<p>So I saw this poster on a bulletin board at my university (I live in Hawaii):</p>
<p>Just a note, when it says “Native Hawaiian” it means people of Native Hawaiian ancestry as in one who’s blood can be traced back to Polynesia. This has nothing to do with residency. Therefore, even though I’ve lived on this island my entire life, I can not participate in this summer course because of the fact that I’m Caucasian and not Native Hawaiian.</p>
<p>Now I can see possibly some private organization or a private college -possibly- offering such classes that have racial/ethnic requirements for eligibility. But this course is a community college course, the community college which is part of the university of Hawaii system which is funded by the state of Hawaii. I’m just thinking to myself that the government couldn’t possibly legally racially discriminate when it comes to things like education. </p>
<p>I get a lot of reverse discrimination being a Caucasian living in the islands even though I live here, enjoy a lot of the local food, speak the “dialect” (Hawaiian Pidgin) fluently in the appropriate contexts, etc. It’s really tough at times And I’ve seen both state and non-state funded programs that aid Native Hawaiians and on occasion other minority groups. But I feel something like this is just crossing the line at this point. Any insights or thoughts?</p>
<p>Note that there are six sections of the same ART 115 course with the same instructor. They are all internet-based courses. Three of the sections are Alu Like funded with “preference given to Native Hawaiian students”.</p>
<p>ahhh, I see. Thanks for doing your own little research and gathering clarification, I guess there’s nothing illegal about this then. I’m still a little butthurt about all of this though, the reverse discrimination prevalent in both the state and the US in general is becoming an increasingly annoying issue imho.</p>
<p>I’m aware that this is a straight up discrimination. I was specifying the type (in this case reverse discrimination) since it’s the type of discrimination I think is becoming more and more prevalent and annoying nowadays.</p>
<p>From the Wikipedia article:
“Reverse discrimination is discrimination against members of a dominant or majority group or in favor of members of a minority or historically disadvantaged group”</p>
<p>You do realize that Native Hawaiians are still oppressed and underrepresented in higher education, right?
Do you realize that by living in Hawaii you are a conduit of colonialism? Yes, even if you don’t want to be. And I just have to laugh at your sense of entitlement to Hawaiian culture and this idea of “reverse discrimination.” Yeah, people can discriminate against you and sometimes that’s not warranted, but it in no way compares to institutional and historical discrimination like the kind Native Hawaiians and other minorities experience.
If you feel so discriminated against and hold a grudge against the minorities in Hawaii, why would you want to take a class that is geared toward them? If you still want to take the class email the professor.
Also, citing Wikipedia? LOLZ.</p>
<p>Perhaps this is discrimination. It sounds like it just might be. But before you gather the troops and declare yourself part to be of the down-trodden, consider that real discrimination is not a single look or act. Real discrimination is a life time of looks and acts that wear down the self esteem of the mind. Have you been discriminated against? Perhaps. Is it legal? Under state rights, it might be. Have you faced real and pervasive discrimination? As a Caucasian, I doubt it.</p>
<p>Actually, your definition of discrimination is highly idiosyncratic–if a black man is refused a job based on the color of his skin, is that act somehow not discriminatory simply because that was the first time? And to make a judgment, as you just did, about someone’s life’s experiences simply on the basis of the color of their skin is pretty much the definition of being racist, at least according to current modes of politically correct discourse.</p>
<p>@2redhares: At the university this is offered at, actually people of native hawaiian ancestry make up the majority of the student population as found on the CC’s own website: <a href=“http://hawaii.hawaii.edu/ir/resources/hawcc-fact-book/acc-web-graphs/about-our-students.pdf[/url]”>http://hawaii.hawaii.edu/ir/resources/hawcc-fact-book/acc-web-graphs/about-our-students.pdf</a> Secondly, just because a class of people were discriminated against historically, that is no reason to give them special privileges in the future. Thirdly, I’m sorry that I was born and raised here and that I am a “conduit of colonialism.” But I am not those people that overthrew the Hawaiian Kingdom and I didn’t choose to come from the same ancestry as them either. Using the “your people” did this to “our people” decades/centuries ago is a poor argument to justify anything. Fourthly, Native Hawaiians have a myriad of opportunities. Sure they have been oppressed in the past but nowadays there are lots of state programs, scholarships, etc geared to help them out. Fifthly, there is no majority in Hawaii, every ethnic group is a minority, including my own, so I’m not holding any grudge amongst the minorities in Hawaii because everyone is in the minority. Even then, I don’t any grudges about any particular ethnic groups at all, I just want to live in a world where there are equal opportunities for everyone that are independent from one’s ancestry. Sixthly, the class isn’t “geared” toward them. The image of the poster (which got strangely removed by a mod) shows that the class is simply a 2D graphics design class, which has nothing to do with Hawaiian culture. I don’t blame you for that one since the image link got removed though, I just wanted to clarify. Seventhly, I have no interest in taking the class at all, I’ll be busy participating in an REU at the university this summer; I’m the type that argue about things because they aren’t morally right, not because it’ll benefit me personally if I get my way. Eighthly, ok, I could have used a better source than Wikipedia. But it was the quickest definition I could pull up and conveys the definition quite nicely imho so whatever.</p>
