Turn on thread page Beta

what would happen if people had a white or caucasian society at a university watch

Announcements
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cluedo89)
    well heres a few examples brunel, winston churchill,shakespeare,dickens, oliver cromwell for starters.

    I'm completly proud of who I am and I'm proud we have a society that embraces all cultures and races but why should that be exclusive to certain groups.

    and on the subject of white culture being to broad, well isnt black culture broad and asian cultures broad as well people arrived from uganda as well as south asia for example, its all complex.

    personally I am against societys at university that at least give that impression to people looking in from the outside of being exclusive.
    I learn new things all the time. I didn't know that Brunel, Churchill, and Dickens were "british people of white origin CULTURE". i thought they were people. I understand what you mean by shakespeare of course- his literature. But that is for just white britons to enjoy is it? I love Shakespeare too. Why put it in a white society, and not a british society? Or a literary society?

    Yes, world black culture is broad. But i'm not advocating socieites called "black culture" for all different tpyes of black people- i will say again i think it should be more specific if need be. Only when its superficial can it be called "black"- and then they celebrate what society would call "black" music- though of course anyone, not just black people, an enjoy black music.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cottonmouth)
    You are patheitc. Me and Laika were making the same point about the use of the words "white" and "black". You just won't respond directly to it, which is very very telling. Answer it, just answer it.


    You and Lakia may try to make the same points - but there is a difference. You make it badly and misunderstand or misrepresent what I am saying, and he is clear and understands me. It is noting to do with me wanting to avoid the point - Ill happily debate it with him, because I consider him to be of a superior quality to you. You mostly pick up his points and express them badly or just repeat yourself, while arguing against things I have never said.

    As such I prefer to deal with him where possible.

    I have already given you an answer anyway. I disagree with your premise.

    In fact I have answered it a number of times now.

    (Original post by cottonmouth)
    Yes, some people do believe there is a white culture. And your point? I stated plainly that this society, and many others, USE THE TERMS in those ways.


    And yet I have pointed out that some of them don’t. You choose to ignore that.

    (Original post by cottonmouth)
    I didn't say that there isn't a white culture, or that people don't believe there is one. So you disagree with something i didnt say, so far.


    You certainly have said that before, or else why did I have to argue with you that the term had meaning?


    Anyway - the point is that people DO use white to refer to culture and race - a thing you claim doesn’t occur. Capice?

    (Original post by cottonmouth)
    Do you disagree with my assertions about how the words" white" and "black" are used by society in general? Not the BNP, who are a fringe of society, and don't represent the wider societies wishes.


    Yes. I disagree. As I have said many many times now.

    (Original post by cottonmouth)
    An Islamic society in a pakistani university, if there was an overwhelming number of practising Muslims, would be stupid, in my opinion. No need for it.


    Stupid? Why? They get together and talk about Islam, discuss things, enjoy Islamic cultural aspects that they might not engage in otherwise?

    (Original post by cottonmouth)
    They would already be immersed in their religion, at uni, and out of it. Christians here are not.


    Well an idiotic opinion IMO, but at least consistent for once.

    (Original post by cottonmouth)
    A french culture society in
    (Original post by cottonmouth)
    France would be fine. As would a British culture society her. Said it again.


    Why? They are "surrounded by" French culture... why the need - why isn’t it "silly" and "stupid"? Apparently the reason that a "white culture" Society would be these things is because they are supposedly ensconced in it. The same is true of a the French society then.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cottonmouth)
    I'm sure you don't want yet another explanation of what we meant by black culture- black culture in Britain is what is centred on in those societies
    I certainly dont want yours.

    (Original post by cottonmouth)
    and if it gets more specific- it branches out. In general. Not always, as you have pointed out. But then, they are minorities in a dominantly white country. But lets NOT be circular.
    You are combining two entirely separate and unrealted arguments.

