Scanned image of the page. Keyboard directions: use + to zoom in, - to zoom out, arrow keys to pan inside the viewer.

Page Options

Download this Issue


Something wrong?

Something wrong with this page? Report problem.

Rights / Permissions

This collection, digitized in collaboration with the Michigan Daily and the Board for Student Publications, contains materials that are protected by copyright law. Access to these materials is provided for non-profit educational and research purposes. If you use an item from this collection, it is your responsibility to consider the work's copyright status and obtain any required permission.

February 08, 1989 - Image 4

Resource type:
The Michigan Daily, 1989-02-08

Disclaimer: Computer generated plain text may have errors. Read more about this.

Page 4 Wednesday, February 8, 1989

The Michigan Daily



By Anne Martinez
Four years ago, on February 6, 1985,
the legislature of the state of Michigan
adopted a resolution declaring February 2-8
Chicano History Week in Michigan.
Concurrent Resolution No. 43 says that
Chicano History Week is "in
commemoration of the signing of the
Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, February 2,
1848, commonly regarded as the birthdate
of Chicanos [and Chicanas], in recognition
of their heritage and contributions to the
state of Michigan and the nation."
In the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, half
of Mexico's territory (all or part of present
day California, New Mexico, Nevada,
Arizona, Texas, Colorado and Utah), and
several thousand Mexicans became part of
the United States. Under the treaty, these
new Chicanos were guaranteed "the en-
joyment of all the rights of citizens of the
United States according to the principles
of the Constitution; and... shall be main-
tained and protected in the free enjoyment
of their liberty and property, secured in the
free exercise of their religion without re-
striction." (Acurfa, Occupied America,
1988). The treaty further guaranteed the
legitimacy of titles and grants valid under
Mexican law, in newly occupied Mexico.
All aspects of the treaty were denied and
violated by the expansionist, gold-digging
Americans who encroached on this terri-
tory. Chicanos and Chicanas were robbed
of their property and water rights; their
homes stolen and/or destroyed. They were
,Anne Martinez is a Chicana in LSA

unfairly treated in courts; the l
bing Anglos being backed by the
judicial system. The early Chic
Chicanas were systematically dei
language, culture, and religion. T
economically, educationally, ai
cally oppressed in "the land of the
Today, 141 years later, Chic
Chicanas - born citizens of th
States - face the same deplorab
tions as the first Chicanos and C
We, like other natives of America
to be acknowledged for the land
stolen from us; this land was o

and-grab- canos and Chicanas are still economical
ir corrupt excluded from America's wealth. Accor
anos and ing to the Bureau of the Census, in 198
nied their 30 percent of "Hispanics" were livingi
'hey were poverty, compared to 15 percent of the t
nd politi- tal population.
free." Chicanos and other Latinos across th
anos and United States are now being cultural
ie United oppressed by the ethnocentric and xen
le condi- phobic "this is America - speak English
Chicanas. movement which has led numerous stat
have yet to outlaw Spanish. Chicanos remain u
that was derrepresented in political bodies duet
urs. Chi- gerrymandering, discrimination, and oth

ly underhanded techniques practiced by their
d- opponents. The Census and the University
2, continue to rob Chicanos and other Lati-
in nos of their unique cultures and heritages
o- by lumping all groups into one, and la-
belling that group "Hispanic."
he Chicanos remain deprived in terms of
ly education received; Anglos averaging 12.5
o- years of schooling compared to 9.9 years
h" for Chicanos. At the University, Latinos
es continue to graduate at a significantly
n- lower rate than Anglos. The 1987-88 Mi-
to nority Student Report indicates that more
er Latinos in the 1979-83 entering classes
graduated than Latinos in the 1975-78 en-
tering classes. However, the difference be-
tween the percentage of Latinos and Ang-

los graduating appears to be growing. Un-
der the circumstances, this isn't too sur-
prising. At the University, some members
of the Spanish department discriminate
against Chicano and Chicana native
speakers of Spanish. At the University,
Chicanos and Chicanas are denied, not the
opportunity, but the right to study their
history and culture by departments, deans,
and administrators who have ethnocentric
One might ask how the History Depart-
ment has commemorated Chicano History
Week; or how the administration that cre-
ated, promoted, and produced "Diversity ,
Day" has acknowledged Chicanos this
week. The answer is they haven't; Chi-
cano History has not been offered since
Winter 1986; the University still has no
Chicano faculty. We are reminded that
those who stripped Chicanos and Chicanas
of their identity, culture, and recorded con-
tributions to society in the Southwest in
1848 are continuing that tradition in Ann
Arbor in 1989. The administration that
chooses to ignore state legislated Chicano
History Week complains when the same
legislative body cuts its funding.

'The early Chicanos and Chicanas were systematically denied their language, cul-
ture, and religion. They were economically, educational, and politically op-
pressed in "the land of the free..."'

