There is a new controversy at Claremont Colleges where a housing advertisement specifically barred white students from living in an off-campus house. Karé Ureña (PZ ’18) posted a housing offer for People of Color only and added “I don’t want to live with any white folks.” There has been a rising objection, particularly from conservative students, that there is a double standard on campuses and that, in this case, the school would never tolerate a student barred blacks or Hispanics from applying for housing. Indeed, off-campus housing at Tulane University was recently the scene of students tearing down a display viewed as racist without any sanction from the university. Some (even CNN commentators) insist that African-Americans or people of color cannot be racist by definition. For example, CNN Political commentator Marc Lamont Hill has maintained that black people lack the “institutional power” necessary to “deploy racism.”
The post at Claremont states that “POC [people of color] only” will be considered for this living opportunity. Various students supported the right to bar whites. For example, AJ León (PZ ’18), a member of the Pitzer Latino Student Union is quoted as saying that “This is directed to protect POC, not white people. Don’t see how this is racist at all…” So, if a white student says, he does not want to live with Hispanics, that would not be directed at Hispanics?
Sara Roschdi (PZ ’17), also Pitzer Latino Student Union member, insisted, “People of color are allowed to create safe POC only spaces. It is not reverse racism or discriminatory, it is self preservation.” Another Nina Lee, a Women’s Studies major, objected to those objecting: “We don’t want to have to tiptoe around fragile white feelings in a space where we just want to relax and be comfortable.”
Other comments in support of the exclusion are too profane to include in this column, but can be read here.
Claremont has not responded what it would do with white students who bar students of color from off-campus housing. However, the controversy should produce a response from the school on its policy on such racial discrimination in housing.
What do you think?
@IndyBob
Rest assured – this is exactly what we Progressives are doing. And there are millions of us. We are uniting behind Jill Stein, but would rather see Trump in office than HRC.
@Jill
Interesting post.
@Independent Bob
How true, I wish.
Hey Issac, if the Trump supporters and the Sanders supporters and the Libertarians and the supporters of Jill Stein get together, Hilary would be toast. What I’m saying is a lot of people out there are not happy with the status quo.
Identity politics serves the needs of the oligarchy. It causes people to turn inward, become hardened towards the “other” and stops people from forming a rational analysis of the social situation we face together. It has been cultivated by the govt. and used against ordinary people. You can see one example of this manipulation quite clearly in the DNC leaks. Here, Hispanic voters are simply a block of people to be used. They are called “tacos” and “brands”, their lives cynically manipulated on behalf of votes for Democrats.
This is a very interesting interview which talks about media manipulation to include the use of identity politics.
http://store.counterpunch.org/nicholas-schou-episode-52/
It is manifestly untrue that black people cannot be racist. Obama has used his institutional format to do enormous damage to the lives of ordinary black men and women both in the US and in Africa. Further, one look at many black run nations in Africa show exactly what a black leader can do to citizens. So the idea that being black confers a special type of moral superiority and good judgment on any person does not hold up to reality.
Safe space is not guaranteed by only hanging out with people whom you consider like yourself. Safe space is created by compassion and intellectual honesty–two things in short supply at this time of crisis. Compassion and critical thought are the qualities needed to confront power. That is why they have been systematically attacked and replaced by narcissism and manifestly false idea that being a member of an oppressed group a priori makes one good.
The sooner these ideas are given an honest critique, the faster people can bond together with others to take on those things which are harming all of us, including racism.
@Issac
Isn’t time you put that funny little hat on (you do wear one) and go lube the gears on your bike?
@Issac
Get used to new normal – a candidate who compromised our national security, lied repeatedly, undermined Bernie Sanders and supports the TPP is a viable presidential contender.
Can the Claremont Colleges legally have such a policy? If the housing is owned by the Claremont Colleges, then the policy amounts to private discrimination based on the race of non-POCs. Hence, any violation of law would be under either the 13th Amendment preventing private housing discrimination as “badges and incidents of slavery” or under the Commerce Clause’s legislative authority to prevent discrimination if it substantially affects interstate commerce. Regulation of private housing and employment discrimination based on race are enabled under the 13th Amendment as the badges or incidents of slavery. However, if anything, such regulation would tend to support, not prevent, such a policy, and it is the only Amendment to expressly prohibit private activity, i.e., private activity against POCs, not against non-POCs. If the housing is owned by the Claremont Colleges, its administration may very well be relying on the 13th Amendment in support of this policy.
So, my guess is that racially-neutral anti-discriminatory legislation under the Commerce Clause would have to be the law violated. I’d look first at the federal Civil Rights Acts.
Housing and education (except with respect to school diversity as a factor in the enrollment application process) are rather important areas within which to prevent racial discrimination at the federal and state levels. I’d hope there’s crystal clear law preventing this policy under both the Commerce Clause and California state law. It’s anti-diversifying if anything.
‘Normal’ people would never vote for Trump. Only the shallow, fist thumping, haters follow Trump, and perhaps the extremely, to the point of having a name for it, curious.
@Egbart
Yes, we must unite to stop the TPP!!
@Autumn
I don’t care who you support as long as it’s to break up the political aristocracy which is bringing the country to a place where there will be no return. After this election our debt is so high there won’t be a fix.
As the great W.C. said “that’s accent drab over the e”.
Forget it, Jake. It’s higher ed. In California. Of course there will be excuses offered for this crew of professional hispanics. The excuses will be offered up until the point where bad publicity begins to have an impact on some administrator’s emotional equilibrium or has an impact on the inflow of funds. It’s all about appearances for hollow men and all about the Benjamins for careerists.
@Egbart
Love your comment. Thing is I am a Jill Stein supporter but find myself defending Trump constantly and calling out the MSM! Truly surreal.
@Autumn
The day that Trump says Obacala is a “Real smart fellow” the media will report something like “Trump calls Obacala a Real Fart Smeller”. They are so used to hammering the guy they don’t care what he says.
Lead story in NY Times today: “Donald Trump Suggests ‘Second Amendment People’ Could Act Against Hillary Clinton”
While it does mention HRC’s remarks about assassination they gloss it over – because she apologized.
We all want to avoid association with those who would harm us. Unfortunately that is largely unpredictable as anyone can have a failure of judgement at any time. Failed judgement comes in all colors, places of birth, languages, cultures, etc.
Reverse racism in action. I am becoming increasingly convinced that these stories are designed to divert us from real issues. As we get upset about the SJW snowflakes OR support them…
This PC crap is why we will very possibly saying “President Trump.” Normal people are fed up. SJW’s weaken, not strengthen, the people they purportedly help.
This is clearly racism. If they allow this, they would be required to allow whites only housing.
First of all, there does not appear to be any reference to the ownership of the apartment in question. It would be a violation of the Fair Housing Act if a landlord published such an ad, but as far as I know, people still have a right to determine who they want to live with in private housing.
Certainly, the ad demonstrates raw racism, but unless there is some other factor that would bring it under the FHA, I think that these students have the right to choose their roommates based on any factor they choose. Other than publication in a newspaper of general circulation on campus, this is no different than, say, three Jewish roommates seeking a fourth, and deciding among themselves that they don’t want to room someone who is not Jewish.
Substitute any affinity group that you want to, people still get to pick their associates. If this were a university dormitory, it might be different, but apparently this is private off-campus housing.
I used to really like Marc Lamont Hill but he is clearly going beyond the pale now. Racism has no color unfortunately. Race segregated housing is wrong no matter which race is Being excluded.