The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current, June 22, 2004, Image 7

Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page. It is also available as plain text as well as XML.

    ay-.
Opinion
The Battalion
Page 7 • Tuesday, June 22, 2004
iatedi
outh
'aid Mo;
with p!
Iraqdi
hallenging the black community
Ml Cosby’s statements on self-destructive nature of black America long overdue
Revised
’Peratepj
t’s time to lay it on the
line. There is a problem
in black America today,
it’s high time someone
'PP 1 something about it.
s res ®'B‘The Blacks of the
^ e . ^wOs marched and were hit
in he face with rocks to get
to inBeducation, and now we
effoi
have these knuckleheads
walking around. These
louver economic people are
w.„ _
n
at paniitft
es rill
the An
)rk AI-
ipe pu,’;
linked n
>outh
t for hi-
holding up their end in this deal,
ese people are not parenting,
ey’re buying things for their kids:
0 sneakers, for what? And they
n’t spend $200 for Hooked on
onics. I can’t even talk the way
these people talk: why you ain’t,
piere you is.”
Anyone have a problem with
these remarks? Is someone out there
chomping at the bit to label the
sp< aker of these words a racist?
^7»st likely the answer is yes, and
thi; is precisely why the vast majori
ty of Americans steer clear of acqui
escing to such statements because
thly fear being deemed a racist also
foi doing nothing more than speak-
in; truthfully.
■ However, these words belong to
£^Bnerica's favorite TV father. Bill
"llBsby, who stated them at the
’^■mstitutional Hall event in
stagedi^shjngton D.C., commemorating
the 50th anniversary of the Brown v.
Board of Education ruling.
Wail p Remarkably, the comedian’s
1 Beech received applause and laugh-
B. though the fact that it was a mul
ticultural convention may have had
soi oething to do with that,
ifl tWgardless, reactions in the black
jCdmmunity have been mixed. Some
'ee with Cosby, while others either
and ack nowledge the truthfulness of the
4«yBnarks but criticize the callous man-
d ner in which the statements were
trOfimade or simply condemn his words
’6 IS If
:o hel
ogether.
For example, Fox News reported
1 peildh lt after Cosby’s remarks the
., i Nj\ACP President Kweisi Mfume
|d NAACP Legal Defense Fund
ad Theodore Shaw approached the
MAIL CALL
podium looking “stone
faced.” Shaw reportedly
announced to the crowd that
most people on welfare are
not blacks, and that many
of the problems his organi
zation addresses are not
self-inflicted.
To illustrate further, in
his article, “What Bill
Cosby Should be Talking
About,” Time Magazine’s
Christopher Farley chided the come
dian, not for what he said, but for
where he said it. Or, more appropri
ately, in front of whom he said it.
4 4
50 years after the
Civil Rights Movement
the black community
can no longer expect
American citizens to
believe that blacks do
not have opportunities
at their disposal....
Farley stated, “Cosby broke the
unwritten rule of keeping black dirty
laundry in black washing machines.”
That is, Cosby should have refrained
from speaking his mind in the pres
ence of other racial groups, specifi
cally whites, even if the statements
were truthful, for as Marlon Brando
put it, “you never discuss business
outside the family.”
Such an outlook is ridiculous. If
the NAACP is to continue proclaim
ing that American society, again
mostly referring to whites, has cul
pability in the problems lower
socioeconomic blacks face, and a
responsibility to rectify them, then
there is no need for “behind closed-
door discussions.” All possible
explanations to the plight must be
raised out in the open, regardless of
the blame they ascribe to specific
groups.
Perhaps what Farley, and many
others in the black community prefer
is for lower socioeconomic blacks to
obtain somewhat of a “free pass” or
excuse for the self-destructive con
duct in which many, but certainly not
all, engage in.
Here’s the bottom line: 50 years
after the Civil Rights Movement, the
black community can no longer
expect American citizens to believe
that blacks do not have opportunities
at their disposal to live the American
dream and become successful.
Though many in the inner cities face
tremendous hardships, this cannot
exonerate parents from their responsi
bility to raise their children properly
by teaching them right from wrong,
to develop self-discipline and pursue
higher education.
When 13 percent of African
Americans fail to complete high
school, when 70 percent of all
out-of-wedlock births are to
black mothers and when the
incarceration rate for black males
between the ages of 18 and 24 is
eight times that of whites, some
thing is wrong.
This is a social problem and,
as Bill Cosby stated, “You can’t
just blame white people for this,
man, you can’t.” And it’s not
rational to assume that some pub
lic policy will rectify this situa
tion entirely. Nothing can, except the
people themselves. This is what
Cosby was stating and he hit it right
on the nose.
So instead of writing Cosby off
as a black elitist, or preferring that
such comments be kept in “black
washing machines,” perhaps its
time to accept the truth and work
toward rectifying it through a
cultural transformation that
places more emphasis on families
and education.
Nicholas Davis is a senior
political science major.
Graphic by Rylie Deyoe
n met
emplf;
3ana
A dog is preferable to George W. Bush
In response to Cody Sain's June 21 column:
, p Just last week, German researchers presented scientific evidence
IQ c that a border collie named Rico could understand more than 200
1SI h words and can learn new ones as quickly as many children.
a i- While not exactly a "yellow dog," I would gladly vote for Rico
“thirdGeorge W. Bush in the upcoming elections, if for no other
lor |i reason than her superior command of the dictionary.
or d While I feel John Kerry does have many strengths of his own
^,1, that would make him a superior President, here I will just sug-
> e r ges * to 3 * voting "against" a candidate rather than "for" the alter-
' enl p] na tive candidate is not a concept unique to this election. It hap-
u , |;P er is all the time.