'...Today, 141 years later, they face the
same deplorable conditions.' Students
protest the lies about Latino students
and programs in the University admin-
istration's Annual Report on Minority
Affairs released last fall.

In the "enlightened" environment of this
self-proclaimed prestigious university,
Chicanos and Chicanas are left with the
same oppressive conditions as the first
Chicanos and Chicanas. The only differ-
ence is the name has changed. The
promise, once called the Treaty of
Guadalupe Hidalgo, is now called the
Michigan Mandate.

Edited and managed by students at The University of Michigan
420 Maynard St.
Vol. IC, No. 92 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.
Good riddance to CBS

CBS protects the master's house:



comes out


By Kevin McClanahan

WITH ALL THE appropriate fanfare
and hullabaloo, CBS News has
Waltzed onto campus, made mush out
of any possible discussion of the
problems which plague the University,
and breezed out. The two-hour broad-
cast from campus last Friday morning
easily lived up to the aspirations of an
image-conscious administration and the
dismal expectations of concerned crit-
The issues were neatly parceled up in
advance: stress, racism, sports, alcohol
abuse, legendary activism. Each one
was given its moment in the spotlight,
then dismissed back into the real
world. Aside from a few extremely
callous and insensitive remarks by the
show's hosts, most of the belittling of
the issues was more subtle. Racism,
when it was discussed, was confined
to an analysis of "racial incidents,"
whether Black and white students sit
together in'the cafeteria, and what the
hosts viewed as a worrisome trend to-
ward "separatism" by oppressed
groups. Any good faith attempt to get
to the heart of the matter (and there
were a few) was quickly dismissed.
Focusing on specific "racial" events,
while occasionally useful, fails to rec-
ognize the depth and sophistication of
current institutional racism.
Anchor Harry Smith perfectly exem-
plified this patte- r of hasty obsoles-
cence when he introduced the segment
on alcoholism by saying, "Let's talk
about alcohol for a few seconds..."
" And it got worse. After Black Greek
Association President Audrey Wright
quite articulately summarized some of
the problems Black students face on
campus, anchor Kathleen Sullivan
suddenly woke up from her football

fever-induced daze to cut in, basically
saying that Wright sounded so dissat-
isfied that she might bemore happy
somewhere else. Cut to commercial.
CBS did not act alone in its presenta-
tion of campus issues. From
electricians and telephone hookups to
the plush (and protected) environs of
the Lawyers Club and the use of secu-
rity personnel, the University put itself
at the service of the show. The Univer-
sity Record quotes producer John
Costello as saying, "the cooperation
from the University... has been won-
derful." Taking advantage of an obvi-
ously favorable publicity situation,
News and Information Director Joe
Owsley added, "We think the media
exposure is an excellent opportunity..."
Although CBS has reportedly been
billed for services provided during the
preparation and shooting of the show,
the Administration will surely never
find a better deal for national advertis-
According to the administration, the
University did not ask to censor the
content of the show, "We respected the
freedom of the press to report on the
campus as they saw fit," Owsley said.
One student standing outside of The
League on Friday morning with a sign
reading "CBS Lies," learned CBS's
definition of that freedom when
Costello, arguing the validity of the
show, told him it was "freedom of the
press," before telling campus security
guards to "clear him out."
The University administration's col-
laboration with the network served it's,
purpose. CBS used its "freedom" to
ignore reality, distort important campus
issues, and showcase the administra-
tion's rhetoric.

My grandmother told me that the truth
would always come out, invited or unin-
vited. The University used 'CBS This
Morning' as an attempt to improve the
public image of the institution, to prove
to America that love overflows and that all
the students are bright-eyed and socially
aware. The public saw civic involvement
by our alumni, the Michigan campus, and
the marching band. Yet, reality reared its
ugly head and may be a Freudian indicator
of Michigan's destiny.
The representative of the Pan Hellenic
Council was critical of the University en-
vironment and articulated the frustrations
felt by the Black community in a round-
table panel discussion. These sentiments
were expressly shared by the white female
participant on the panel. However, at the
end of the discussion, Kathleen Sullivan,
the co-anchor of the show, quipped to the
Black representative that "Maybe you
should go to some other university if
you're so unhappy."
First,this quip revealed the ignorance of
the journalist since minorities in general
and Black students in particular experience
the same intolerance and blatant disrespect
at all of the major universities. More
importantly, however, is the proprietary
assumption underlying these words. Only
the master of the house has the authority
or standing to suggest that someone leave.
Furthermore, this speaker must view the
object of the request as, at minimum, a
guest, and, more likely, an outsider.
Kevin McClanahan is a third year law

