White males should organize.

[SW85]

Now it seems we have a total disconnect. I have not called for "white racialism", the organization I imagine would be no more "racialist" than the NAACP used to be. If you're talking about California Prop 209 passed in California in 1996, then you are apparently unaware that it has been widely ignored by state officials, especially university officials, who are more concerned with getting illegal aliens into university than whether white males are treated fairly. It also gave rise to racist scholarship funds, for which white males need not apply:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IDEAL_Scholars_Fund

Ward Connerly's other efforts in this regard (if that is what you are talking about - not sure anymore) have had a very spotty success, with some going down to defeat at the polls, and others regularly tied up in court challenges when they have succeeded. The racist policies in the corporate world remain firmly institutionalized, and are only extremely rarely challenged. Really, why should the establishment end of all of this crap, if the afflicted group never speaks up for itself?

OK, but:

(1) The NAACP is a highly racialist organization, so saying it would be no more racialist isn't much of an assurance.

(2) White racialism will not make public officials in California obey the law; that's up to the people and the government they elect. They deserve whatever the tribalistic Marxist governments they keep electing foist on them.

(3) White racialism will not make Ward Connerly's efforts any more successful (probably less so -- isn't he black?). I acknowledge he hasn't always been successful, which is just evidence that the electorate is not categorically opposed to affirmative action (or rather, that it can go either way). This doesn't, however, negate my main point: that where affirmative action has been defeated, it has not relied on appeals to white racialism.

I use the term "racialism" loosely here, meaning appeals to racial identity/group interest politics.

 

[Libsmasher]

OK, but:

(1) The NAACP is a highly racialist organization, so saying it would be no more racialist isn't much of an assurance.

Note that I said HOW THEY USED TO BE.

(2) White racialism will not make public officials in California obey the law; that's up to the people and the government they elect. They deserve whatever the tribalistic Marxist governments they keep electing foist on them.

Once again, I am not supporting "white racialism".

(3) White racialism will not make Ward Connerly's efforts any more successful (probably less so -- isn't he black?). I acknowledge he hasn't always been successful, which is just evidence that the electorate is not categorically opposed to affirmative action (or rather, that it can go either way). This doesn't, however, negate my main point: that where affirmative action has been defeated, it has not relied on appeals to white racialism.

I use the term "racialism" loosely here, meaning appeals to racial identity/group interest politics.

How many times will you bring up this strawman? It is VERY bizarre that in a society that f__ks the hell out of one and only one group, that a suggestion that they organize politically and fight back is termed "racialism". The only racialism present is that used against white males!! Excuse me, but you have things 100% backwards. But that IS the standard liberal gamut - attempts by white males to resist anti-white male racism would be itself racism. I think a lot of white males have been subtly brainwashed by this absurd reverse thinking - it's actually Orwellian, I think you may have been affected by it, and I call on you to recognize it for what it is, and reject it.

It is also bizarre that tens of millions of brainwashed, docile, discriminated-against white males rely on only a single heroic black man to stand up for their rights! Obviously, if those tens of millions of non-establishment white males organize and use their votes, things will change, and change consistently.

 

[9sublime]

You sort of miss the point. In the US (I don't know about the UK and elsewhere) government and private entities have just bald-facedly selected white males out for discrimination. I don't like race-based groups either, but in this case it's a matter of self defense. By analogy you might not like that there are standing armies in the world, but if everyone else has one, you better have one too.

What would this "white organization" stand for? In what way would it support the white man? Whatever reason you think of, I doubt I would count it as being a neccessary element of self defence.

I think you are very scared of standing armies that don't really exist. I doubt "Ebony Magazine" is causing any real threat to me.

 

[Libsmasher]

What would this "white organization" stand for?

You're STILL asking that, in post 33 of the thread???

It would stand for an end to racial discrimination by public and private entities. Real radical notion, right? Secondarily, it would oppose the pervasive racist characterizations of white males in the media.

I think you are very scared of standing armies that don't really exist. I doubt "Ebony Magazine" is causing any real threat to me.

Whaaaaaaattttttttttt???????

 

[SW85]

Note that I said HOW THEY USED TO BE.

My mistake, but is there any reason to believe that a NAAWP would not be diverted down the same intellectual ratholes?

Once again, I am not supporting "white racialism".

Insofar as racialism is the deliberate political emphasization of race (i.e., identity politics), you are.

