The problem is most third world countries don’t need that kind of help. Unless you have some specialized skill, what are you offering that some local person can’t do? If they ship you around the world just to take a job away from some guy who needed it, it’s just making the problem worse. They’d have been better off taking the money they paid to send you and used it to hire the local guy.
I can see that, it could become a situation that would not stand up to broader cost/benefit scrutiny when you factor in all the potential costs. If, on the other hand, someone with a skill or who could otherwise be an asset were denied an opportunity to contribute based on a red flag that consists entirely of a racist comment they made when they were 19; then I think the criteria for selection may not be in the best interest of serving others.
Because it’s not about what “someone” wants, it’s about what people need.
Developing countries have no particular need for uneducated, inexperienced workers. They are up to their ears in those already. Bringing in that kind of volunteer labor is only going to undermine the labor market and make it even harder for local people to earn money. And it’s costly to support a volunteer, in terms of fixed costs (airfare, medical care, stipend), effort from skilled staff, and reputation.
Peace Corps and other serious volunteer programs do real assessments, in partnership with the host country, to determine exactly the set of skills a country needs and what communities they are needed in, and if those can be brought in without having a negative impact.
These programs are also going to try to choose volunteers that reflect well on the organization, and who aren’t liable to do something stupid that will get everyone kicked of the country or on the front page of the news.
There are programs, usually pay-for-play voluntourism outfits or church missions, that let anyone who can pay up go. But these are of iffy value as volunteer work, though they can provide an interesting experiment and open the door for more substantial involvement later.
Tldr; the first thing someone who wants to “help” others need to do is to learn something useful.
Change your name.
Do Peace Corps or Military Service.
Hire a lawyer to quietly appeal to the University to change your status to “resigned”. Do this six months after you leave, when the shouting & the tumult has died.
Consider a foreign education.
Whe he’s 50, a racist comment he made at 19 might not be important. But at 20, it definitely shows a lack of judgement.
And a lack of judgment isn’t a great fit for Peace Corps, where you are on your own for months, hours or even days away from headquarters. I was presented daily with situations where poor judgement could have gotten me killed, cost the U.S. tens of thousands of taxpayer dollars, and gotten everyone kicked out of the country.
But the real problem is the idea of running away from something. Peace Corps is hard, mentally and physically. People who are anything less than 100% internally committed don’t last. And people who go home early cost a lot of money, damage the program, and hurt the communities that host them.
Do I think they’d lynch someone? No. But I do think they think it’s a point of pride that they don’t let black people into the organization. And worse, I bet when they were in high school, they didn’t think that. But they got to college and someone taught them this chant, and it’s funny and shocking and everyone laughed but the sentiment–the really dangerous sentiment, that the really cool, exclusive white organizations only deal with black people when they have too–that sentiment has been internalized not just by them but by hundreds of boys.
That makes sense.
Not aware of any countries, but I do know of a few streaming video websites that offer this specific category, among others.
This doesn’t happen.
All of my imaginary black friends talk like that. (My imaginary white friends talk like this.)
Is this parody? Right-wing performance art has become so farcical even when genuine that I do wish Dopers would use smiley-face icons when they’re hjust having fun.
Are we sure that the frat boy in question is actually racist as opposed to being just “Fat, drunk and stupid”?
You know, if the song were just about lynchings, I’d buy “drunk and stupid”. Horrific violence is kinda meaningless to dumb teenagers, and they invoke it to shock older people because it makes them feel bad ass and they really have no understanding.
But the other part–the part about never admitting black people–my horrible fear is that lots and lots of these frat boys weren’t particularly racist, weren’t particularly not racist, in high school, and then they get to college and find out that the assumption is that the really cool, hip white people don’t allow black people in their clubs, that it turns out white people are better than black people and don’t really want them around, only no one let them in on that secret before. Horrifically, it sends the idea that this sort of attitude is normal, known, assumed. And they go along with it because, hey, it’s a message that’s appealing (you’re better!) and people who seem to be in the know are loudly declaring it.
So I think they probably are racist, and worse than that, evangelical racists.
If I had done this, and (as per the OP) had had some sense shocked into me and wanted to make up for it, I’d focus on trying to get that sense across to other people a lot like the ‘before’ version of me. I’d use my fifteen minutes of fame to write an in-depth blog post or article or whatever, explaining how I reached the point where I thought singing that hideous song was OK, and why it really, deeply wasn’t - aimed at reaching other teenagers who might believe it’s no big deal, and making them think. Then I’d volunteer to go into schools and colleges and give a talk on the same thing.
There are people who only really get the point when it’s being brought to them by someone who shares their position of privilege. There’s a thread I read on here just in the last couple of days, about online dating and what it’s like for men and for women. Someone posted a link to an article about a guy who tried a dating site under a female persona, for a laugh, and was stunned by how nasty it was; after two hours, he couldn’t take any more. And a couple of male posters were blown away by this. They had to have heard before, from women, that online dating for women includes an awful lot of nasty experiences - at least one said straight out that women had already told him very similar things to what was in the article - and yet, when they heard it from a man’s perspective, they were shocked. When the account came from a woman, or from multiple women, it somehow didn’t have an impact; but when it came from a guy, all of a sudden it was real and it counted and it was shocking.
I’m pretty sure the same holds true for other forms of bigotry: some people in the privileged group will dismiss or minimise experiences that they hear about from people in the less privileged group, without even realising they’re doing it. But when they hear the same message from people in their own privileged group, it’s got worth.
So, if I were one of these guys and genuinely wanted to make up for doing something so deeply scummy, I’d use my position of privilege to try and get through to other people in the same position.