4 - The MichiganDaily - Monday, January 31, 1994 4d1runAirg 420 Maynard Ann Arbor, MI 48109 Edited andmanaged by students at the University of Michigan JEssIE HALLADAY Editor in Chief SAM GOODSTEIN FLINT WAINESS Editorial Page Editors Unless otherwise noted, unsigned editorials reflect the opinion of a majority of theDaily's editorial board. All other articles, letters, and cartoons do not necessarily reflect the opinion of The Michigan Daily. MEE Blo n the wn Welcome to the new Daily Editorial Page B eginnings are never simple, especially when you're not quite sure when it all ended. In the case of the Daily Editorial Page, there is no doubt about it: times have changed, but no one is exactly sure when the old gave way to the new. Once upon a time, administrators trembled when they passed Daily editorial staffers on the street. There was even a time when the Daily editorial page editor was expelled from the Univer- sity for printing a letter from a pro-student organization that had ties to the Communist party. Of course, our intent today is surely not to invite our own expulsion. Instead, the point we are attempting to illustrate is that a student newspaper can, and should, be more than a place to get a weather update or read a movie review. A student newspaper can be an instigator for action. It can be a mecha- nism for students to voice their concerns and demands. In short, it can be a vehicle for change. In the 60's, a great wave of student activism forced administrators to stop treat- ing college students like children. Students demanded that their rights as citizens not be ignored once they entered the ivy walls of the University. Collective action allowed the concerns of students to be translated into the policies of the University. But the gains of the 60's are being rolled back at every turn. The Statement of Student 'Rights" and Responsibilities, the Diag Policy, the looming Alcohol Policy, deputization of the campus police force - all examples of the administration acting in locoparentis (in place of the parents). At no time have these concerns been more perti- nent to the lives of students at the Univer- sity. Some of these policies were born of good intentions. But whether or not the motives are admirable, the results have been chill- ing. Free speech and rational discussion have often been curtailed in favor of "or- der." And individual rights have been cir- cumvented in the desire for conformity and blanket control by the University. We're all in this together. You may dis- agree with our arguments about the Clinton presidency or intervention in Bosnia, you, may find them flat-out wrong. But there's one thing we can't avoid: University poli- cies affect every single one of us, and you never know when these pernicious rules and regulations will show up on your doorstep. We're prepared to reach out to you, and we hope you will do the same. If you have ideas for editorials, if you have been a victim of the University oligarchy or if you just have concerns or questions, drop us a line. This page is not for us, the editors. It's for you, the readers. It's time we cut through the polarizing grip of ideology and realized that we are all, first and foremost, students. Sam Goodstein, Flint Wainess -Editorial Page Editors Julie Becker, Jason LUchtsteln -Associate Editorial Page Editors *ja 3:~ : 0 0 'Liberalism is a fashion statement at this school.' -Katie Buckingham MSA Representative WHEZE STUDENTS 0 40ro SPEN a TH E112i M ONE Y FRoM SELLINCI WJSHIN( BACK THE1Ik BOOKS. WE L L Letter misinterprets MLK's message MLK Day not a failure To the Daily: After reading the letter by this is wrong. True, he did To the Daily: Stephen Markel and Doug fight for other racial groups' The Daily's suggestion Weisz about Martin Luther rights, but he primarily that the MLK Symposium King Day I was bothered by fought for the rights of his was a failure because few his interpretation of MLK's people . We all grew up in famous people participated message. schools where all we were was silly and shallow. The King did not want a taught about King was that BSU's assertion that Dr. multicultural community. he had a dream of whites and King's work was somehow Multiculturalism brings all Blacks together, but he was distinct from and the different cultural groups about much more than just independent of issues of into one culture stifling each that. People should take the diversity, multi-culturalism ones individuality. MLK did time to learn what the was and tolerance was not want that at all. He really about and stop buying, preposterous and myopic. It wanted Blacks to be equal to into the University's and is unfortunate that the Daily whites in American society America's attempts to turn and the BSU chose to taint and for all oppressed groups his struggle into an and sabotage the only day to uplift themselves. endorsement of officially dedicated to the Markel and Weisz said multiculturalism. discussion of these issues. that celebrating MLK's life JESSICA TAYLOR AMITAVA MAZUMDAR should not be a Black issue; Engineering sophomore LSA senior A history of in loco parentis Dollar bills and the un-PC cretin Last summer vacation, after lunch one day, I got a rather odd dollar bill with my change. To the left of George Washington's head someone had scrawled "HITLER IS COMING FOR YOU JEWS" and drawn a swastika. As a Jew, I have a particular aversion to swastikas; seeing one on U.S. currency sent an even stronger message to me. For the