How many times will you bring up this strawman? It is VERY bizarre that in a society that f__ks the hell out of one and only one group, that a suggestion that they organize politically and fight back is termed "racialism". The only racialism present is that used against white males!!

Do you think I'm denying that the left is racialist (and, let's face it, frequently racist to boot)?

I'm saying that co-opting their methods is (a) unnecessary, since again, everywhere it has been defeated it has been done without appeals to whites specifically (who are not the only ones screwed over by this), and (b) will probably be destructive in the long run, because it will make the right vulnerable to the same irrational tribalistic impulses that have infected the left.

It would stand for an end to racial discrimination by public and private entities.

There are plenty of organizations that do this successfully without appeals to white interest.

The fact that the battle against affirmative action is ongoing and the outcome isn't entirely clear does not hinge on the fact that white conservatives have not adopted the sluttish and unethical tactics of black liberals. It's mostly because the right has, for too long, been feckless about this kind of thing, doing nothing about university extremism, caring not the slightest bit about the appointment of rational court justices, etc. The tide is beginning to turn because they're now paying attention.

 

[Libsmasher]

Quote:
Note that I said HOW THEY USED TO BE.

My mistake, but is there any reason to believe that a NAAWP would not be diverted down the same intellectual ratholes?

Because one organization becomes intellectually corrupt, that means a new one will, too? I don't get you.

Quote:
Once again, I am not supporting "white racialism".

Insofar as racialism is the deliberate political emphasization of race (i.e., identity politics), you are.

How is an organization to fight racial discrimination against it's represented group except by "emphasizing race"?

Quote:
How many times will you bring up this strawman? It is VERY bizarre that in a society that f__ks the hell out of one and only one group, that a suggestion that they organize politically and fight back is termed "racialism". The only racialism present is that used against white males!!

Do you think I'm denying that the left is racialist (and, let's face it, frequently racist to boot)?

No but you are confusing them with what I propose.

I'm saying that co-opting their methods is (a) unnecessary, since again, everywhere it has been defeated it has been done without appeals to whites specifically (who are not the only ones screwed over by this), and (b) will probably be destructive in the long run, because it will make the right vulnerable to the same irrational tribalistic impulses that have infected the left.

I do not suggest co-opting their methods - any comparison is specious. They get elected by promoting racial identity politics, by seeking ever more privileges for their client groups. I propose a group, which will necessarily be mainly constituted by the last group in the country to face widespread discrimination - white males, but others of good will will be welcome to join. The purpose is to end racial discrimination - not seek special privilege for white males. The difference between that and what libs do is the difference between night and day.

Quote:
It would stand for an end to racial discrimination by public and private entities.

There are plenty of organizations that do this successfully without appeals to white interest.

There's almost NOBODY that does it - Connerly's American Civil Rights Institute is the only one I can think of, and the whole establishment - the media, universities, judiciary, military, mainstream churches, corporations have lined up solidly in favor of anti-white discrimination.

 

[9sublime]

You're STILL asking that, in post 33 of the thread???

It would stand for an end to racial discrimination by public and private entities. Real radical notion, right? Secondarily, it would oppose the pervasive racist characterizations of white males in the media.



Whaaaaaaattttttttttt???????

Your missing my point.

How would this organization go about promoting its "ideals"? How would it stop this racism in the media of supporting minorities? Would it start its own news channel? I'm not sure it would get a big enough audience to change the way the whole media works.
Would it send letters of complain to media channels instead? I don't think that would go very far.

This is a cultural thing, and making a white organization isn't really going to do a lot of good except make people like you feel a tiny bit more secure.

My last analogy is that you claim the other races have standing armies working against white people like me and you, and that we need an equivilant in response. What I am saying is that something like a black magazine is not really a standing army in my opinion as its causing very little danger.

 

[Libsmasher]

Your missing my point.

How would this organization go about promoting its "ideals"? How would it stop this racism in the media of supporting minorities? Would it start its own news channel? I'm not sure it would get a big enough audience to change the way the whole media works.
Would it send letters of complain to media channels instead? I don't think that would go very far.

This is a cultural thing, and making a white organization isn't really going to do a lot of good except make people like you feel a tiny bit more secure.

