Thoughts on what is happening at MissouriU
- Thread starter ilikenu
- Start date
- Status
I've been involved in hiring on several occasions and quite often the top candidates are incredibly qualified. In those cases, it is clear that many employers give the hiring nod to someone who looks like them or who graduated from the same school, etc. In most cases, I'm sure it isn't a deliberate attempt to keep non-whites or women from those positions, but damn ... look at the numbers. It is crystal clear that it is happening.
Quotas are a really poor way to handle the situation IMHO and it creates a very negative undercurrent. Every organization ought to value diversity. I've had the opportunity to work in very diverse workforces and the creativity and the culture of the organization is considerably better. I'm currently in an organization where the top 4 positions of the organization have been held by 13 different white men over the age of 50 in the past 15 years. I know each of those men very well and I don't believe they were consciously racist or sexist but I can tell you that the culture of the organization has suffered and we've lost a disproportionately high number of talented non-white and female employees because of the perception of the glass ceiling.
You know what the most powerful EXECUTIVE on earth is? The POTUS. Tell us all about his awesome resume that got him his job. This is where you tell me being a war hero doesn't qualify you for being the commander-in-chief but being John Kerry's biggest fan does.
Generalizations aren't remotely productive. You assume you know how I voted based on a few posts in this thread. That's ridiculous. Please take your political trolling elsewhere.
WOW! That was fast.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I didn't' see any looting, or any violence from anyone at Mizzou. The University President had obviously lost control of the situation. Hunger Strike, football protest, and a walk-out. All peaceful. Good on Mizzou.
Classic liberal. Tells people to shut up when their progressive "logic" is exposed. Free speech, you guys ain't a fan of it.
It's obvious you're an intelligent person and I will treat your post's accordingly going forward. Please accept my apologies for not giving your opinions the proper respect initially.
Civil disobedience is not the same as violence.
Really, your going to compare people rioting to celebrate a championship (not saying I agree with it) with the racially motivated and incredibly violent riots in Baltimore and Ferguson.?
You say disobedience but in this instance they are not disobeying anyone. They were physically restraining someone with the additional unknown of potential physical harm. That is not my definition of non-violent!
Often times one precedes the other. Most all of them start out civil, but the potential is there to turn explosive quickly.
Lemme ask you this...So if your wife was stopped by a group of people who were mad at her, would you tell her to get out of her car and talk to them, or keep driving?
If it was MY WIFE, I would tell her to get out of the car. (just kidding)
We live abo 90 miles from Columbia and our son is a journalism major at Mizzou and also works for one of the Columbia TV stations....he is getting a story of his young life. We had known about these incidents for awhile but when the football team joined it quickly went to national news.
Let's remember both sides of blacks and whites have racists, so if one uses their perceived position to deliberately hurt others that is wrong
So your definition of clueless and/or racist is anyone who doesn't agree with you? Because It's possible that both sides have valid arguements. It's almost universally true in political/racial posts.
Yep, politics. Dumb people think it is about 'justice'. People with critical thinking skills know this is about money and power. You can earn it, or you can demand it with threats.
I haven't seen the list of demands, but I think that misses the point. The situation got to this point because Wolf didn't react to the situation. Allowing the incidents to continue and not responding was tacit approval. Now the situation is out of control and the crazies will join in a legitimate complaint and turn it into a circus. He will probably lose his job over this, so I don't think he needs to acknowledge anything accept to pack his things.
I am almost certain the post from huskrj12 was meant for me, or at least partly me. I assure you I am far from racist. If you wish, I could prove it beyond the shadow of a doubt. Or you can take my word for it, I don't care. I say all that to say this, I am not racist, but I'm not color blind either. We have some pretty recent history of minorities rioting in certain communities, one of them close to Columbia even. To deny that it could have happened again if that guy stopped his car against his will isn't doing anyone any favors. I will freely admit I need to word some of my responses better and will work on that, but don't make the mistake of thinking I am a racist because you would be dead wrong and I could prove it.
Last edited:
To get back on track, let's talk about Gary Pinkel and how much the new President is going to show him luv. I'm sure a big raise and extension is coming.
Nah litespeed I wasn't calling you out! I disagree with some of your thoughts but they weren't what had me riled up. Haha
There has been no violence. Period.
Your question is a non-starter as the situations are entirely different. If my wife was a university president and had a group of concerned students I'd absolutely tell her to schedule a meeting with the student group to hear their thoughts, engage them in a discussion, and do her best to reconcile the situation. It's part of being an administrator.