next few hours, a million thoughts crossed my mind as I bounced from surprise to fear to anger. Eventually, I put the dollar bill in its own space in my wallet, where it remains, to remind me. We hear a lot at Michigan about hate speech, ethnic slurs and PC. The University speech code is a distant memory, a casualty of the Supreme Court and the First Amendment. The argument was that a university, by officially forbidding some fool from making nasty ethnic slurs, stomps through the thin ice of civil liberties, plunging legitimate speech into the chilling waters below. Now, PC does the same job as the old speech code; the more timid among us claim that they are "afraid to say what they really think" in class. It is remarkable how quickly specific acts of hate are forgotten in First Amendment cases, transforming the PC debate to one about abstract ideals. This dollar billstaring at me was not, however, an abstraction. It was deadly specific and stinging. Behind every hate-law' First Amendment case there are such. personal ordeals, and these ordeals have a -Purpose - to remind us. 'This purpose should certainly not be celebrated, but it should not be r ignored either. PC and hate speech bans are not wrong because they len e4he Iofty ideal of free - . -for more utilitarian reasons, namely that they attempt to suppress messages and people that we need to confront. We cannot afford to make this mistake. Laws are laws, of course. Acts of hate often involve crimes like assault or trespassing. And the university has a responsibility to keep overt, disruptive hate out of~ the classroom. "Free" speechhas alwaysbeenboundedby such lines and restrictions. But being stung by a viciously sexist joke in the Diag, or overhearingsomeone in a dorm who says vaguely that your "group" upsets him? These things are only affronts. PC and the law can never hope to suppress these things, nor, regardless of free speech, should they. To do so would be escapist, providing only a hazardously false sense of security. Equally dangerous, however, are siege mentalities. Acts of hate often depend on shock to make their impression, and are thus notable because they are rare. For me to conclude from a single dollar bill that Nazism pervades Michigan would be a mistake. On the other hand, some hateful messages are so plentiful that they do reveal deep flaws in our society. A feminist, for example, has likely seen enough beer commercials to reach her or his proper conclusion. Any seen after that are just annoying, not instructive. Context and perspective are crucial. But that is the point: acts of hate require scrutiny and should spur careful thought. Imagine some un-PC cretin, standing in the Diag spouting hate. Is it the First Amendment that makes allowing him to speak so important? No. Acts of hate are not necessary evils to be tolerated I, Is Intenatlonal inaction The sovereign nation'"of Bosnia- Herzegovina and its people have been invaded, raped, plundered and starved. While this tragedy continues unabated, most of the nations in the world community have done little to end the killing, slaughter and de- struction of a Member State of the United Nations. Unequivocally, the Western world aeeds to band together to thwart aggression with strength and war crimes with a moral pledge to human rights. The Western pow- ers must have the will and courage to mobi- lize a credible international humanitarian relief effort to ensure peace and security in the Balkans. The Clinton Administration should initiate serious talks among its major Western European allies - namely, Great Britain and France - through the estab- lished institutional channels of NATO to deal with this crisis of politics and morality. 4 mobilization on a monumental scale can and should be conceived.to prevent the total :estruction and annihilation of the nation of Bosnia-Herzegovnia, and its people. Ideologically, the Daily would support unilateral U.S. military intervention in the Balkans, be it air strikes on Serb positions or :he mass deployment of ground troops to lake back lost territory. Yet this option is highly idealistic, impractical and has almost ao support in the American body politic. Massive U.S. action independent of NATO ar the United Nations could involve this :ountry in a long-term quagmire that would demand something politically impossible - the deployment of hundreds of thou- sands of U.S. troops in the former Yugosla- ;ia to seek an end to a conflict it did nothing :o instigate. It remains true that the United States has no overarching or direct security interest in intervening to prevent the col- lapse of the Bosnian Government. This sen- timent has so far directed Western policy in the region, as evidenced by the halfhearted UN operation and EC efforts to implement a peace plan. What we need now is a com- prehensive, determined, collective approach to ending the crimes against humanity in Bosnia: and the United States must be the, opening up of airports throughout Bosnia to! secure the free flow of international hu- manitarian supplies to people in desperate need, the protection of UN peacekeepers already on the ground, ensuring that Sarajevo makes it through the winter and the repeal of the UN arms embargo: These objectives are paramount and must be executed by the West regardless of 'national security inter- est.' In a significant, albeit symbolic step to- ward reshaping U.S. foreign policy, the U.S. Senate overwhelmingly endorsed the lifting of the arms embargo