4A - The Michigan Daily - Monday, December 10, 2001 OP/ED U~be J +irbigan i+ iI 420 MAYNARD STREET ANN ARBOR, MI 48109 daily.letters@umich.edu NOTABLE QUOTABLE EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS AT THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN SINCE 1890 GEOFFREY GAGNON Editor in Chief MICHAEL GRASS NICHOLAS WOOMER Editorial Page Editors Unless otherwise noted, unsigned editorials reflect the opinion of the majority of the Daily's editorial board. All other articles, letters and cartoons do not necessarily reflect the opinion of The Michigan Daily. (T(The student body at Michigan is through and through just lovable." ENMD 0fTHE SEAESTK $Ac.~rcEs... - 19AVfE TO STOP No PATING OR ° WATCI NG TV A~Ao SoCoUZIIM& UNTIL tD .'os O RA w RcS ' - F It OMT SLEEP TH~IS WEK., 1tMIGHT I H~A ~7 GETENOU(6H DON*E ToAWDtI sEmcoMSEF -..i: CtIQIJE. = _ Kk11TETU// - University president Lee Bollinger in Cincinnati Thurs ay when asked ifWhe had any further comments about his experience at the University, as quoted in today's Daily. A call for more intellectual activism AMER G. ZAHR THE PROGRESSIVE PEN a s I have watched the most recent debates, demonstrations, and rallies revolving around our landmark affirmative action cases I see that there have emerged three distinct groups of people. First, we have those who support affirmative action, who qui- etly voice their opinions, and many times quiet- ly work to make principled arguments in favor of the policy. Second, we have those such as the Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action and Integration and Fight for Equality By Any Means Necessary, who are unmatched in their loudness and ability to make a stir wherever they choose to. And third, we have the growing voices of anti-affirmative action activists, most times using intellectual means, such as newspa- per writings and quiet counter-protests. Their impact is growing, not because of their num- bers, but because of their methods. The first group I have mentioned has simply been too quiet. While it is perhaps the most numerous, its members rarely use more intellec- tual methods to achieve any types of gains. Newsletters, newspaper submissions and media activism have been neglected by this group, and their sheer size and sure emotion for the issue will mean nothing unless they start to get more organized. The other two groups of people have been able to use these methods to make their voices more well known, many times making it appear as if they are in fact larger than the "silent majority" who I think probably exists, at least on this and most college campuses. Intel- lectual arguments for affirmative action have been void for the most part, and pointed short- comings of those anti-affirmative action voices have not been distinctly pointed out. First, however, one must make a clear state- ment that disassociates any type of intelligent activism in support of affirmative action from the type of activism that is undertaken by BAMN. While some of what BAMN does may well educate some people and may well invigo- rate some others, I believe they ultimately hurt the cause of affirmative action more than help it. BAMN's in-house attorney, Miranda Massie (the sister of one of BAMN's leaders, Luke Massie), made a colossal mistake when attempt- ing to refer to BAMN petitions in her opening statements last Thursday when the latest round of hearings opened up in Cincinnati. After pre- senting them, she was put in her place by the judge telling her that was in fact a legal case and not the forum to make fluffy arguments about integration and the such. He's right. Clearly, the right forums to talk about integration and petitions supporting exist almost everywhere, except the courtroom. Massie's legal shortsightedness in this one instance probably hurt the University's case more than helping it. Send the petitions to news agencies, politicians, students governments, but don't commit a legal error just to get on record in one of he most important cases in American legal history. BAMN and others have failed because they have refused to recognize that their efforts are useless in a courtroom atmos- phere. The affirmative action debate must hap- pen in college auditoriums, newspapers, radio stations, etc. Not until supporters of affirmative action see this will they see much fruit of their hard work. Attending a court proceeding does nothing. Presenting a petition in open court is useless. BAMN's strategies are sloppy, and their personnel unpleasant. Those of us who support affirmative action have to think twice before we unwittingly support BAMN and their rag-tag tactics. Also, those who back affirmative action must do more to point out the obvious short- comings that are the foundation of the current popular backlashes. Since, those who oppose affirmative action are for the most part using intellectual arguments, we should do the same. Opponents of affirmative action distort the meaning of the