Jan Libourel
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 867
I suppose most of you have heard of that incident at the University of Oklahoma where some members of SAE fraternity were recorded singing a racist chant on a bus, whereupon university president David L. Boren reacted by permanently shutting down the fraternity house and expelling the two students leading the chant.
Does this strike any of you as excessive? Had the SAEs been involved in a cross-burning or chanted the offensive chant at a group of African-American students, that would be a different matter. However, they were by themselves on a bus, where presumably no African-Americans were present. This seems to me to be more a "thought crime," kind of like Donald Sterling's injudicious remarks to Vi Stiviano.
And, how serious were the students in their racism? Isn't there a very good chance they were simply being bratty, irreverent and mischievous? College men--and perhaps fraternity members especially--are noted for that kind of thing. For example, when I was at UCLA, the "Fiji" house, notorious as an "animal house," was reputed to have a little shrine with a swastika flag and a bust or bas-relief of Adolph Hitler before which they burned candles. UCLA, I might mention, was very heavily Jewish in those days. However, everybody knew it was just what we called a "rat fuck," the Fijis just being their animalistic selves, and as far as I know, they never suffered any consequences.
And was it just or right to close down the whole fraternity house for the actions of just a few of the members, actions for which there were no real victims? I always thought the doctrine of "collective guilt" was sort of un-American. Anyway, do any of you have any views on this matter?
David L. Boren and I were up at Balliol together and were on quite cordial terms, I thought. If he is now so offended by political incorrectness, I don't know what the hell he was doing hobnobbing with the likes of me!
Does this strike any of you as excessive? Had the SAEs been involved in a cross-burning or chanted the offensive chant at a group of African-American students, that would be a different matter. However, they were by themselves on a bus, where presumably no African-Americans were present. This seems to me to be more a "thought crime," kind of like Donald Sterling's injudicious remarks to Vi Stiviano.
And, how serious were the students in their racism? Isn't there a very good chance they were simply being bratty, irreverent and mischievous? College men--and perhaps fraternity members especially--are noted for that kind of thing. For example, when I was at UCLA, the "Fiji" house, notorious as an "animal house," was reputed to have a little shrine with a swastika flag and a bust or bas-relief of Adolph Hitler before which they burned candles. UCLA, I might mention, was very heavily Jewish in those days. However, everybody knew it was just what we called a "rat fuck," the Fijis just being their animalistic selves, and as far as I know, they never suffered any consequences.
And was it just or right to close down the whole fraternity house for the actions of just a few of the members, actions for which there were no real victims? I always thought the doctrine of "collective guilt" was sort of un-American. Anyway, do any of you have any views on this matter?
David L. Boren and I were up at Balliol together and were on quite cordial terms, I thought. If he is now so offended by political incorrectness, I don't know what the hell he was doing hobnobbing with the likes of me!