OPINION {.s s Page 4 Monday, February 29, 1988 The Michigan Daily - , i Edited and managed by students at The University of Michigan Institutional racism defined Vol. XCVIII No. 99 420 Maynard St. Ann Arbor, MI 48109 Unsigned editorials represent a majority of the Daily's Editorial Board. All other cartoons, signed articles, and letters do not necessarily represent the opinion of the Daily. PLO eaceplan ignored IT HAS BEEN OVER A MONTH since) Yasser Arafat offered to recognize the State of Israel in exchange for a peace conference. Since then, Israel has only continued killing and beating Palestinian youth, indicating that it chooses to ignore Arafat's overtures. This lack of response demonstrates Israel's unwillingness to negotiate a solution to the Pales- tinian problem. Yasser Arafat called for an inter- national peace conference including all, nations concerned with the Pilestinian problem in exchange for ile PLO's (Palestinian Liberation Organization) recognition of Israel. By attending the conference, Israel would be giving de facto recogni- fion to the PLO, and reciprocally, the PLO would officially recognize Israel. ;'his is not the first time such of- fers have been made. For example, then-senator Paul Findley received a similar proposal for mutual recognition between the PLO and Israel several years ago from Yasser Arafat. Even though Findley di- tectly relayed this to the to the State Department, no response from the Viaited States or Israel was elicited. ' Tere is no doubt that the PLO is Wling to recognize Israel today, ai&d has done so in the past. Criti- cigms of the PLO on this basis are baseless. .Another concern of many PLO critics has been that the PLO must give up all violent means of over- throwing Israel. This issue has also been addressed by the legislative body of the PLO, the Palestinian National Congress, which along with Yasser Arafat and other Pales- tinians, has made several resolu- tions and statements to this effect. These statements are much more recent than the decades old rhetoric about throwing Jews into the sea, and reflect more accurately a trend in the PLO to seek diplomatic means of securing a homeland. It is impossible to compare the scale of the violence between the Patestinian rioters and the Israeli Artiy. Palestine is under military ©Ccupation and any means people ise' to defend themselves from hos- tili: beatings, jail without trial, and r*,dom killings cannot be juxta- posed to one of the largest standing armies in the world. Israel does not need a beating policy and live am- munition to defend itself from rocks and bottles. In spite of all these signs that the PLO is looking for new solutions, Israel has continued to ignore them. Israel and the PLO have a responsi- bility to look into any potential offer by either side. Israel's evident re- fusal to do this can be taken as an indication of Israel's true intention: maintenance of the oppressive and economically parasitic relationship with the West Bank and Gaza at the expense of the Palestinians. Claims that the PLO is a "terrorist" organization are just attempts by Is- rael and its proponents to discredit the PLO politically, so nobody would have to deal with the content of what the PLO is proposing. There are no angels in the Middle East: the word "terrorist" is a politi- cal label which could just as easily be applied to Israel if you consider killing innocent civilians objection- able. Alarmed by the extent of discon- tent in the occupied territories, the United States proposed a peace ini- tiative of its own. This initiative has a basic flaw in that it asks Jordan to negotiate with Israel about the Palestinians, rather than the Pales- tinians themselves. The PLO has showed many times that it has the overwhelming support of the Palestinians. Until a new election can be held, the PLO should be considered as the spokesperson of the Palestinians, not some fat monarch whose treatment of the Palestinians 20 years ago was not much better than their condition to- day. The United States and Israel have no excuse not to grant the Palestini- ans a homeland, and recognize the PLO or any other group which can prove support through elections in the territories. The representatives of the Palestinians are willing to sit down at the negotiating table, but neither the United States nor Israel is willing to join them, much less acknowledge them. Evidently, the United States is too busy closing down their offices, and Israel is too busy burying alive protestors or just beating them to their senses. By Walter Allen, Vonnie C. Mcloyd, Aldon Morris, and Ernest Wilson this is the first of a two-part series Is the University of Michigan a racist institution? Are most whites at the Uni- versity - administrators, faculty, stu- dents, etc. - racist? What is racism? Is it possible that Blacks, because of their his- tory of oppression, are quick to overreact to words and deeds and falsely label white institutions and individuals racist? Presently the University community is caught in the clutches of a dilemma: a significant