Republicans and Muffins in a Liberal School

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**halonachos**

huffingtonpost wrote:In protest against an Affirmative Action-like bill awaiting Gov. Jerry Brown's signature, U.C. Berkeley College Republicans announced plans to host a satirical Increase Diversity Bake Sale, selling racially price-adjusted pastries on campus, SFGate reported. The bake sale is scheduled for Tuesday morning at 10am.

The announcement, posted on the group's Facebook page, advertised a pricing structure, ranging from $2 per pastry for white men to $.25 per pastry for Native Americans, with a $.25 price break for women.

"Just like the CA Senate Bills 185 and 387 the phone bank supports, we will be considering race, gender, ethnicity, national/geographic origin and other relevant factors to ensure the equitable distribution of baked goods to our diverse student body," read the announcement. The post finished with a signoff: "Hope to see you all there! If you don't come, you're a racist!" In another post, the group explained that the bake sale is meant to be satirical.

But many students were not amused. "I'm ashamed to know that I go to the same school with people who would say stuff like this," said student Skyler Hogan-Van Sickle in a Facebook. "I'm really trying to figure out how someone can be this hateful."

While some students resulted to threats and name-calling, others questioned the logic behind the bake sale. On Facebook, student Keith Africano wrote:

If you're going to compare the Bake Sale to Affirmative Action…the only way it would be comparable is if the flour, oven, and all baking materials were stolen from the people that are required to pay the lowest prices. And if the baked goods from all prior bake sales were made for free by the minorities while white students reaped all the profits…which resulted in unequal opportunities to purchase baked goods in the current sale.

Others argued in favor of the bake sale as a means of expression. "In no way do I believe this group is trying to be racist," wrote student Dennis Kim on Facebook. "They are just trying to raise awareness on new legislation that may come to pass that will allow universities to select applicants based on race and sex."

According to the Daily Cal, a special meeting of the ASUC Senate has been called for Sunday evening to discuss both the bill and the bake sale.

The Berkeley College Republicans may have jumped from the frying pan into the fire with the Increase Diversity Bake Sale. But if it's attention and discussion they are after, they've got it.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/24/uc-berkeley-racist-bake-sale_n_979184.html

So a group of college kids decided to make baked goods and then sell them in comparison to the proposed affirmative action bill that would change the tuition rates for students based on race, gender, and other backgrounds. Then all hell breaks loose because its racist to change the price of baked goods based off of the same things as the affirmative action bill. But why should cupcakes and muffins be used to make a political point, they are sacred instruments of weight gain and should not be used in politics, ever.

So what do you guys think about this, is this free speech, is it racist, is it immoral, how do they know you're part native american, what are they selling, and why should people care?

**rubiksnoob**

I have a few liberal tendencies, but I disagree with AA. Two wrongs don't make a right. Sorry. But I don't really think that this is the best way for these students to go about protesting this, either. Pretty funny nonetheless, though.

**Amaya**

I'm not a fan of AA. (either one)

This is funny, could've sworn I heard about it a long time ago though.

**LordofHats**

Amaya wrote:This is funny, could've sworn I heard about it a long time ago though.

Me too. I'd swear something similar to this happened a year or two ago at another university. It sounds really familiar.

EDIT: I'll also point out the stupidity of the opposition. It's racist to change your prices based on race when selling baked goods but not when charging tuition? Racism is racism. The only difference is if society accepts it or not.

**halonachos**

It wouldn't surprise me if someone did this before, or at least did something similar but the article stems from the 24th of September.

I just think its a funny way to protest something, and its also funny how the prices of baked goods made some people mad.

**Ma55ter_fett**

My male belly fat has just as much right to those cupcakes as any woman's belly fat has!

It’s just not fair if women folk get to buy a cheaper ticket to lifelong diabetes than I do!

**sebster**

I think it's just more childish student politics.

Running a bake sale like that is just looking to get some outrage. And predictably, the equally ridiculous student left wing has provided it. In the end everyone goes home self-righteous, having learned nothing from the experience.

**cptbravo**

I'm not necessarily a pro-affirmative action person...but the whole bake sale idea in itself is incredibly just plain racism with a faux "satirical" twist to it.

And yes, baked goods, should always be equal opportunity. Remember kids, food doesn't like violence, so I doubt it is very tolerant of racism either.

**Goddard**

Pretty soon they'll be picking the chocolate chips outta the high-class white dough.

**Amaya**

cptbravo wrote:I'm not necessarily a pro-affirmative action person...but the whole bake sale idea in itself is incredibly just plain racism with a faux "satirical" twist to it.

And yes, baked goods, should always be equal opportunity. Remember kids, food doesn't like violence, so I doubt it is very tolerant of racism either.

Hey, by that logic Affirmative Action is racist as well since white males pay more than any other group to go to bloody college.

**schadenfreude**

According to 2010 US Census California's population was 40.1% Non-Hispanic White, 5.8% Black or African American, 12.8% Asian, 4% American Indian, 2% Pacific Islander and 2.6% from two or more races. 37.6% of the total population are Hispanics or Latinos of any race.