The term "outsider" best describes the
position of the Black students at the Uni-
versity. It is unimportant to the Univer-
sity community that these students pay
their tuition like every other student and
assume the added burden of culturally edu-
cating the white student body. They orga-
nize unity marches and symposia to
openly discuss differences in the face of

'[CBS] voiced the widely held notion that Black students have
not earned their position in the halls of academia and the soci-
ety at large; we are freeloaders and, as such, we can be dis-
missed by our benefactor whenever we get out-of-hand or fail
to give thanks for all this benefactor has done for us.'


you will - of the University community
and the nation as a whole. The fact that
Sullivan directed her quip solely at the
Black representative and did not include the
white female who had also lodged com-
plaints of racial insensitivity was only
natural. The University belongs to the
white female; she has a right to be there
and, concomitantly, a right to criticize its


administrative apathy and indifference. And
more, they excel. They demonstrate levels
of excellence not dreamed of by their white
counterparts - for to succeed where it is
expected of you pales in comparison with
success in the face of overt hostility, lack
of role models, and institutional invisibil-
ity. Yet, with all of these contributions,
the culture and well-being of Black stu-
dents are marginalized and made a political
football by this administration.
So it is no wonder that a total stranger
would pick up on these institutional vibes
and feel free to excuse the Black represen-
tative from these hallowed halls. This was
her instinctive and protective response to
the system. In every sense, her request that
the Black representative leave was the ar-
ticulation - the achievement of voice, if

structure. But the Black representative is
without the family circle and cannot raise
her voice in legitimate protest. Instead,
she should leave. The absence of Black
students is preferable to change.
As Aretha Franklin so proudly pro-
claimed, "We're doing it for ourselves."!
We have done it for over two hundred
years and the young minds on this campus
are following in this glorious tradition,
voluntarily or by necessity. Thus, not
Sullivan, the University, or this country
can hand us our walking papers; nothing
or no one possesses that power, as our
survival has so aptly demonstrated. No,
Sullivan, the Black representative will not
leave her own house. The University be-
longs to the Black community as well as
to those students who were instinctively
protected by your quip.

:?. _ __c _ ± L: ;%' : ::":':{ :;;;; } ::. _ ;:: : i' % _ ' _ _ } } : 'r;::It; :;::ii:'';i~si t{;:::"i'::' " : :;:'i?::: r::v i:.:}? ::"

". :::::::::. ::::. :. . : :". :: ;.;{::.::".}::::.. : :".:.... :.: ....::...::.:..".:.. :...: :"...:::. r.
"::::::::. : :"::. ::::::. : :":::::::::::::::::: :"::.:.::::. ::.:.::::::::::::. . ::". ...... .:::::::...................... .. ...... ......r "-?Y
:: }::::$:?:i:' ;:;7:;: ::'}:: ?::::4:ti: :5:::}:i "' ::?4: .. :: :'r: i::titi:::;:;t::ti:;'r:}:titii:vi..::. ;: i r: :" tip':":t::":i? ...........
". ii'

To the Daily:
In last Tuesday's issue of the
Daily, anonymous graduate
students in economics are
quoted as suggesting that Dean
John Cross's work uses a no-
tion of cardinal utility that is
"perhaps the silliest notion of
human nature ever employed in
social science." A Harvard pro-
fessor (not anonymous) is
quoted as saying that "cardinal
utility is a concept that has

realize that this attack on his
scholarship is unjustified. Pro-
fessor Cross's use of utility
theory in his famous work on
bargaining theory, and also in
the journal article cited in the
Daily article, is in accordance
with the modern treatment of
utility theory as used in eco-
nomics, game theory, political
science and psychology. The
modern treatment of measur-
able utility originated with the
classic work of John von
Neumann and Oskar Morgen-
stern The Theory of Games
(1943). An extensive treatment
of this theory and its applica-
tion to both the physical and

informed charges of scholarly
- Theodore Bergstrom
Kenneth Binmore
Hal Varian
January 31
Editor's note:
In the article in question,
"Doctoral students scrutinize
deans" (1131189), The Daily did
not charge the deans with in-
competence nor did the Daily
evaluate technical criticism.
The article quoted anonymous
sources in the University's
Economics Doctoral Program
who charged LSA Dean Peter
Steiner and LSA Associate

These sources remained un-
named because they feared
reprisals from members of the
Economics Department. The
Daily believes that the aca-
demic work of University pro-
fessors should be open for dis-
cussion in the newspaper. Stu-
dents and faculty who work
closely in the departments
and/or programs they choose to
criticize often risk losing
grants, being denied tenure, or
being rejected from the depart-
ments or programs they criti-
cize. Therefore, to provide the
University community a forum
where academic criticism may
be freely voiced, the Daily oc-
1- cn n~ a~l. f l I c ~a ..a flrr~tf l'


-- l

Back to Top

© 2024 Regents of the University of Michigan