OPINION

Page 4

Tuesday, April 12, 1988

The Michigan Daily


I

Edite anmnaebstsa nrichig an l
Edited and managed by students at The University of Michigan

Faculty responds to

Vol. XCVIII, No. 130

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.

Reopen the Diag

THE UNIVERSITY administration is
engaging in censorship and the
abridgment of students' First Amend-
ment rights to free speech through its
rules governing protests on the Diag.
"Loud" rallies are to be held only be-
tween noon and 1 p.m. The rationale
behind the rule is that research and
classes are disrupted by "loud"
protests; therefore, those protests must
be restricted to only a certain hour.
This policy is yet another instrument
with which the University muzzles
student voices. In other instances, the
administration took away the free use
of the Union Bulletin Board and it is
considering taking over the student ra-
dio station (WCBN). Further, the ad-
ministration, particularly President
Fleming, has demonstrated a reluctance
to hear and take seriously student input
on the code.
Another example of the University's
attitude towards free speech was evi-
denced two weeks ago when a Diag
preacher was read the Trespass Act by
campus security, and forced off the
Diag by the Ann Arbor police. Ac-
cording to security chief Leo Heatley,
the charge against the preacher was that
he was talking too loudly. The actions
of the authorities to silence him speak
much more loudly than the preacher
ever could.
The Supreme Court ruled in Wiscon-
sin v. Yoder that free speech must be
permitted by educational institutions
unless that speech disrupts the educa-
tional process. It is hard to believe that
the exercising of free speech b y
protestors on the Diag, far from class-
rooms, could do little more than force
someone to close a window in a build-

ing.
Though Diag activity could possibly
be deemed an inconvenience, it is
hardly a great enough disruption to
merit regulating protest. Furthermore,
the courts have consistently held that
free speech protections, especially re-
garding political speech, overrule per-
sonal inconvenience in public places. It
is not as if protestors are running
through halls and interrupting classes.
Rather, they are holding rallies away
from classrooms. The University has
in no way proven that Diag activity is a
grave enough disruption of the educa-
tional process to warrant limitation.
The University admits that it is diffi-
cult to strike a balance between pre-
serving an environment in which
protest can occur and also where re-
search and classes can proceed. But
rather than trying to strike a balance,
the University should foster an envi-
ronment in which free speech is never
compromised.
Political activity is, in many ways, as
educational as classroom studies. It of-
ten introduces students to alternative
views, encouraging them to consider
their opinions, and challenges them to
think critically. However, the adminis-
tration refuses to recognize the impor-
tance of free expression and continues
to hamper it with the present restric-
tions.
The limitation on "loud" rallies in
order to protect the educational
environment is only a cover for the
administration limiting free speech. The
University should deregulate the Diag
and other public places and allow
people to exercise their constitutional
right to free speech.

By Concerned Faculty
As a group committed to combatting
racism and sexism, Concerned Faculty
wishes to express its concerns over Presi-
dent Fleming's policy on discriminatory
conduct. Concerned Faculty agrees with
President Fleming that a policy with
sanctions can be a useful part of a larger
effort to eradicate racism and sexism on
this campus. However, we object to
President Fleming's policy on four
grounds.
First, to propose a policy which applies
only to students suggests that racism is
perpetrated primarily by students. In fact,
the main locus of racism on campus is
institutional. Those in positions of power.
should recognize that the burdens of living
up to any policy will fall more heavily on
them, since their conduct carries weightier
implications for the well-being of minor-
ity groups.
Second, the standards of conduct elabo-
.rated in the proposal do not take account
of history of racism in the United States,
and hence leave open the danger that its
provisions will be interpreted so as to
suppress the legitimate activities of people
of color and of students generally on this
campus. White supremacists, Nazis, and
similar groups have been responsible for a
great deal of racist violence and harass-
ment. Any reasonable policy should pro-
hibit this kind of racially motivated con-
duct. On the other hand, such a policy
must protect the rights of people to
demonstrate against such groups, or other
terrorist groups such as the CIA.
Third, the articulation of different stan-
dards of conduct for different locations on
campus threatens to vitiate the purpose of
Fleming's policy fails, to make clear how
students' rights would differ in the differ-
ent locations, and will not adequately pro-
tect their civil liberties. We fear that the
policy will embolden white supremacists
in the Diag, while threatening to control
the expression of oppressed groups in the
classroom and dormitories.
Finally, the proposal contains undemo-
cratic provisions, and fails to reflect the
perspectives of the people whom the pol-
icy claims to protect.
Standards of Conduct. Any policy
for discouraging discriminatory behavior
must be framed with the history of racism
in the United States and on this campus in
The following members of Concerned
Faculty signed their names to this letter:
William "Buzz" Alexander, Elizabeth An-
derson, Phillip Gasper, Miriam Greenberg,
Bonnie Kay, Peter Sporn, John Vander-
meer, Alan Wald, and Tom Will.