Whites at 40.1% of the population are actually an under represented minority within California universities.

California SB185 is nothing more than legalized racism against Asians (12.8% of the population).

UB Berkley: Total number of Undergraduates: 25,151; African American/Black: 4%; American Indian/Alaskan Native: 1%; Asian/Pacific Islander: 43%; Hispanic: 12%; White: 32%; International: 3%.

UCLA: Total number of Undergraduates: 26,536; African American/Black: 1%; American Indian/Alaskan Native: 0%; Asian/Pacific Islander: 38%; Hispanic: 15%; White: 34%; Race/Ethnicity Unknown: 5%; International: 4%

UCSD: Total number of Undergraduates: 23,143; African-American: 2%; Asian: 44%; Mexican-American: 10%; Filipino: 4%; Latino/Other Spanish: 3%; Native-American: 0%; Caucasian: 26%; Race/Ethnicity Unknown: 10%

**sebster**

It isn't that complicated.

They're trying to make a point that it is racist to charge different amounts to different people. They're doing this by charging white people the least. They believe this is an important point to make because they think white people are getting a hard deal in the US, because of affirmative action and a handful of other policies.

This seems like an important point if you're a college activist dick who really, really doesn't want to get the idea of privilege. Predictably, other college activist dicks who understand privilege will make their own highly contrived analogies to explain that the price of a single good really isn't the whole picture. Both groups will shout at each other and nothing will be achieved, because the original grounds for debate were ridiculous.

This is what college politics is.

**curtis**

So any chance to actually see this affirmative action bill? Cause the Huffington post has done a great job of not even naming it. Since if it says we will give all non white male students lower tuition rates republicans have a point, however if it said we shall give those from poorer areas cheaper tuition it's still affirmative action but has no basis on race (apart from the fact more non whites are poor).

Also 25c muffins for me, wonder if anyone who got 25c muffins or free muffins (if only i was a girl) brought wholesale from the republicans and set up stall next door selling to whites for 1 dollar each.

**CptJake**

curtis wrote:So any chance to actually see this affirmative action bill? Cause the Huffington post has done a great job of not even naming it. Since if it says we will give all non white male students lower tuition rates republicans have a point, however if it said we shall give those from poorer areas cheaper tuition it's still affirmative action but has no basis on race (apart from the fact more non whites are poor).

Also 25c muffins for me, wonder if anyone who got 25c muffins or free muffins (if only i was a girl) brought wholesale from the republicans and set up stall next door selling to whites for 1 dollar each.

The article mentions CA Senate Bill 185. This is what I found on that.

http://e-lobbyist.com/gaits/text/351079

**Kilkrazy**

sebster wrote:I think it's just more childish student politics.

Running a bake sale like that is just looking to get some outrage. And predictably, the equally ridiculous student left wing has provided it. In the end everyone goes home self-righteous, having learned nothing from the experience.

Agree with that.

It's free speech but rather silly and meaningless on both sides.

**ChrisWWII**

It's free speech, yes, but I've never been a fan of Affirmative Action, and I do give them props for being a bit creative.

**curtis**

CptJake wrote:
curtis wrote:So any chance to actually see this affirmative action bill? Cause the Huffington post has done a great job of not even naming it. Since if it says we will give all non white male students lower tuition rates republicans have a point, however if it said we shall give those from poorer areas cheaper tuition it's still affirmative action but has no basis on race (apart from the fact more non whites are poor).

Also 25c muffins for me, wonder if anyone who got 25c muffins or free muffins (if only i was a girl) brought wholesale from the republicans and set up stall next door selling to whites for 1 dollar each.

The article mentions CA Senate Bill 185. This is what I found on that.

http://e-lobbyist.com/gaits/text/351079

How did i miss that

I see nothing wrong with 185 it helps poor white males as much as any poor minority and why weren't the republicans giving out cheaper muffins to any of the cultural, geographic, economic and social groups of california, why just race? (apart from it makes the argument to not do it easier and better)

**CptJake**

I suspect folks are worried about how it will be implemented. I know the following is from the digest, but it since it does not reference economic factors specifically, but does mention others, it could be read that the intent of the law is to help those with desirable traits of the factors mentioned:

This bill would authorize the University of California and the California State University to consider race, gender, ethnicity, and national origin, along with other relevant factors, in undergraduate and graduate admissions,

I'm not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV, but the following section doesn't make sense:

c) (1) Pursuant to subdivision (b), the University of California may, and the California State University may, consider race, gender, ethnicity, national origin, geographic origin, and household income, along with other relevant factors, in undergraduate and graduate admissions, so long as no preference is given.

If you're not going to give preference, what is the point of looking at those factors? The fact you are looking at them seems to imply you are going to use them in choosing who you admit, and when you do that you ae going to show some preference.

As far as different prices charged for attending, I don't see anything in that bill to indicate that is going to happen. It would make sense that financial aid be used to those that need it. I know my son's school makes me submit tax returns to determine his elgibility for certain aid. That is typical. So some poor kid pays less than my kid to go to the same school (or would, my kid is on scholarships).

