Quote:
Originally Posted by The12thMan";p="
Most of those look like they have a specific interest (such as historic preservation) or perhaps geographical interests in common. If the CBC limited members to those with large black constituencies in order to serve the specific interests of blacks, I wouldn't see a problem.
|
I agree wholeheartedly that this would make more sense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by The12thMan";p="
The fact that they refuse membership to someone who other than skin color rates 100% with them makes the organization racist.
|
I don't think it's so much racism, in that the organization does not arbitrarily look down on whites. It's an assumption (perhaps wrongheaded) that only blacks can truly sympathize with black community problems... I think they only hurt themselves by not accepting as much idea flow as possible...
Quote:
Originally Posted by The12thMan";p="
The fact that they choose to endorse candidates because of skin color is also racist. Now, if you think racist caucuses are OK, nevermind.
|
I disagree. And feminist orgs that support female candidates are not sexist either. The idea isn't to put in candidates that meet the needs of the people in question, but to increase the morale by showing that minorities can and do get into office... Now what is odd is when they do not help candidates based on political affiliation.
This idea might be outdated, but it has a basis in making the implausible plausible. It isn't meant to be a sign of superiority, but a sign that minorities can make it and by making it into places of power they inspire.
It is a fact that some groups in society lack good role models to combat stereotypes and hopelessness. That is what these are meant to bring about.
It's not that these ideas aren't outdated or even misguided. It's just that believing the agenda to be racism is ignoring their true motivation.