First, you are focussing on the secondary thing I mentioned - the lib media defamation of the white male identity. The primary thing is anti-white male discrimination - did you forget that? As to the media defamation - an organization such as I envision could eg do studies to document scientifically what is obvious to anyone who looks at the media often enough - that it has a relentless campaign to defame white males. Then petitions could be presented to the FCC. Those would seek that the studied networks/local stations broadcast licenses not be renewed, insofar as they have not carried out their mandate to operate in the public interest - the systematic defamation of one gender/racial group not being in the public interest.

My last analogy is that you claim the other races have standing armies working against white people like me and you, and that we need an equivilant in response. What I am saying is that something like a black magazine is not really a standing army in my opinion as its causing very little danger.

First, I DIDN'T say the defensive techniques would be like the offending techniques. Eg, I don't want to acquire a broadcast license and defame another group.

Secondly, reducing the offense against white males to a "black magazine" is missing the point entirely, and also scoping it wayyyyyyyyy down.

In regard to the media defamation, that is done by WHITE people who control the media. WHY they do it is partly a puzzle. Advertisers are inured to the tiresome ploy of showing a stupid prson and contrasting that with a smart person - the stupid persone will 95% of the time be guess who - the only group it is still PC to ridicule. Also "women's networks" like Lifetime and Oxygen, run by feminists, do it because its part of their strategy to bring down the "patriarchy: - their code word for white males.

But once again - the media stuff is secondary - the main thing is anti-white male discrimination by employers, universities, etc.

 

[SW85]

OK Libsmasher, I clearly don't understand where you're coming from here.

Are you proposing the establishment of an organization made up explicitly of white men to combat affirmative action? Or are you merely saying white men should be more active in combatting it?

 

[Libsmasher]

OK Libsmasher, I clearly don't understand where you're coming from here.

Are you proposing the establishment of an organization made up explicitly of white men to combat affirmative action? Or are you merely saying white men should be more active in combatting it?

Neither. An organization should be formed that will primarily consist of white males, since they are the ones being discriminated against. Other persons who dislike injustice would be welcome to join, just as white people belonged to the NAACP when it was actually fighting for civil rights. There definitely should be an organization - only in that way can forces be combined in ways, eg for lobbying, that has any possibility of having an effect.

 

[9sublime]

First, you are focussing on the secondary thing I mentioned - the lib media defamation of the white male identity. The primary thing is anti-white male discrimination - did you forget that? As to the media defamation - an organization such as I envision could eg do studies to document scientifically what is obvious to anyone who looks at the media often enough - that it has a relentless campaign to defame white males. Then petitions could be presented to the FCC. Those would seek that the studied networks/local stations broadcast licenses not be renewed, insofar as they have not carried out their mandate to operate in the public interest - the systematic defamation of one gender/racial group not being in the public interest.

So you are suggesting limiting the freedom of speech of your countrys media stations, by telling them to pump out pro-white propaganda?

Don't like the sound of that.

Not to mention that the petition would be turned down, thus making your organization a giant wet blanket.

First, I DIDN'T say the defensive techniques would be like the offending techniques. Eg, I don't want to acquire a broadcast license and defame another group.

So you don't want to speak out yourself, you just want to silence others? Isn't this completley in contradiciton to the idea of allowing white groups to exist? While I agree that white groups should be allowed in the same way black groups are even though I wouldn't join one, the angle you are tackling it at is logically flawed.

Secondly, reducing the offense against white males to a "black magazine" is missing the point entirely, and also scoping it wayyyyyyyyy down.

No, its a practical example that would actually happen on a small scale.

In regard to the media defamation, that is done by WHITE people who control the media. WHY they do it is partly a puzzle. Advertisers are inured to the tiresome ploy of showing a stupid prson and contrasting that with a smart person - the stupid persone will 95% of the time be guess who - the only group it is still PC to ridicule. Also "women's networks" like Lifetime and Oxygen, run by feminists, do it because its part of their strategy to bring down the "patriarchy: - their code word for white males.

If white people own the media, what chance do you have of your petitions to the FCC making any difference?

But once again - the media stuff is secondary - the main thing is anti-white male discrimination by employers, universities, etc.

Oh, and please give examples of white discrimination YOU personally have faced. And its easy to lie on the internet, I hope you wont do that just for the sake of argument.