BCBnybody remember the 2000 election? That was about
■ in |i:P*' n ^ on ar| d nothing more. Mr. Sain is correct that many people
Jre voting "for" Kerry because of a dislike of Bush, but there are
iV likewise many people who will vote for Bush because of a dislike
^ |,of Democrats or of liberals.
Hie ipThere is a polarization evident today in America unlike any
time in the recent past. I would suggest that Bush's policies at
home and abroad have led to such polarization which can only
, n i he bad for our country. Therefore a change is in order; whether
in the form of a man named Kerry or a dog named Rico, we
need to change paths.
Robert Powell
graduate student
The Battalion encourages letters to the editor. Letters must be 200
'rds or less and include the author’s name, class and phone number,
opinion editor reserves the right to edit letters for length, style and
accuracy. Letters may be submitted in person at 014 Reed McDonald with
■ valid student ID. Letters also may be mailed to: 015 Reed McDonald,
1 i 1 TAMU, College Station, TX 77843-1 111. Fax: (979) 845-2647
Bail: mailcall@thebattalion.net
Limiting non-related people
cohabitating unreasonable
T he neighbors had
put up with enough
loud parties,
crowded streets and trash
buildup. Incessant on
gaining revenge against
the unknowing college
students around them,
community members of
College Park did some
thing they felt more
effective than calling in
yet another noise violation or attempting to
speak with their younger neighbors. They
made it the local government’s problem.
Don’t let the quaint historic houses and
proximity to campus fool you. The College
Park subdivision, located east of Texas
Avenue across from campus, has become a
breeding ground for conflicts that threaten to
endanger the privileges enjoyed by the largest
sect of College Station citizens: the students.
It is undeniable that the community
depends upon students for its very existence,
but unfortunately the permanent residents
seem to have forgotten this fact yet again.
Their attempt to make College Station better
for themselves by seeking implementation of
unnecessary legislation would not only bur
den students financially, but fail to solve the
actual problems.
This spring, the tension between permanent
residents and students reached new heights
when the actions of the students drove the other
residents to bring their complaints before the
College Station City Council, aiming to reduce
the number of non-related people allowed to
cohabitate in a single-family dwelling from the
current limitation of four to three or two.
Besides the obvious appearance that the
residents are attempting to alienate students
living on limited budgets, the root of the
problem is a false belief that the less students
in their neighborhood, the faster problems
would be solved and the better their subdivi
sion would appear to outsiders. The solitary
act of decreasing the number of students in a
house, however, doesn’t automatically guar
antee fewer problems or smaller parties.
As a result of the complaints came the for
mation of a task force that spent six weeks
evaluating a laundry list of concerns from
permanent residents, ranging from recurring
noise violations to overcrowded streets.
On May 27 the summary of the task force’s
recommendations was presented to the City
Council, which will decide what action to take
from these recommendations on June 24.
The complaining residents may claim they
want a neighborhood where college students
and older residents can peacefully coexist.
Their actions, however, indicate otherwise.
The residents formed a petition to reduce the
number of non-related people in a single-fam
ily home, which only communicates hostility
instead of cooperation.
This one-step solution advocated by the
residents is not only financially impossible
for most students, but ignores that the archi
tecture of many multiple-bedroom houses
throughout College Station were built with
students in mind.
The less extreme potential legislation advo
cated by the task force would apply a reduced
number of non-relatives for particular neighbor
hoods that the City Council considers “historic.”
The neighborhoods that would fall under
this legislation, such as the College Park sub
division and the Southside district, are no
more historic than many other neighborhoods
within College Station; they are just filled
with neighbors who will make any student
who does move in wish he hadn’t.
If these problems were just about noise
violations and parking problems, identical sit
uations could be found in cities statewide.
These complaints are only symptoms of the
deeper problem, which is the division
between permanent citizens of College
Station and the students, who are treated as
second-class citizens when it comes to any
legislation that could favor them.
In the same breath that residents ask stu
dents to be more responsible neighbors, resi
dents act like disciplining parents aiming to
teach the students a lesson for the audacity
of having four cars parked near a four-bed-
room house. If this attitude of permanent
residents continues, the students will only
adopt a resentful and defiant attitude toward
local government.
The complaining neighbors in the College
Park area haven’t stopped to consider that if
the legislation did pass, making it unafford
able for most students, it would leave them
without occupants to fill the houses.
Abandoned houses with overgrown yards are
apparently better to them than an extra car
parked in the street.
Granted, the permanent residents have a
point: Loud parties and consistently crowded
streets are not only an annoyance but reflect
poorly upon the neighborhood. Unfortunately,
the solutions they came up with don’t solve
anything but instead placed the blame on an
undue recipient.
College students are the easiest scapegoat
to carry the blame that really belongs to the
local municipal services faulty performance
and the lack of enforcement of current codes.
It comes as little surprise that this is exact
ly what the task force found, who in its final
recommendations advised as its foremost sug
gestion that the city invest more into service
improvement and enforcement of codes, said
Phillip Shackelford, Student Senate Speaker
and task force member.
In order for true community peace, the
permanent residents must accept the natural
tendencies and financial burdens of college
students, and the students must attempt to
take on the role of responsible community
members. If set standards were enforced and
both college students and permanent residents
worked together, perhaps the community
could peacefully coexist without dramatic
government intervention.
Sara Foley is a senior
journalism major.