    The fact remains that "black" societies do NOT necessarily confine themselves as you seem to do with the term "black".
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I think that this discussion is rather nebulous; nothing has been defined about these societies, and this whole thing is based on conjecture of this supposed controversy of a white/caucasian society being formed. Would you like to state, Lawz/_____ what the aims of this "white" society would be (as ridiculous as a white society is; when do you ever see a "black" society??)? You say that it would not be open exclusively to white people, would the societies of the ethnic minorities you are using as a comparison be exclusive? Please put some kind of limits on this debate, and give us something concrete to discuss.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by wacabac)
    what the aims of this "white" society would be


    I suppose to discuss, enjoy, expose people to, celebrate and partake in White culture. The same as any cultural society.

    (Original post by wacabac)
    You say that it would not be open exclusively to white people, would the societies of the ethnic minorities you are using as a comparison be exclusive?


    No. I have been pretty clear about that.

    My point is - I will repeat:

    1. Societies or organizations that are expressly for one race and to the exclusion of others are wrong

    2. Non-exclusionary groups that aim to celebrate and learn about cultures, whether they be entirely specific or more monolithic are fine with me though I have no desire to join any of them.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lawz-)
    Non-exclusionary groups that aim to celebrate and learn about cultures, whether they be entirely specific or more monolithic are fine with me though I have no desire to join any of them.
    Firstly I'd just like to say that there's no need to try and ridicule cottonmouth as his posts are just as valid and well argued as mine and he has made some very good points. As someone a few posts up has said though this debate has just lost all scope.

    I think before we go any further we should find a British example of a 'Black' society (must be titled such, not 'afro-caribbean' or whatever that is open only to blacks and not other races. Similarly for Asian socieities. So far we've had no real examples other than an alleged one at Cambridge though it's not listed on their website. If such a society actually exists, then this debate might still have some worth, but until then we're arguing about a double standard that isn't even a single standard as far as we know.

    So, any offers?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Here is an excerpt from a paper published by the University of Winchester:

    'The UW’s more specifically targeted activities around race equality were less well known. Most students were aware that there was an Equal Opportunities Officer, but only one or two commented that they knew about the Race Equality Action Forum. The Black Students Society evoked strong feelings among the three students who discussed it. One student viewed the concept of a Black Students Society in a positive light, but commented that the society at the UW was not particularly active. He suggested that a major limitation to the scope of the society appeared to be that the political nature of the term ‘black’, which for various reasons was not universally accepted and acceptable to the range of ethnic minority students on campus. Another student expressed anger that she had not ever heard of the society, and that it had not been highlighted in the welcome pack or during the initiation programme. A third student (who had not heard of the society) expressed anger and alarm at the concept of a Black Students Society, because it differentiated on the grounds of race, and, in her view, fuelled a deficit view of race.

    If there is a Black Society on campus, I wouldn’t go to it, because that’s saying to people: “You’re black so you’d better come to a meeting, like Alcoholics Anonymous”. Do you see what I mean? That’s almost what it feels like. If I were to go to one, I’d probably sit down and think that the white people are out there having a white society – they’re out there getting on with university life…I don’t think it’s helping by you sitting in a room thinking about the issues of being black, and right now you’re the people who are making the issues, not the people out there on campus who are going out for a drink and having fun..

    At one level her comments are a critique of any discourse which seeks to essentialise constructs of race. At another, they evidence how depoliticised the context at the UW is for minority students who find themselves reasonably well integrated into the white middle class norms and values that prevail, and who represent no threat to them. Issues of power and race and oppression are masked by the broadly middle class, western, tolerant environment of the campus. More broadly, her comments suggest a central tension within any ‘race’ and ethnicity discourse; that is, the tension between securing equality and recognising difference.'

    http://www.winchester.ac.uk/view.ashx?Item=12552
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    This is good.

    I feel it re-iterates some points and brings to light a new one.

    Firstly it discusses the political terminology which is linked to the term 'black'. As I have argued already, 'black' is not exclusively a race issue, but one linked to a cultural-political history that isn't applicable to the white majority of this country.