<p>@sosomenza: I’m not going to go out my way to sue or try to get the class cancelled. I wouldn’t want to mean to the people that already signed up for the class. I would just want more people to be more aware of this “reverse discrimination” thing that’s happening. Perhaps if I could persquade a professor at the CC to create an “only Caucasian class” next summer that’s funded by some third party organization I could get a point across. I’m sure that would tick a lot of people off but the professor could just use the case of this Native Hawaiian only class as an example to justify it. It’d virtually be no different. Not that I’d want only Caucasian classes to be something of a reality, but perhaps a single scenario like the one above would strongly convey the point I’m trying to make. Also, yes, being a Caucasian in Hawaii is not the easiest thing. A lot of the locals here are not fond of people with the “mainland attitude” (this usually ends up being rude tourists and Caucasians from the mainland US that only moved to Hawaii very recently) and they say that they lack the “aloha spirit.” Because of this, based off the color of my skin, I often get lumped as a mainlander or someone who lacks “aloha spirit.” I’ve been called a f’in haole (a Hawaiian word that connotatively means “white person”). The discrimination isn’t something that’s persistent or life-altering but I will go as far to say that I’ve been treated with less respect than I deserve from people on a fair amount of occasions based off the color of my skin.</p>
<p>AASon: Understanding racism and being a racist are two distinct things. Subjectively defining pervasive racism does not make one a racist. Also there is a direct correlation to skin color and racism-I encourage you not to argue against this point. Anyway, losing a single job is racism but not pervasive life changing racism, which was the whole point of my post. Losing a life time of jobs on the other hand is. Put more simply, the student likely will lose out on the class, but his is not likely a future of pervasive racism.</p>
<p>You were saying that someone can only claim discrimination if he’s suffered a lifetime of discrimination, which is patently false. You then changed your point to mean that you are only arguing that a lifetime of discrimination=pervasive life changing racism, which is a triusm. And there is no absolute direct correlation to skin color and racism: whites can be discriminated against and blacks can be discriminated against</p>
<p>AAson: My point has been pervasive racism all along. It is constant and true and in no way inconsistent. Congrats on your attack. A time tested method to distract from a bad POV. It always works for a little while but eventually the truth will win. Here’s some truth for you. I used the words direct correlation, which you restated as absolute direct correlation. A completely different concept but a must make change on your part in order to save face-I suppose. Also I’m not sure if you understand what correlation means? Please look it up. Btw A direct correlation between discrimination and dark skin color will not preclude white discrimination, obviously.</p>
<p>Sorry, I misused the term majority. I meant that, looking at the other pie chart diagonal to that, you’ll note that Hawaiian is the most prevalent ethnicity, more than double any other ethnicity. I don’t have any statistics readily available right now but from personal experience judging by my own observation of the racial distribution of the population, Hawaiians are if anything over-represented at this community college, not under.</p>
<p>And doesn’t the fact that native Hawaiians are over-represented at community college mean that there is a problem with equality on the island? Community college is not a place you want to be over-represented.</p>
<p>Well, it’s better to be over-represented at a community college than to not be over-represented in any form of higher education. Also, having a class of people being over-represented at a community college doesn’t necessarily imply that they are under-represented at actual universities.</p>
<p>"Preference given to Native Hawaiian students. "</p>
<p>This is an exact parallel to wording used for situation (job ads, etc.) where Native Americans or Alaska Natives are given preference. The legality of this (which is bound to the rather complicated concept of native sovereignty) I’m guessing comes from the U.S. constitution which treats Native Americans as a special case:</p>
<p>“To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes”</p>
<p>This is the underpinning of tribal sovereignty and government-to-government relations between Native Americans and the government in the continental U.S. Does it apply to Hawaiian natives? I don’t know, but that would be argued as the legal justification for the ‘discrimination’. As I mentioned, this certainly justifies hiring preferences in Alaska by, for instance, village corporations.</p>
And I’ve seen both state and non-state funded programs that aid Native Hawaiians and on occasion other minority groups. But I feel something like this is just crossing the line at this point. Any insights or thoughts?</p>