 

[Libsmasher]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Libsmasher
First, you are focussing on the secondary thing I mentioned - the lib media defamation of the white male identity. The primary thing is anti-white male discrimination - did you forget that? As to the media defamation - an organization such as I envision could eg do studies to document scientifically what is obvious to anyone who looks at the media often enough - that it has a relentless campaign to defame white males. Then petitions could be presented to the FCC. Those would seek that the studied networks/local stations broadcast licenses not be renewed, insofar as they have not carried out their mandate to operate in the public interest - the systematic defamation of one gender/racial group not being in the public interest.

So you are suggesting limiting the freedom of speech of your countrys media stations, by telling them to pump out pro-white propaganda?

Don't like the sound of that.

Ooooooooo - serious debate index just dropped to 3% -- sure you're not Top Gun in disguise??

Not to mention that the petition would be turned down, thus making your organization a giant wet blanket.

I don't get the "wet blanket" business - and if the FCC DOES turn it down, they are setting a precedent - racism on the licensed airwaves is OK by the FCC.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Libsmasher
First, I DIDN'T say the defensive techniques would be like the offending techniques. Eg, I don't want to acquire a broadcast license and defame another group.

So you don't want to speak out yourself, you just want to silence others?

The FCC already "silences" plenty - pornography, dirty words. The airwaves are held to higher standards than ordinary speech. The purveyors of anti-white male racist speech would be free to take their garbage out to the street and the gutter - where it belongs.

Isn't this completley in contradiciton to the idea of allowing white groups to exist? While I agree that white groups should be allowed in the same way black groups are even though I wouldn't join one, the angle you are tackling it at is logically flawed.

Are you SURE you're not Top Gun? You sound like you stopped listening to me about three posts back. I didn't advocate forming a "white group".

Quote:
Originally Posted by Libsmasher
Secondly, reducing the offense against white males to a "black magazine" is missing the point entirely, and also scoping it wayyyyyyyyy down.

No, its a practical example that would actually happen on a small scale.

No, it's a comment that evades the serious issues by bringing up the most trivial example. A white male who works hard all through high school and all through an undergraduate degree and earns the grades and makes the test scores and then gets the door to law school slammed in his face because he's white is a much better example.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Libsmasher
In regard to the media defamation, that is done by WHITE people who control the media. WHY they do it is partly a puzzle. Advertisers are inured to the tiresome ploy of showing a stupid prson and contrasting that with a smart person - the stupid persone will 95% of the time be guess who - the only group it is still PC to ridicule. Also "women's networks" like Lifetime and Oxygen, run by feminists, do it because its part of their strategy to bring down the "patriarchy: - their code word for white males.

If white people own the media, what chance do you have of your petitions to the FCC making any difference?

Don't understand your question at all. The whites who run corporations have become the lap kitties of the left. Among many other things they do, is pander to the supposed anti-white male resentment of minorities with racist portrayals. If the licensed airways are being used to peddle racism, it doesn't matter at all what color the peddlers are.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Libsmasher
But once again - the media stuff is secondary - the main thing is anti-white male discrimination by employers, universities, etc.

Oh, and please give examples of white discrimination YOU personally have faced. And its easy to lie on the internet, I hope you wont do that just for the sake of argument.

I won't lie, but I don't give a sh__ whether you believe it or not. And let's face it - no matter what I say, you'll find some bogus way to just discount them. But I'll play the game, although the level of your debate seems to be losing any seriousness. Two from grad school:

1. When I was a second year astronomy grad student, one day I was walking in the physics building, and saw a flyer up on the grad student bulletin board. The flyer offered National Science Foundation internships with NSF scientists in several science fields for the coming summer. (Let me point out that this would be a MONUMENTAL opportunity for a grad student.) It included a living stipend ANNNNNNNNND round-trip airfare. I thought "Geez, what's not to like - this is is GREAT! Where do I sign up!!!" That's when I noticed in small (embarassed?) print at the very bottom of the flyer the words "Minority and Female Students Only".

2. In my department, university fellowships were very rare - about one per entering class. Also research fellowships were rare because the faculty at that time weren't particularly interested in adding money for that to their grant applications. So nearly everyone worked as a TA - a teaching associate. They said it should take 20 hours of your week, but it took 30 hours easily. A grad student in the physical sciences is VERY busy. Then one day I read in the student newspaper about the university hosting a group of recent graduates from "historically black colleges". There was nothing about the students being otherwise any kind of select or accomplished group. They were going to offer all that would accept it up to 100 grad school university fellowships. In case you don't know - a fellowship includes a stipend and fee and tuition waiver in return for - nothing. Just being your sweet little (black) self. Meanwhile, the rest of us (white) folk are plodding along minus 30 hours a week, before we can get to our studies.