    Secondly it re-iterates the cultural context of University life - that white, middle class values are the norm, and ethnic minorities assimilate into these values. Although the student quoted criticises this, I think it goes to highlight how a minority society may be needed to partake in those cultural values, as the mainstream University lifestyle very much caters to white, middle class values.

    Thirdly, the article shows that having a 'black' society is far from the accepted norm, but a controversial issue. People aren't comfortable, or disagree with the nature of such a society. Thus, can we really argue for a double standard which persecutes whites, if such a controversy exists around the 'black' society anyway?
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Laika)
    Firstly I'd just like to say that there's no need to try and ridicule cottonmouth as his posts are just as valid and well argued as mine and he has made some very good points.
    That's your opinion. I disagree.

    He cosntantly argues against things I haven't even said, claims I am twisting HIS words when in actuality I have simply assumed him to be precise, and continues to repeat things that I have addressed rather than moving on to the points I have made and rebutting them.

    This debate is certainly somewhat circular, but I feel it is far more so with him. I am genuinely not out to ridicule him, but I feel that much of time replying to his posts are wasted as he doesnt seem capable of debating very well. I would prefer to deal with someone who actually provides a moving debate.

    Personal preference - I dont fear his intellectual prowess or anything :rolleyes:

    (Original post by Laika)
    I think before we go any further we should find a British example of a 'Black' society (must be titled such, not 'afro-caribbean' or whatever that is open only to blacks and not other races.
    Why? - I am not discussing such exclusionary groups. I diagree with black ones and white ones in the abstract - but it is not what I have been addressing. See my post above with my numbered points.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lawz-)
    1. Societies or organizations that are expressly for one race and to the exclusion of others are wrong

    2. Non-exclusionary groups that aim to celebrate and learn about cultures, whether they be entirely specific or more monolithic are fine with me though I have no desire to join any of them.
    Well in the abstract, I agree. But clearly that's not what we've been debating, we've been disputing whether one standard exists for minotities and another for whites. So I think we need to turn to real examples now to further this, because, as you say we've said the most we can otherwise.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Laika)
    Well in the abstract, I agree. But clearly that's not what we've been debating, we've been disputing whether one standard exists for minotities and another for whites. So I think we need to turn to real examples now to further this, because, as you say we've said the most we can otherwise.
    Why do I need to present an example of an exclusionary society. It isnt what I am comparing.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lawz-)
    Why do I need to present an example of an exclusionary society. It isnt what I am comparing.
    You don't need to, but if you believe there are double standards for ethnic minorities, then you would do well to highlight them. If all you're saying is that you don't agree with any exclusionary groups, then that's fine, but what have you been talking about for a million pages if that's all you're saying?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lawz-)
    I suppose to discuss, enjoy, expose people to, celebrate and partake in White culture. The same as any cultural society.
    Then I guess there would be no controversy about the group. But could you clarify what you mean by "White" culture? Are we talking about English people, Americans, Australians, South Africans...? What is the common culture?

    (Original post by Lawz-)
    No. I have been pretty clear about that.

    My point is - I will repeat:

    1. Societies or organizations that are expressly for one race and to the exclusion of others are wrong


    2. Non-exclusionary groups that aim to celebrate and learn about cultures, whether they be entirely specific or more monolithic are fine with me though I have no desire to join any of them.
    So if a ethnic minority group is non-exclusionary, then you have no problem with it and there is no controversy. So to summarise:

    If a "white" society was set up (though I'm not sure what this entails- please clarify) which was not exclusive to whites (not controversial) to exist alongside other non-exclusive societies of ethnic minority groups (not controversial) then there is no controversy from either side.

    ie there is no double standard. Agreed?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by wacabac)
    Then I guess there would be no controversy about the group. But could you clarify what you mean by "White" culture? Are we talking about English people, Americans, Australians, South Africans...? What is the common culture?
    What is the common culture to any race?

    I think what is being described is a society for cultures of a white origin, shared or appreciated by the members.

    I remember one time, years ago, a black guy hearing some classical music and laughing and taking the piss out of the "white" music.