segment of that community is convinced unequivocally that the Univer- sity and its policies are downright racist while another equally significant segment is convinced that the institution is not fundamentally racist. A large number of people, especially young white students, are not sure what to believe. The net product of this situation is confusion and polarization. The purpose of our remarks is to bring clarity to this confusing debate and to take a principled clear-cut stand based on reality. In our view most whites at the Univer- sity of Michigan are not racist bigots. It is absolutely true that a few whites, such as those who consciously hate Blacks, slip racist flyers under doors, and encourage racial animosity, do fall in this category. Such racism is not openly fashionable nor is it easily condoned at a University whose stated mission is the quest for knowledge and intellectual pluralism. Yet, it is our view that institutional Walter Allen is an Associate Prof. of Sociology. Vonnie C. Mcloyd is an Associate Prof. of Psychology..Aldon Morris is an Associate Prof. and the Associate Chair of Sociology. Ernest Wilson is an Associate Prof. of Political Science and Public Policy. racism is entrenched throughout the very fabric of the University of Michigan and is far more dangerous to Blacks and whites than individual acts of racial bigotry could ever be. We contend that institutional. racism is the culprit that allows well- meaning decent whites to implement racist policies on day-to-day basis while admir- ing Martin Luther King, Jr.'s speech, "I Have a Dream." Institutional racism seeps into the brains, practices, and beliefs of individuals undetected. Institutional racism grips its victims in such a disguised and insidious manner that they are convinced beyond a doubt that in no way could they be racist. Institutional racism is the re- spectable force that causes human suffer- ing and racial inequality. Institutional racism at the University is not only alive and well; it is arrogant, defiant, growing, and dangerous. But what - we all ask - is institu- tional racism and how is it stamped into every brick of the University's foundation? This is a legitimate question that must be asked at a University and it deserves an answer. Yet, the concept is not new. To the contrary, it has received much schol- arly attention and research (Hamilton and Carmichael, 1967; Knowles and Prewitt, 1969; and many others). The most funda- mental meaning of institutional racism is as follows: a set of stable policies, beliefs, and behaviors within institutions that re- sult in practices whereby citizens of color in America are consistently penalized be- cause of the color of their skin. People who engage in institutional racism often do so unintentionally. Thus the driving force behind institutional racism need not be conscious intentions. Moreover, even when institutional racism is detected, it is seldom clear who is immediately at fault (Knowles and Prewitt, 1969) because it is ensconced in the history and the very deci- sion-making bodies, committees, ahd de- partment of institutions. How are we to recognize institutional racism at the University? It is easy if one understands what it is and has the courage to point to it and say, "There it is." Let's start at the top. Throughout the Univer- sity's history there has never been a Black president or academic provost and there have been very few Black deans of crucial colleges. The result is that these high level decision-making bodies have been systematically void of minority representation for over 100 years. Yet, this reality has rarely been seriously questioned by whites at the University. Last year there were no Black department chairs and few associate chairs. Department chairs are key actors, for they set the intellectual tone and play key roles in the hiring of faculty. There can be little doubt that the absence of minority faculty at this level is correlated with the small numbers of Black faculty found throughout the University. Yet, white faculty, administrators, and students have found little wrong with this practice and have not spoken out. How are we to explain this except to suggest that institutional racism is at work? Let's examine LS&A for a moment because it is the largest College at the University. One of the most important decision-making bodies of LS&A is its College Executive Committee. This elected committee sets policy for the col- lege and plays a crucial role in determining which faculty will receive tenure. There are currently no Blacks on this committee and only-one or two have ever served. No whites-on or off this committee-have publicly raised the issues of exclusion. The tacit assumption is that whites can serve the interests of people of color. Is this not an arrogant assumption given the history of race relations in America? At the present time there is only one Black female member in all of LS&A. Yet white faculty, administrators, or students have not stepped forward and said this must not be tolerated nor have they proposed insti- tutional mechanisms to remedy these kinds of problems. Institutional racism is alive and well at the University of Michi- gan. Wasserman, 15s 5 wtu& A TC i 6A[iW& Tit g A DPLoRAtiL PA E.