I can give MANY examples.

 

[Libsmasher]

Hey gosh - look at this!

Lessee what this is about:

The Gates Millennium Scholars Program (GMS), established in 1999, was initially funded by a $1 billion grant from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Great! Great! Lessee what the requirements are!

Students are eligible to be considered for a GMS scholarship if they: •Are African American, American Indian/Alaska Native, Asian Pacific Islander American or Hispanic American

Oh. No whites need apply. There must be many tens of thousands of poor white students who could use this. Too bad they're the wrong color.

http://www.gmsp.org/default.aspx

 

[9sublime]

Ooooooooo - serious debate index just dropped to 3% -- sure you're not Top Gun in disguise??

Unbelievaly poor comeback. What you are saying is that you want the media to be censored to fit your views. It seems you only want a free society when it suits you.

The FCC already "silences" plenty - pornography, dirty words. The airwaves are held to higher standards than ordinary speech. The purveyors of anti-white male racist speech would be free to take their garbage out to the street and the gutter - where it belongs.

Nobody is allowed to be racist on air like that. That is not the postion you have been taking. You have been complaining about the lack of support for the white race, not the amount of attack it faces on air, because it doesn't face any.

Are you SURE you're not Top Gun? You sound like you stopped listening to me about three posts back. I didn't advocate forming a "white group".

Haha, you must be kidding me! Do you want me to find a couple of quotes, or have you gone back and edited your posts before you came out with that ridiculous statement!!

No, it's a comment that evades the serious issues by bringing up the most trivial example. A white male who works hard all through high school and all through an undergraduate degree and earns the grades and makes the test scores and then gets the door to law school slammed in his face because he's white is a much better example.

Yes, thats why there's no white lawyers anymore. Absoloute rubbish.

Don't understand your question at all. The whites who run corporations have become the lap kitties of the left. Among many other things they do, is pander to the supposed anti-white male resentment of minorities with racist portrayals. If the licensed airways are being used to peddle racism, it doesn't matter at all what color the peddlers are.

But if the white bosses of the media are the ones you are trying to appeal to, don't you see that they would have done it themselves if they wanted to by now.

I won't lie, but I don't give a sh__ whether you believe it or not. And let's face it - no matter what I say, you'll find some bogus way to just discount them. But I'll play the game, although the level of your debate seems to be losing any seriousness. Two from grad school:

I have not given any bogus ways to discount them, I have only quesitoned tthe logic of how your white group would go about changing society. If your ideas cannot stand up to critism maybe you should leave the thinking to other people better equipped.

1. When I was a second year astronomy grad student, one day I was walking in the physics building, and saw a flyer up on the grad student bulletin board. The flyer offered National Science Foundation internships with NSF scientists in several science fields for the coming summer. (Let me point out that this would be a MONUMENTAL opportunity for a grad student.) It included a living stipend ANNNNNNNNND round-trip airfare. I thought "Geez, what's not to like - this is is GREAT! Where do I sign up!!!" That's when I noticed in small (embarassed?) print at the very bottom of the flyer the words "Minority and Female Students Only".

Well thats totally ridiculous and I agree that shouldn't be happening anymore, and I agree that people should be allowed to form white groups, I just don't believe they would serve any benefit except to segregate society.

2. In my department, university fellowships were very rare - about one per entering class. Also research fellowships were rare because the faculty at that time weren't particularly interested in adding money for that to their grant applications. So nearly everyone worked as a TA - a teaching associate. They said it should take 20 hours of your week, but it took 30 hours easily. A grad student in the physical sciences is VERY busy. Then one day I read in the student newspaper about the university hosting a group of recent graduates from "historically black colleges". There was nothing about the students being otherwise any kind of select or accomplished group. They were going to offer all that would accept it up to 100 grad school university fellowships. In case you don't know - a fellowship includes a stipend and fee and tuition waiver in return for - nothing. Just being your sweet little (black) self. Meanwhile, the rest of us (white) folk are plodding along minus 30 hours a week, before we can get to our studies.

I can give MANY examples.

Once again, its wrong and shouldn't happen.

 

[Libsmasher]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Libsmasher
Ooooooooo - serious debate index just dropped to 3% -- sure you're not Top Gun in disguise??