    I don't know who the composer was, but it sounded awful to me.

    The point is that something can be white, and cultural, without it being shared by all white people, it does not have to be universal to everyone, after all what is?

    I keep hearing about rap in this thread, but I know a lot of black people who can't stand that genre of music, and many whites who do, so is it black culture, white culture, or culture of a black origin?

    I think the trouble is that people are looking for the impossible in their defenitions, there is no culture, or cultural aspects, universal to all people of a specific race, white, black, red, pink or blue.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lawz-)
    Why do I need to present an example of an exclusionary society. It isnt what I am comparing.
    I think what Laika is trying to say is this:

    You have presented a hypothetical situation in which an ethnic minority society, which is open exclusively to those who are classed as belonging to that ethnic minority, is not regarded as controversial by most people, but a "white" society would be. Can you give an example of an exclusive ethnic minority society, otherwise the discussion of it is ultimately pointless, considering you have referred to it being in existence and a point of comparison?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Paul Bedford)
    What is the common culture to any race?
    That doesn't make sense. "White" encompasses a group of peoples with white skin, all from various countries, all with various cultures. So what would the common culture be in this "white" society or would all cultures be celebrated in one big mix? "White culture" isn't a coined term as it doesn't exist. Black culture is something specific, as is Ukranian culture, Indian culture, Hispanic culture, Mexican culture, Australian and NZ culture, Chinese culture, Dutch culture, Greek culture, Korean culture, Malaysian culture, Singaporean culture, Polish culture, Taiwanese culture, Thai culture, Scandinavian culture, Scottish culture and Caribbean culture. If you insist that "white" culture exists (yet contradict yourself by saying that no race has any particular culture) then define what it is?

    (Original post by Paul Bedford)
    I think what is being described is a society for cultures of a white origin, shared or appreciated by the members.

    I remember one time, years ago, a black guy hearing some classical music and laughing and taking the piss out of the "white" music.

    I don't know who the composer was, but it sounded awful to me.

    The point is that something can be white, and cultural, without it being shared by all white people, it does not have to be universal to everyone, after all what is?
    I agree not everyone exposed to a particular cultural lifestyle enjoys it, which is why societies are not exclusive to a particular race or nationality group. But what is this white culture you keep mentioning?

    (Original post by Paul Bedford)
    I keep hearing about rap in this thread, but I know a lot of black people who can't stand that genre of music, and many whites who do, so is it black culture, white culture, or culture of a black origin?

    I think the trouble is that people are looking for the impossible in their defenitions, there is no culture, or cultural aspects, universal to all people of a specific race, white, black, red, pink or blue.
    Rap has its roots in Black Culture, and is classified thus as it originates from Black culture; a specific culture is not classified according to who appreciates or enjoys it, but according to where it originates from, or where it is ingrained.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Laika)
    You don't need to, but if you believe there are double standards for ethnic minorities, then you would do well to highlight them. If all you're saying is that you don't agree with any exclusionary groups, then that's fine, but what have you been talking about for a million pages if that's all you're saying?
    I'm comparing a white culture society that is non-exclusive to a black one that is the same.

    An exclusive one is not to the purpose.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by wacabac)
    So if a ethnic minority group is non-exclusionary, then you have no problem with it and there is no controversy. So to summarise:

    If a "white" society was set up (though I'm not sure what this entails- please clarify) which was not exclusive to whites (not controversial) to exist alongside other non-exclusive societies of ethnic minority groups (not controversial) then there is no controversy from either side.

    ie there is no double standard. Agreed?
    The point is that a non-exclusionary "black" society would rais eno objections whereas a non-exlcusive "white" one IMO would.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by wacabac)
    Black culture is something specific
    More specific than white cuture?

    how so?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lawz-)
    The point is that a non-exclusionary "black" society would rais eno objections whereas a non-exlcusive "white" one IMO would.
    Why? This is purely conjecture on your part and not worth debate unless you have evidence of where such a group has caused controversy.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you think parents should charge rent?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.