mind. Racism does not consist solely in
racist practices and attitudes of individuals,
nor is racism in the interests of most
white people. Nevertheless, racism in this
country has been, and continues to be, ex-
pressed in practices and attitudes of white
people which deprive people of color of
the power, opportunities, and recognition
they need to advance their interests. This
situation has led to complex relations of
domination along lines of race, gender and
class. A policy on discriminatory behavior
must take these relations of domination
into account by explicitly acknowledging
that some behavior which constitutes
racist oppression when engaged in by
whites does not have this character when
undertaken by people of color on this
campus. For example, a white person may
not proclaim a lounge or a campus
organization only for whites. Yet there is
an important place on this campus for
Black student lounges, the Black Student
union, etc. Such associations do not op-
press whites, because people of color are
not in a position to deprive whites of the
powers, opportunities, and recognition
they need to advance their interests. A
policy on discriminatory conduct should
specifically protect the efforts of oppressed
to maintain their associations.
Furthermore, we must recognize that the
anti-racist struggle and other progressive
actions on campus have been initiated and
sustained political activity. Such activity
must not become the target of a policy on
discriminatory conduct.
Conduct in different locations
on campus. The division of the
University into three different regions in
which different standards of conduct apply
threatens to undermine the purpose of the
policy. The policy offers only vague
guidelines for locations other than educa-
tional and academic centers. The standards
for academic centers say that students may
not assault, harass, or stigmatize others on
the basis of their race or other specified
characteristics. The policy implios that
standards for behavior in public forums are
less strict than those in educational and
academic centers, and mentions only ac-
tions which are violent or which damage
property as subject to sanction. Are we to
understand the policy as permitting mem-
bers of the University to assault, intimi-
date, harass and stigmatize oppressed in
the Diag, as long as they don't damage
property or act violently? Surely such be-
havior cannot be tolerated anywhere on
campus.
Fleming's policy is no more satisfac-
tory with respect to the standards of con-
duct for University housing. It states that
behavior in University housing is to be
regulated by the Living at Michigan