&ntta~r / EAtDt4 of CRILDREN AMW tIMO of 1 P Q ~ E~ i R S "" O M U ~ t AT O V IL W -I 6 H ~ i T { E E A W AT AR )w6110, To Do A~ouT %T?2 r- CLO e UE ?ALesrnt4WA g W4;10NTO Tl mU.N. a I I -IF - LETTERS Daily forfeits freedom of Stop military research RAGICALLY, the military-indus- trial complex has invaded another area of the University in the form of chemical and biological weapons research. This ongoing research into chemical weapons has explic- itly stated military significance and is funded by the U.S. Army Medi- cal Research and Development Command (USAMRDC). Research into chemical blistering cgents, toxic defoliants, nerve. gas deection systems,and nerve gas is taking place in the University Medical School, the School of PIfarmacology, and the School of Public Health. This research vio- lates the fundamental mission of these institutions which are supposedly dedicated to the im- piovement of human life. :Empirically, chemical and bio- logical weapons are used in the Third World or against defenseless adversaries. Korea, Vietnam, Iran, I][q, and Afghanistan have all been _& u - - 1-- 3 I _ 1- - -- - - I - - - - - ological weapons demands a politi- cal, not a scientific, solution. A worldwide solution to the use of chemical weapons will only be possible if states realize the in- evitability of their effects. The Army cannot be allowed to set research priorities at universi- ties. If the military is allowed to use its immense budget to establish which endeavors are useful, then the University becomes a tool of the military-industrial complex. Although the initial outlays for the two nerve gas projects alone exceed $1.5 million, the University should not prostitute the values of students and faculty endeavoring for social progress by acquiescing to the de- sires of the Army. If research had positive implications, money could be made available through alterna- tive channels. Necessary research into health care can find funding through other government sources. Further. the To the Daily: It was with great interest that I read Muzammil Ahmed's (a Daily opinion page staffer) in- terview with former U.S. Outrage! To the Daily: As Jews, we are outraged by the threatening racist posters distributed at the University of Michigan and pained that Black students were confronted by such hatred. We believe that America's strength lies in its commit- ment to equality, a value which lies at the heart of the Jewish understanding of the story of Adam and Eve, in which the Bible teaches that we humans are all descended from the same ancestors and are therefore one family. We deplore the vicious racism of the posters and urge all other of good will to speak out strongly against racism whenever and however it is ex- pressed. -Judith Seid Rabbi Allan D. Kensky Rabbi Robert Levy Dr. David E. Schteingart Benjamin Ben-Baruch Joseph Kohane February 8 Congressman Paul "Pete" Mc- Closkey (2/16/88). I believe it is both important and interest- ing to learn the views of American politicians on important issues. However, I take exception to the fact that while on January 21 Mr. Mc- Closkey was given an oppor- tunity to speak on peace prospects in the Middle East, ten days earlier Mr. Zvi Brosh, Israeli consul-general to the U.S. from Chicago, was denied that very right. I was quite sure that if nothing else the Daily would advocate free speech, a first amendment right which allows you to print "Ninety- eight years of editorial free- dom" each day and mean it! Not only was Zvi Brosh denied his right to speak but the Daily endorsed the protest(see Protest Israeli rights abuse, 1/11/88), and encouraged stu- Accusations subvert cause To the Daily: The column by A. C. Townsend, "Whites blind to racism," (Daily, 2/17/88), seems to do whites a disservice by implying that, by the very fact of being white, one is naturally blind to racism. I think this is an insult to the many whites who are aware of the problem, and a r e sympathetic with the anti- racism movement. A person critical of a group's actions is not necessarily against that dents to protest in the name of human rights. The ultimate irony is that the American right to free speech was for- feited in what the Daily defined as a human rights issue. Fur- thermore, since Zvi Brosh was denied the right to speak, I group, Mr. Townsend's opinion to the contrary. Ultimately, his implying that all whites are part of the racism problem could quite possibly undermine the white support of the fight against racism. This is precisely the kind of wild finger-pointing that our cause can do without, as it only adds to the problems it claims to be destroying. -Sheldon Robertson February 18 speech challenge the Daily to attempt to interview him on your opinion page or at least print a transcript of his speech which was buried amidst anti-Semetic slurs and profanity. --Lance Pacernick February 16 Hl A S M , ~ I