THIS! So much racism is done without any overt intent and likely even without knowledge of the people involved. The statistics and results speak for themselves. You either believe that systematic racism has essentially been built into the fabric of our society or you believe that white people are just inherently smarter, better workers, and more deserving of higher-paying jobs. It really has to be one or the other.
Okay, using your logic, if there was a group on campus who was demanding a conservative Professor be promoted to Department Head, would you support bully tactics to make it happen? I know, I know. That's a non-sequitur. Funny how it always works that way when the politics are different from your own.
This has nothing to do with my views - it has to do with precisely what it takes to be a college president.
Having open conversation with portions of the student population comes with the job. You might think it shouldn't - and perhaps there is merit to that line of thought - but it does.
Agree with your statement Archie but you have to admit there are right and wrong ways to go about this discourse. I would offer that submitting a list of demands and stopping the Presidents car are probably not the most productive ways to start the conversation. Keep in mind that we know absolutely nothing about the hunger striker. Was this individual a respected campus leader or was he someone the Administration had had issues with before. Did this individual actually follow the proper steps to meet with the president or did he find a more sensational way to get his message out. Is there even any evidence that his complaints had and merit and could be proven truthful. Finally, how do we know that the president did nothing. Aside from a statement by him at his resignation I don't believe anyone ever heard his perspective on the situation.
To be clear, I'm not saying I agree with anything that has gone down. I'm simply trying to make it clear that in this day in age a university president has certain responsibilities and one is to engage with students in certain situations. I'd argue that events related to race are most certainly on that list. I'd imagine that if the president would have taken certain steps following some of these events much of this would not have occurred. I suppose I'm of the opinion that if there were more details from the POV of the president we would know about them. For example, the comments from the chancellor regarding some of these events have been made public.
I simply think the 'what is this world coming to' crowd are illustrating they are a bit naive when it comes to modern collegiate administrations.
When you create a post you have created a 'view'. And whether we like it or not, we all get to own them. You should come check out the other thread on this topic. I just read an espn article that blacks (I'm not gonna hyphenate someone's lineage, that has balkanized the USA) are under-represented on campus. (12% in the state, 9% on campus IIRC). But I imagine conservatives are under-represented on campus as well. Should Wolfe have launched an investigation over that imbalance? There are those who, for gentle reasons, want to get past the civil war of the 1860s (or in this case 1950). And there are those who want to keep it alive to serve a political end.
You should read THE PRINCE, by Niccolo Machiavelli. Tupac actually called himself Makaveli. Tupac was a bright fellow and more well read than most realize.
Last edited:
Ok. My view is that it is the job of a president to consider issues related to racial intolerance on his/her campus.
In general, politics do not belong in any classroom unless we are talking about political-focused courses. I also believe that conservative students should have the same student rights as all others, e.g., if they wish to start a student organization that focuses on conservative views they should be encouraged to do so.
I just read a timeline of events published by the student union newspaper (and if I wasn't on a iPad I would link it) that if correct illustrates that Tim Wolfe was much more involved than we are being led to believe. From the papers perspective it sounds like this is a lot more about money than it is about race though race was certainly a component. It sounds from the article like Tim Wolfe had met with the protestors and with the hunger striker and was sympathetic but was unwilling to succumb to their demands (one of which was him stepping down). It appeared the Mr Wolfe was more than willing to continue negotiations. I suspect we are going to learn a lot that is unfavorable about the protesters in the coming days but unfortunately that will be to late for Mr. Wolfe.
Something else just occurred to me unrelated to Wolfe. Pinkel and I believe the AD were in full support of this action. And right now they can celebrate a victory (not on the field, but ya take 'em where you can find 'em). But what if this action emboldens these athletes? I guess what I'm sayin is, right now Pinkel may think he is the leader of his charges. But what if the lesson they just learned is that THEY are in charge? Maybe next week or next year they decide there is too much white privilege on the depth chart. Anyone else wondering if Pinkel just opened Pandora's box?
We will see - I'm certainly interested in the details.
P.S. Please link the article you are referring to if you find time. TIA.
That's rich. Go ahead and point out where I stifled a bit of discussion in the entire thread. I'm perfectly capable of articulating my point of view without resorting to personal attacks or bullying someone. If you want to have a substantive discussion about issues, I'm game. If you want to use labels and deliberately misrepresent what I've said, I'm out.
We don't have to agree on anything and that's perfectly fine. I appreciate the opportunity to discuss the ways in which Missouri sucks with a fellow Husker fan.
- Status
Similar threads
