Column trivializes bigger picture
Adam Epstein should be proud of his trivial treatment of real
social and economic injustices present in our American society
(“Sports recruiters should seek diversity, not skills,”
Viewpoint, April 6). While I am proud of being an American, I am at
least sensitive enough to see that institutional racism has left a
tangible imprint on the everyday lives of both whites and
non-whites alike.
The majority of American children are being raised thinking that
the academic achievement gaps observed between whites and
non-whites/poor whites are solely due to a lack of motivation,
intelligence and parental guidance and can therefore comfortably
shed any social responsibility for these marginalized members of
our society ““ citizens or not.
I may not agree with affirmative action. I personally feel that
a more fundamental change is necessary in our public education if
we wish to provide a real remedy “to let the healing
begin.”
I’m glad Epstein finds this disgraceful situation in our
society so amusing and I hope his self-perceived wit lets him feel
better about himself. Unfortunately, I don’t share his same
enthusiasm for sarcastic commentary and a lack of social
responsibility.
I don’t accuse him of being a bigot, but he certainly is
insensitive to a large number of communities. He trivializes their
attempts to seek ways to fully contribute to the same society that
has so consistently marginalized them.
There is a very distinct difference between African American and
Latino students trying to reach the university and Epstein trying
to get on the basketball team. Many of the best basketball players
come from the northeast, so I don’t see how he can blame his
lack of ability on the weather.
The fact is that, in our wonderful country, there are many
children who have the potential to succeed, but that potential is
not developed because of their economic backgrounds. Unfortunately,
American history and society has ensured that these just happen to
fall along racial background.
The achievement gap is real, the social injustice tangible. The
only question is: should we do anything to change this? Epstein
doesn’t really seem to want to.
Nevertheless, he should strongly consider an apology for his
patronizing attitude. I would never even consider affirmative
action because I feel it further marginalizes the students that it
targets. It is just a desperate measure (which was very necessary
in the past) because the dominant population doesn’t care
about what happens to underrepresented minority students.
Christopher Segura Third-year Microbiology and Molecular
Genetics
Whites have diversity too
The Bruin has printed a chart entitled “Ethnicity of
Admitted Freshmen at UCLA,” which dissects the
“Asian” category, revealing multiple countries of
origin (“Minority admits at UC near pre-SP-1 levels,”
News, April 4). Why is “white” not described in a
similar manner?
Under the “white” label would fall such
nationalities as: British, Scottish, Welsh, Irish, German, Italian,
French, Dutch, Belgian, Swiss, various Slavs, Bulgarian, Albanian,
Hungarian, Rumanian, Spanish, Portuguese, Latvian, Estonian,
Lithuanian, Greek, Polish, Swedish, Danish, Norwegian, Finnish,
Russian, Ukrainian, Byelorussian, Jewish, Middle Eastern, Armenian,
North African … etc.
Why don’t you tell the truth? “Whites”
represent various cultures, languages, customs and appearances.
What is apparent is The Bruin’s attempt to negate the
diversity of “white” culture, make it appear that
“Asians” are really not as overrepresented as they are,
and deflect from the underrepresentation of
“whites.”
Jonnie Hargis, Library Assistant IV, RIS Library,
YRL
History shows need for redress
I am responding to the recent articles concerning slave
reparations and the David Horowitz ad (“Racist ad is not free
speech issue,” Viewpoint, April 2, and “Blacks miss
global picture, ignore current opportunities,” Viewpoint,
April 5). For the past two years or so, I’ve been following
the often heated and controversial issue of reparations for
slavery. Across the nation, most white folks are vehemently against
reparations of any sort. You mention a mere apology for slavery,
and their shorts get all knotted.
I truly believe that there would be another civil war if the
U.S. government ever considered this measure. Please, let me share
with your readers why I’m still waiting on my 40 acres and a
mule.
On Jan. 1, 1863, President Abraham Lincoln signed the
Emancipation Proclamation, freeing the slaves. Shortly thereafter,
the Homestead Act of 1862 was enacted. Under this act, Congress
literally gave away 160 acres of land per person or family, free.
For more than 100 years, more than 2 million white Americans
received more than 270 million acres of land, and the only
stipulation was that they had to “homestead” the land
for five years and it would be theirs.
Imagine that ““ 160 acres of land, free. And the settlers
didn’t even have to be U.S. citizens to qualify, only working
on becoming one. To my knowledge, the Homestead Act of 1862 was
never repealed.
In 1866, the Southern Homestead Act was also enacted by Congress
during the Reconstruction Period. It aimed to grant 40 acres to
freedmen or ex-slaves. Some ex-slaves did indeed receive a few
southern acres, but were eventually returned to the pardoned
Confederates. America preferred to keep the freed slaves, my
ancestors, as sharecroppers for another 100 years. The rest is
history.
The U.S. government could give away 160 acres of land, free,
even to noncitizens but could not give 40 acres, as enacted, to a
group of people who provided them over 200 years of hard, free
labor. Instead, they gave my people 100-plus more years of hate,
Black Codes, Jim Crow laws, the KKK, lynchings, segregation,
oppression, miscegenation, poverty and more hate.
I ask you, would black America, no, would America, as a whole be
a better nation if we’d gotten our acres, as promised? Right
now, I’d take an acre and a chicken.
Pamela A. Hairston Washington, DC