last Thursday. The flawed reasoning behind the embargo. rests on the notion that preventing all three sides from buying weapons will prevent all three sides from using military force - thus ending the war with a friendly handshake. Unfortunately, this is naive and simplistic. The Bosnian Serbs and Croats are both endowed with a vast supply of arms from their respective military backers. The only way that the Bosnians can get arms is with a lifting of the arms embargo. This would, in the very least, level the playing field, allow- ing the Bosnian Muslims to fairly engage the invaders and potentially reclaim the territory taken by the Serbs and Croats. A multilateral military force needs to be coordinated and organized quickly to roll back aggression. The mandate of the multi- national force should be the full restoration of the established borders of Bosnia, the, withdrawal of Serb and Croat military units from Bosnia and the establishment of a war crimes tribunal. The mandate must recog- nize the fundamental principles of self-de- termination, democracy and sovereignty. This translates into the application of West- ern military force against Serbian and Croat units that currently occupy Bosnian land. In keeping with President Clinton's just- announced policy of the role of the United States in international peacekeeping efforts, we must act to end the "gross violation of human rights" in the Balkans. The alterna- tive, empty rhetoric and inaction in the face of nanncide. is unthinkahle. Nnthing less By ROBERT HONIGMAN socially active students The American out of the normal student University is only about community and gave them 100 years old, but over a privileged position in the this briet time it has campus. As a result, most changed significantly. For Gree students wer 'e ve example, from about1920 tObIserative and pro- to 1960 most universities administration. In their under the in loco parentis view the people at the top doctrine (in place of the running the university parent) developed a were good people doing a housing system that good job. Since Greek treated women quite students dominated differently than men. student government, they Men's and women's effectively kept radical residence halls were built and intellectual students at the opposite ends of the from having a public voice' campus from each other in student activities. and superficially looked The Greek system was alike. But only freshman also supported by males were required to powerful alumni. live in the men's dorms, Religious leaders liked the while all unmarried Greek system because it undergraduate women not kept Protestants, Jews and pledged to a sorority had Catholics apart, each in to live in the women's their own social sphere, residence halls. dating only people of their It meant a great deal to own faith. women students of that era The housing system to join a sorority since that worked as a filter to was the only exit route reinforce authority. from the dorms. It also Intellectuals had to opened up a more varied embrace the faculty as role social life for them. But models and mentors, while while a majority of shy students depended on freshmen women usually the dorm system. rushed each year, only Meanwhile, graduates of about half were accepted. the Greek system became The rest, who were often business and community slightly overweight, had leaders and injected an bad complexions or were anti-intellectual tone into socially awkward and the whole of American unsure of themselves, life. In some respects the could expect to remain in university had no choice. the dorms for another Until the 1960s college three years. was a luxury and not a The real reason for necessity. The university isolating women's had to sponsor circus and residence halls at opposite games to attract students ends of the campus was to its campus. that the university wanted What the university to protect the Greek couldn't afford was an system. What did the integrated student university gain by community, for experience favoring and supporting had shown that students the Greek system? First living together for four W" . socially active students meet and share friendships both grow socially and intellectually far more than they do apart. The university Was puoiLiy ia trust being operated-forthe benefit of its undergraduates, their demands could not be reasonably denied. But to a majority of faculty the purpose of a university was to advance knowledge and train graduate students at the Ph.D. level, not to cater to undergraduates. For them undergraduate life was a counterculture that robbed a university of its true mission. It was safer to shape a housing system that kept students politically quiet, socially isolated and preoccupied. The in loco parentis doctrine passed in the 1960s when the Baby Boom doubled college enrollments. Women's dorms were converted into freshmen co-ed dorms. It was far cheaper to let older women out of the dorms and free up the space for new freshmen than to build extensive new dorms for women. Moreover, since demand for a college degree now exceeded supply, the university no longer needed to advertise itself as a sheltered homelike environment. Looking back at the in loco parentis era it may be said educators betrayed their deepest ideals to make the system easy to run. They rationalized university policies with half-truths and protective ignorance. They were not too different from educators of today, except they believed the 4