Jump to content

Racist Cupcakes?


Recommended Posts

racist_cupcakesZombietime blog - 'Racist Cupcakes' event link:


[Excerpted: read commentary to numerous photos of entire event at link provided]


WARNING: no nudity or 'disgusting' is present at above source link for this excerpted article


"Increase Diversity Bake Sale," Berkeley, September 27, 2011


The U.C. Berkeley College Republicans struck a national nerve today by holding a bake sale with racially discriminatory pricing: Higher prices for white and Asian students, lower prices for black, Hispanic and female students. Why the intentional discrimination? To protest a pending new statewide law, SB 185, which attempts to re-introduce Affirmative Action into university admission standards, something that was banned years ago with California's Proposition 209, a popular constitutional amendment requiring race-neutral admissions.

The purposely inflammatory gag was very clever: the goal was to make everyone point out how racist the cupcake prices were, at which point the young Republicans reply, "Exactly! Racial discrimination is unfair. Thanks for making our point for us!"


But the leftists on campus and around the state instead flew into a blind rage: The joke was too effective, so Affirmative Action proponents simply pretended to "not get it." Accusations of racism flew back and forth and before anyone knew it we had a major FUBAR situation on our hands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First off I'm very pleased that the College Republicans made such a good showing.


That being said - and knowing full well that both of my feet are firmly planted in the 'Church' of Bastiat - I exhort forum readers to view the following lectures.


The lecturer is Harvard Professor Michael Sandel - author of the book Justice: What’s the Right Thing to Do?, a New York Times best seller - and presents BIG questions of political philosophy to a student body of several hundered concerning the most vexing issues of our time: bank bailouts, equality and inequality, taxes, immigration, affirmative action, the role of markets, national service, same-sex marriage, the place of religion in politics, and the ethical questions we confront in our everyday lives. The venue: some Harvard University lecture hall.




Episode 03

February 15, 2011 Comments (0)



With humorous references to Bill Gates and Michael Jordan, Sandel introduces the libertarian notion that redistributive taxation—taxing the rich to give to the poor—is akin to forced labor.



Students first discuss the arguments behind redistributive taxation. If you live in a society that has a system of progressive taxation, aren’t you obligated to pay your taxes? Don’t many rich people often acquire their wealth through sheer luck or family fortune? A group of students dubbed “Team Libertarian” volunteers to defend the libertarian philosophy against these objections.




Episode 04

February 14, 2011 Comments (6)



The philosopher John Locke believes that individuals have certain rights—to life, liberty, and property—which were given to us as human beings in the “the state of nature,” a time before government and laws were created. According to Locke, our natural rights are governed by the law of nature, known by reason, which says that we can neither give them up nor take them away from anyone else.



If we all have unalienable rights to life, liberty, and property, how can a government enforce tax laws passed by the representatives of a mere majority? Doesn’t that amount to taking some people’s property without their consent? Locke’s response is that we give our “tacit consent” to obey the tax laws passed by a majority when we choose to live in a society.


WARNING: the three episode jump may prove somewhat disconcerting to those not accustomed to FLT transitioning.


That notwithstanding, and given the foregoing, and knowing my affinity to political economy to the likes of Bastiat, Hazlit, Friedman, et ali, the following lecture comes to the crux of the issue raised in the very first link of this thread:




Episode 08

February 8, 2011 Comments (0)



Rawls argues that even meritocracy—a distributive system that rewards effort—doesn’t go far enough in leveling the playing field because those who are naturally gifted will always get ahead. Furthermore, says Rawls, the naturally gifted can’t claim much credit because their success often depends on factors as arbitrary as birth order. Sandel makes Rawls’s point when he asks the students who were first born in their family to raise their hands.



Sandel discusses the fairness of pay differentials in modern society. He compares the salary of former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor ($200,000) with the salary of television’s Judge Judy ($25 million). Sandel asks, is this fair? According to John Rawls, it is not.


[Excerpted: http://www.justiceharvard.org/watch/ - watch all 12 episodes in their entirety]


Participating in all TWELVE lectures WILL make you think and will require at least one FULL week to observe & contemplate in their entirety. Each lecture is about 45 minuts and at least 1/3 of the time is devoted to debate by the student audience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It takes a lot of fortitude to be a Republican at Berkley. It takes even more to do something like this at Berkley. Let's get the Berkley Republicans into congress.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hear what your're saying.


SOMEBODY should be a minion and present the Knight of the Order of Bastiat to the leader of that group.


So: what about Professor Michael Sandel at Harvard University?


I noticed a lot of the 'kids' were takin' notes during the lecture.


So that's a 'university' lecture, eh? In contrast to my local community college: maybe 40 students / class.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


One of the most entertaining and yet tragic readings ever!


Kinda like our surreal universe- brilliant, funny, satire, exasperating, ironical and mind boggling stupidity, blindness and deafness all on display.


Ward Connerly, the godfather of the anti-Affirmative Action movement, showed up took a seat at the bake sale table, where he was interviewed by various media outlets.


He calmly pointed out to all comers that the pending bill, SB 185, waiting to be signed or vetoed by Gov. Jerry Brown, was patently unconstitutional, since California voters had already amended the state constitution with Proposition 209, which plainly says "The state shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting." He predicted that SB 185, even if signed, would be thrown out by the courts. The only way to undo Prop. 209 would be to re-amend the state constitution to allow discrimination (highly unlikely), or to have the United States Supreme Court declare the whole thing federally unconstitutional, something which they've never done, despite having several opportunities to. So it looks like non-discrimination is here to stay, to the great dismay of the Affirmative Action advocates.




Back at the main table there were incessant arguments and discussions about race and Affirmative Action. To everyone's amazement, the College Republicans did not back down, despite massive condemnation from the ASUC (the student government) and worldwide accusations of racism being hurled at them. In fact, they held their own in the arguments pretty well, because practically every single opponent fell face first into the simple logical trap the Republicans had set: If you think the pricing scheme is "racist," because it discriminates according to ethnicity, then you must also think that Affirmative Action is racist, since it does exactly the same thing!



You know the world has turned upside down when the Republicans are the ones holding up signs saying "Stop discrimination by 'race'," while the liberals are protesting for discrimination.


I felt the ground shifting beneath my feet, but it wasn't an earthquake.



Speaking of which: Some counter-protesting group thought they'd make some kind of brilliant point by handing out flyers advertising a slave auction in 1855. Which actually reveals what this is really all about: Reparations, baby.






Cal's Indian Students Association hoped no one would notice them at their nearby table. "We have nothing to do with this!" They truly are the forgotten minority on campus, the ethnicity that doesn't fit in the American schema. Are they part of the "over-represented minority" Asian student population, or are they oppressed brown peoples from the Third World? A little of both, but their straight-A grade point average and relentless work ethic tend to identify the Indians as part of the Oppressor Class. Spend less time studying and more time protesting, and you can finally take your place in the Hierarchy of Victimhood!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • 1686319526
  • Create New...