But I have no skin in this game. If CA wants to pass laws like this, they sure can. If folks don't like it, they should vote for state legislatures and other officials that will pass laws they like.

**Frazzled**

Kilkrazy wrote:It's free speech but rather silly and meaningless on both sides.

Incorrect. The awesomeness of Muffins are never silly and meaningless.

**biccat**

LordofHats wrote:Me too. I'd swear something similar to this happened a year or two ago at another university. It sounds really familiar.

It's a common tactic to protest against Affirmative Action. Just about every year you can count on some group of college students doing this somewhere.

sebster wrote:I think it's just more childish student politics.

In their defense, this is at U.C. Berkeley. Childish student politics designed to provoke outrage is probably a requirement for graduation. Ever see PCU? That's Berkeley, except there's no redemption or cool kids, just faux outrage and political correctness.

sebster wrote:They're trying to make a point that it is racist to charge different amounts to different people. They're doing this by charging white people the least. They believe this is an important point to make because they think white people are getting a hard deal in the US, because of affirmative action and a handful of other policies.

No, they're charging whites more. As for the rest, while racism might be acceptable in Australia, we've actually got laws (the Constitution) that prevent racial discrimination.

CptJake wrote:I'm not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV, but the following section doesn't make sense:

c) (1) Pursuant to subdivision (b), the University of California may, and the California State University may, consider race, gender, ethnicity, national origin, geographic origin, and household income, along with other relevant factors, in undergraduate and graduate admissions, so long as no preference is given.

If you're not going to give preference, what is the point of looking at those factors? The fact you are looking at them seems to imply you are going to use them in choosing who you admit, and when you do that you ae going to show some preference.

In 1996 California passed Prop. 209, an amendment to the California constitution that prohibits discrimination or preferential treatment in public education:

The state shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting.

So in fact California can't pass laws like this. And there's a good argument that can be made under the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment that this type of discrimination violates the U.S. Constitution.

**SOFDC**

If folks don't like it, they should vote for state legislatures and other officials that will pass laws they like.

I find that in a place as high on the moonbat scale as CA, it tends to work better to simply start suing people on constitutional grounds and bypass the whole voting thing entirely. Seems this place likes to push the envelope regularly in that regard.

If you're not going to give preference, what is the point of looking at those factors? The fact you are looking at them seems to imply you are going to use them in choosing who you admit, and when you do that you ae going to show some preference.

I agree. There ain't a whole lot of reasons to factor "Race" and/or "Ethnicity" into an admissions process, and I can't think of any that look very good when stared at for a while. Doesn't matter who gets the bone, if they got it due to skin color something probably needs to be challenged.

**Radiation**

This isn't a new policy. Its not discrimination. Its an amendment to already existing policy that has been in place for some time now. Schools are allowed to look at many factors when accepting applicants.

Its just an amendment to the already established code. It looks like the amendment wants to keep track of statistics probably in regards to the new census information. Angry little teamuffins.

**Frazzled**

Radiation wrote:This isn't a new policy. Its not discrimination. Its an amendment to already existing policy that has been in place for some time now. Schools are allowed to look at many factors when accepting applicants.

Its just an amendment to the already established code. It looks like the amendment wants to keep track of statistics probably in regards to the new census information. Angry little teamuffins.

Just because it isn't new doesn't mean its discrimination, unless you believe Dredd Scott was lawfully decided.

But then again its UC Berkeley. People who want to go to Berkely need to be sent to Australia re-education facilities to begin with.

"Right. See that croc? Pull its tail. No they love it."

**Radiation**

If you read the bill it is permitted according to the 14th Amendment.

**Frazzled**

Radiation wrote:If you read the bill it is permitted according to the 14th Amendment.

Yes I can write a bill that states it is in compliance with the First Amendment even though it abolishes free speech on the internet. What the bill thinks is utterly irrelevant. I',m sure the justices of that infest Califonria will even agree, and be overturned yet again.

**Kilkrazy**

Frazzled wrote:
Kilkrazy wrote:It's free speech but rather silly and meaningless on both sides.

Incorrect. The awesomeness of Muffins are never silly and meaningless.

**Frazzled**

Exactly.

**Radiation**

The UC and CSU systems are committed to diversity. Excellence through diversity.

**Frazzled**

Radiation wrote:The UC and CSU systems are committed to diversity. Excellence through diversity.

And that means

all...

Here's some more cool corporate phrases.

Quality is Job One
We promise it works this time.
We are committed to diversity as long as its our approved divserity.
14th Amendment? Who cares?
Jim Crow, its not just a name. Its a lifestyle.
We need Living Room.
Sometimes you have to destroy a village to save a village.

**Polonius**

Affirmative Action: the greatest enemy to borderline talented white person.

Sorry, I know I should care more about this issue, but I could give a crap who gets the last 10% of seats at a public university, which is all that's up for grabs in AA.