Fleming
Credo. But the credo states the aspirations
of the Housing Division; it does not de-
fine the kinds of student conduct which are
to be prohibited. Are we to understand that
resident students are to be held to these
same aspirations, and hence must not
make others "uncomfortable" on the basis
of their race, sex, etc.? This standard is far
too vague, sweeping and arbitrary to con-
stitute a reasonable standard of conduct.
Heterosexual students may feel "uncom-
fortable" in the midst of a gay and lesbian
students' meeting in a dormitory. To ac-
cept feelings of discomfort as a criterion
for misconduct as to eliminate all protec-
tions for students' civil liberties.
Enforcement Mechanisms. Presi-
dent Fleming's policy fails to represent
adequately the perspectives of oppressed
minorities in its enforcement mechanisms.
It leaves the problem of initially
determining whether a racist act has oc-
curred to the administration. Concerned
Faculty has documented many times how
the administration has failed to recognize
its own racist practices. To insist that ad-
ministrators may define what counts as a
racist act, overriding the perspectives of
oppressed people of color, is itself a racist
policy. Such a determination can only be
made by a body representative of the entire
campus, including a preponderance of
people of color.
Both the provisions of Fleming's policy
and the manner in which he has obtained
its approval betray a contempt for demo-
cratic processes and for the perspectives of
people of color on this campus. The pol-
icy calls for the Dean of a school to select
students to sit on hearing pan'els if the
school's student government refuses to do
so. This provision appears designed to
circumvent democratic processes in the -
event that a student government refuses to
nominate representatives because it judges
that the policy on discriminatory conduct
is being used to-suppress political activ-
ity.
Furthermore, in his rush to place a draft
of the policy before the consideration of
the Board of Regents, President Fleming
has failed to spell out crucial provisions of
his policy, such as the provisions for in-
cluding people of color on the hearing
panels. Yet he refused to extend the
amount of time available for students to
complete their own counter-proposals.
Concerned Faculty stands behind the call
for a policy on racist and sexist conduct at
the university. But it opposes the response
which President Fleming-has made to this
call, both in its specific provisions, and in
its neglect of the groups who have forced
the University toA take action against
racism on campus.

0

Northwest bans the butts

SMOKING OR NON-SMOKING?"
Along with "Window or Aisle?" the
question remains a staple for airline
gate attendants making passenger seat
assignments. But starting April 23, the
question will no longer be asked prior
to any domestic flight of two hours or
less on any airlines because smoking
will no longer be allowed.
Northwest Airlines, the nation's fifth
largest, has even written its own
corollary to the new regulation by not
allowing smoking on any flight which
takes off and lands in North America.
Both Northwest's adaptation and the
two-hour regulation are positive steps
for non-smoking passengers who have
been previously forced to breathe the
polluted air that flows from the smok-
ing section to the non-smoking. It's
also a way for Northwest to improve

its bad image in the travel world and to
give them an excuse for a new line of
advertising.
Northwest has taken a gamble by
ostracizing the smoking minority.
Travel agents have reported that some
smoking passengers are now specifi-
cally asking to be put on other airlines.
Northwest has agreed to refund usually
non-refundable tickets to smokers who
purchased them before the rule was
changed.
Regardless of the smoker's com-
plaints, Northwest is doing the correct
thing and the other airlines should fol-
low suit. The cleaner air in the skies is
very encouraging to an industry which
has become less service-oriented since
deregulation ten years ago. The new
policy will undoubtedly benefit all air
travellers.

0

LETTERS:
Look out for crazy bus drivers!

Hug Tiger Stadium

To the Daily:
I would like to address an is-
sue that I feel is a concern of
approximately twenty-five per-
cent of the University popula-
tion - the bus system.
Now don't get me wrong -
I think the bus system is a
wonderful service for students
who have to travel back and
forth between North and Cen-
tral campuses every day. I feel
that given the number of
drivers available, and the num-
ber of students needing trans-
portation, the bus system is
generally reliable, schedule-
wise as well as safety-wise.

However, I would like to
express my concern about one
particular Saturday night. My
friends and I wanted to catch
the 8:35 p.m. bus to Central
Campus, and went out to the
Bursley bus stop to wait at
8:30. We were informed that a
bus had already arrived at 8:28,
seven minutes early. Conse-
quently, we waited for the next
bus, due at 9:05, but which
didn't arrive until 9:15. We
were by then fifteen minutes
late for our movie; our bus
driver did his best to make sure
we got there as quickly as pos-
sible. Although I was terrified

as the bus rounded the corners
through Northwood Apart-
ments practically on t w o
wheels, that was nothing com-
pared to the feeling I had when
the driver ran through two red
lights.
I feel that the safety of every
person on that bus, including
the driver's, was grossly vio-
lated. It would be sad to see the
reputation of that service ruined
because of a few crazy bus

drivers.
Periodic secret surveillance
of every bus driver is an exam-
ple of what action needs to be
taken to keep this kind of mis-
conduct in order. I think it
would be in the best interest of
the University to do so, in or-
der to avoid unnecessary law
suits resulting from needless
accidents.
-Kimberly Gorny
March 29

