Connect with us

News

UC Berkeley Law School Falls for Political Correctness and Removes “Racist” Name of School Building

Published

on

The University of California, Berkeley School of Law has continued the march towards political correctness by “denaming” a school building after a 19th century man who made derogatory remarks towards Chinese people.

Many argue that John Boalt’s view helped lay the groundwork for the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882.

On Thursday, January 30, 2020, Boalt’s name was removed from the campus building. This marks the first time that a Berkeley facility’s name had been removed because of “its namesake’s character or actions,” according to a statement from the university.

Trending: WATCH: General Flynn SPEAKS OUT In First Interview Since Pardon: “President Trump Won This Election”

In 2017, Charles Reichmann, an attorney and law lecturer, discovered and publicized Boalt’s racist writings. According to the Thursday statement, “John Henry Boalt was instrumental in legitimizing anti-Chinese racism and in catalyzing support for passage of the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 — the nation’s first immigration ban on a specific group of people solely on the basis of race or nationality.”

take our poll - story continues below

Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense?

  • VOTE NOW: Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense when he shot three BLM rioters? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Boalt wrote that “the Caucasian and Mongolian races are non-assimilated races.” He pointed to five reasons “why races might fail to assimilate,” according to the Thursday statement, including “physical peculiarities,” “intellectual differences and differences of temperament,” “differences in language and customs,” “hatred engendered by conquest or by clashing of national or race interests” and “religious fanaticism.”

Many at the university used to refer to the law school as Boalt Hall, and students attending the law school were usually called “Boalties,” according to the university’s statement.

Boalt was never a student or teacher at the law school. However, following his death in 1901, his widow put her own property into a trust for the university.

“It’s incredibly important to confront racist symbols, like John Boalt’s name on a building, because these symbols act to reinforce the history of white supremacy in our institutions,” declared Paul Fine, a professor of integrative biology. Fine is a co-chair of the university’s Building Name Review Committee, which was set up after Boalt’s legacy went public.

Alex Mabanta, a doctoral student in the Jurisprudence and Social Policy Department at Berkeley Law who is also a party of the Building Name Review Committee, commented that the change “says to Asian American and Pacific Islander law students, unequivocally: You matter. The process of denaming Boalt Hall says to students of color, unmistakably: You matter. Racial justice matters. We want you to belong to Berkeley Law.”

“If the Chinese Exclusion Act was operative law today,” he continued, “I doubt I would be a Berkeley Law student.”

The removal of Boalt’s name represents the second time the University of California system has taken down a name from a campus. In 2018, UC-Irvine took off the last name of Francisco J. Alaya, a donor, from two school following “an internal investigation substantiated sexual harassment claims.”

Such acts are indicative of a broader political correctness movement that is sweeping across the nation.

Americans should fight to preserve their history and not fall into the PC traps the Left has set up.

Culture

Starbucks Barista FIRED After Refusing to Wear “Pride” T-Shirt for Religious Reasons, According to Lawsuit

She is a Christian and was apparently told by her manager that she didn’t have to wear it.

Published

on

A former Starbucks barista is filing an unlawful discrimination lawsuit against the coffee giant, claiming they fired her for refusing to wear a “Pride” t-shirt that violated her Christian religious convictions.

Betsy Fresse started working as a barista in December 2015. After transferring to a Glen Ridge, New Jersey, store in early 2019, managers apparently “assured” her that her Christian faith wouldn’t be an issue.

Then in June 2019, she noticed a box of Pride shirts on a desk and asked if they’d make her wear one. Her store manager said she wouldn’t have to, but two months later she found herself out of a job after being terminated by a district manager.

A notice of separation claims that Fresse was fired for violating Starbucks’ “core values.” It specifically mentions an incident where she said her colleagues “need Jesus” when given the “Pride” shirt.

take our poll - story continues below

Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense?

  • VOTE NOW: Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense when he shot three BLM rioters? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Starbucks maintains that “no part of our dress code requires partners to wear any approved items that they have not personally selected” and that Fresse’s claims are “without merit,” in a comment to the New York Post.

So Starbucks denies that she was fired for not wearing the shirt, yet their notice of separation appears to claim that they fired her for something she said about Jesus. Not a good look either way.

Fresse is seeking backpay, punitive damages, money to cover the cost of an attorney, and a permanent injunction that prevents Starbucks from “failing to accommodate […] sincerely held religious beliefs.”

Starbucks has long been a major player in the world of Woke Capital. Back in February Big League Politics reported on how the British branch of Starbucks was raising money for a pro-transgender lobbying group:

The U.K. branch of Starbucks is raising money to push for the chemical castration and surgical mutilation of children.

Nathanael Blake at The Federalist reported that the multinational titan is selling special mermaid-shaped cookies to help the pro-transgender lobbying group Mermaids. Curiously, the group’s founder took her underage son to Thailand to undergo a castration procedure.

Blake correctly observed “That Starbucks is supporting this group illustrates how thoroughly radicals have conquered both the LGBT movement and corporate culture.”

He also called attention to how “In a few years the fight has shifted from government recognition of same-sex relationships as legal marriages to mastectomies, sterilization, and castration for children.”

Here’s hoping that Betsy Fresse is successful in her lawsuit.

Continue Reading
It's time to name Antifa a terror org! Sign your petition now!


Trending