Unbelievaly poor comeback. What you are saying is that you want the media to be censored to fit your views. It seems you only want a free society when it suits you.

Mine was an excellent come-back to an absurd thing you said - that I want the media to disseminate "pro-white propaganda" - I said NOTHING of the kind, and that's a bald-faced strawman.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Libsmasher
The FCC already "silences" plenty - pornography, dirty words. The airwaves are held to higher standards than ordinary speech. The purveyors of anti-white male racist speech would be free to take their garbage out to the street and the gutter - where it belongs

.

Nobody is allowed to be racist on air like that. That is not the postion you have been taking. You have been complaining about the lack of support for the white race, not the amount of attack it faces on air, because it doesn't face any.

When argument fails, trot out the strawmen eh? I complained about anti-white racism from the very beginning in the OP. Now, everyone go back and look.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Libsmasher
Are you SURE you're not Top Gun? You sound like you stopped listening to me about three posts back. I didn't advocate forming a "white group".

Haha, you must be kidding me! Do you want me to find a couple of quotes, or have you gone back and edited your posts before you came out with that ridiculous statement!!

Yeah, go back and show me. Be sure you include the place where I said everyone would be welcome to join.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Libsmasher
No, it's a comment that evades the serious issues by bringing up the most trivial example. A white male who works hard all through high school and all through an undergraduate degree and earns the grades and makes the test scores and then gets the door to law school slammed in his face because he's white is a much better example.

Yes, thats why there's no white lawyers anymore. Absoloute rubbish.

Cowardly evasion - whether or not there are white lawyers anymore has NOTHING to do with whether or not whites are discriminated against NOW trying to enter law school. Lessee what's your count now? Two strawmen and an irrelevent evasion - GOOD WORK.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Libsmasher
Don't understand your question at all. The whites who run corporations have become the lap kitties of the left. Among many other things they do, is pander to the supposed anti-white male resentment of minorities with racist portrayals. If the licensed airways are being used to peddle racism, it doesn't matter at all what color the peddlers are.

But if the white bosses of the media are the ones you are trying to appeal to, don't you see that they would have done it themselves if they wanted to by now.

Incoherent.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Libsmasher
I won't lie, but I don't give a sh__ whether you believe it or not. And let's face it - no matter what I say, you'll find some bogus way to just discount them. But I'll play the game, although the level of your debate seems to be losing any seriousness. Two from grad school:

I have not given any bogus ways to discount them, I have only quesitoned tthe logic of how your white group would go about changing society. If your ideas cannot stand up to critism maybe you should leave the thinking to other people better equipped.

They stand up fine - and I've yet to read a single valid word of criticism form you. As for how to change society, it would be gone down the well worn path (created by libs unfortunately) that it has always changed: organization, lobbying, public condemnation, voting at the polls, boycotts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Libsmasher
1. When I was a second year astronomy grad student, one day I was walking in the physics building, and saw a flyer up on the grad student bulletin board. The flyer offered National Science Foundation internships with NSF scientists in several science fields for the coming summer. (Let me point out that this would be a MONUMENTAL opportunity for a grad student.) It included a living stipend ANNNNNNNNND round-trip airfare. I thought "Geez, what's not to like - this is is GREAT! Where do I sign up!!!" That's when I noticed in small (embarassed?) print at the very bottom of the flyer the words "Minority and Female Students Only".

Well thats totally ridiculous and I agree that shouldn't be happening anymore, and I agree that people should be allowed to form white groups, I just don't believe they would serve any benefit except to segregate society.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Libsmasher
2. In my department, university fellowships were very rare - about one per entering class. Also research fellowships were rare because the faculty at that time weren't particularly interested in adding money for that to their grant applications. So nearly everyone worked as a TA - a teaching associate. They said it should take 20 hours of your week, but it took 30 hours easily. A grad student in the physical sciences is VERY busy. Then one day I read in the student newspaper about the university hosting a group of recent graduates from "historically black colleges". There was nothing about the students being otherwise any kind of select or accomplished group. They were going to offer all that would accept it up to 100 grad school university fellowships. In case you don't know - a fellowship includes a stipend and fee and tuition waiver in return for - nothing. Just being your sweet little (black) self. Meanwhile, the rest of us (white) folk are plodding along minus 30 hours a week, before we can get to our studies.

I can give MANY examples.

Once again, its wrong and shouldn't happen.

Great - your blinders are falling away.