6
S

BASEBALL RETURNS TO Detroit to-
day as the Tigers celebrate their home
opener against the Texas Rangers at
1:35 p.m. This marks the 75th
anniversary of baseball within the liv-
ing monument known as Tiger Sta-
dium.
The history and tradition of baseball
in Detroit centers within the walls be-
tween the streets of Michigan, Trum-
bell, Kaline, and Cochrane, on the field
where superstars, legends, and also-
rans of old played the national pastime.
However, there is discussion that
Tiger Stadium has reached the age
where it can no longer serve the pur-
pose of a modern sports team. Granted
there are obsructed view seats, mimer-

ous poles, and an upper deck over-
hang, but these are not reasons to scrap
one of-only four remaining "old-time"
ballparks. (Comiskey Park and
Wrigley Field in Chicago and Fenway
Park in Boston are the others.)
On April 20, a group known as The
Tiger Stadium Fan Club will host "The
Tiger Stadium Hug" at 6:00 p.m. to
encircle the building with supporter's
bodies. This is a great way to show
support for the building and to tell De-
troit Mayor Coleman Young and
Tiger's owner Tom Monaghan that
people care about the survival of this
great artifact of American history.
Anyone interested in volunteering to
help the fan club or for more informa-
tion about the hug can call 994-5991.

Support 'Marcuse Fund'

'U' unfair landlord

To the Daily:
For years, students living in
the university residence halls
have been denied many free-
doms often willfully given
tenants by their landlords. I
have finally reached my break-
ing point.
Recently, the residents of 3rd
Hinsdale in Alice Lloyd signed
a contract to repaint their
corridor. When it came time to
paint the design, the residents
realized the original format was
much too hard to paint. The
drawing alone would have
taken the rest of the year. In-
stead, they decided to paint a
slightly modified version of the

The fight eventually went to
the head of the residence hall
association who left the final
decision up to Kaplan. The
original decision stood.
The fact remains, however,,
that any change in the residence
hall corridors is a change for
the better. This artistic and
colorful design masks a dingy,
subhuman yellow paint, now
chipping and cracked. I would
think the university would
want to impress the students
coming in for summer orienta-
tion and new impressionable
freshpersons with a colorful
and bright residence hall. But
apparently this is not the case

To the Daily:
We would like to acknowl-
edge the generous donations
that have been made thus far to
the "Harold Marcuse Legal
Fund." These contributions in-
sure that Marcuse can continue
his defense against trumped-up
charges of assault and battery
levied by a UM security officer
during his participation in a
peaceful demonstration against
CIA recruitment on campus
last November. Even more,
they will aid in his initiating a
civil suit against this officer,
who in fact assaulted Marcuse.
Unfortunately, the use of our
legal apparatus requires money;
and still more is needed for
Marcuse to pursue his case,
despite the fact that his lawyer
is donating his time. Univer-
sity-sponsored groups such as

MSA are unable to lend finan-
cial support as Marcuse is su-
ing an agent of the university
itself. Thus the contribution of
individuals is vital. If you are
interested in addressing this in-
justice and the broader issues
involved, please send contribu-
tions to the "Harold Marcuse
Legal Fund," c/o Belinda
Davis, 2374 Stone Dr., Ann
Arbor 48105; or call 994-3561
or 763-8892 for further infor-
mation. Also consider attend-
ing the trial, beginning April
14.
You can do something about
this!
-Belinda Davis
Meg Kruizenga
Harold Marcuse
Legal Fund
April 4

a

;:

.


a