the same race-focused BS they claim their enemies do and say it promotes harmony … Well, there’s a nice plot of land on Three Mile Island I have for sale …