principle, ignore recent history, and shun present realities. They incorrectly claim that the success of affirmative action is based on whether or not it diminishes poverty, while it was never intended to substitute for jobs, alleviate welfare woes, or provide food to poor families. Opponents also misguidedly argue that affirmative action requires a lower- ing of standards, pointing to grades and test scores as the real indicators of worthiness. They can't be fully serious, since experts agree that using test scores alone is probably one of the worst ways to determine admissions. Crit- ics also ask why we don't simply replace race- based affirmative action with programs based on poverty and economic disadvantage. The answer to that is simple. Race is one thing, poverty another. The irony is that most who use this popular -logic would not really favor a poverty-based affirmative action; they simply use this tactic to attempt to point out a moral shortcoming in cur- rent policies. Policies targeted to help those in poverty would surely be beneficial, but that does not mean ruling out policies that are race-based. Finally, opponents argue that affirmative action is contrary to the American belief in individual- ism and the struggle for a color blind society. This argument fails because discrimination is almost never based on individual traits (it might then be acceptable); it is based on association with a group. Let's eliminate group discrimina- tion before we eliminate group remedies. Also, our own Constitution recognized that we are not a color blind society. Congress knowingly per- petuated slavery of blacks, and knowingly out- lawed it. Our whole legal system is based on diversity and color consciousness. So, if we are to function by the rule of law, we must be color conscious, not color blind. These are the arguments that need to be made. Those who are currently too silent, spending too much of their either complaining about BAMN or working to oppose them must begin to delineatethese argumerits usi;g e, most effective outlets. We cannot let BAM N hurt affirmative action more than it already .has. It is incumbent upon us to take back the fight by' ignoring BAMN, not by fighting them, and by making intellectual arguments in the face of a growing, intelligent anti-aftirna- tive action movement. I I V VIEWPOINT The world wasn't watching: Afiveaction in Ohio q BY ZAC PESKOWITZ AND JIM SECRETO Waking up at 5 a.m. the week before finals to drive to a federal appeals hearing in Cincin- nati is not the most academically wise decision. It is a sacrifice - and we assume our decision to attend the oral arguments for the University's affirmative action cases will not improve our blue-book-taking capabilities. But our trip into the fine state of Ohio made two ideas concerning the lawsuits very clear: The present effort to save affirmative action is rather underwhelming, however, without affirmative action the nature of higher education will be permanently altered. We boarded a bus sponsored by Students Supporting Affirmative Action. Sadly, despite chartering two buses for the trip, only one bus was filled. After an hour of futilely waiting for more individuals to arrive, the buses departed. Several hours into the ride, we were told of a possible turnout of roughly 3,000 protesters and warned that Fountain Square, the location of the noon rally, could be dangerously overcrowded. We were also informed that BAMN, everyone's favorite Trotskyist front group and the sponsors of the day's rally, had hired the Nation of Islam for the security detail. Our immediate reaction: Altamont - the 1969 Rolling Stones concert where the Hell's Angels were prudently chosen as security guards. Once we arrived in downtown Cincinnati, we were able to secure tickets for the overflow court room, despite being told by a variety of sources that people would have been "lining up since six in the morning" for a supposedly val- ued spot inside the courthouse. At the square, we realized that there would only be a few hundred individuals at the rally. Even more disheartening was the low number of University students, particularly undergraduates, at the event. The crowd was dominated by high schoolers and BAMN sympathizers. Also, three individuals from The Michigan Review had journeyed to Cincinnati to voice their disapproval of the University's admission policies. On a skywalk above the main stage confrontation brewed as the Review kids' signs were tom apart by high schoolers, and one writer was physically accosted and told that he was "going over" the rail. After the initial incident, the Review kids choose to return to the skywalk with more posters. Once again, people attempted to destroy their signs. We ran to the skywalk to closely view the melee. After some shoving between a high schooler and the Review kids, a girl tried to grab one of their signs. Secreto stepped in and prevented her from taking the sign and an older man threatened physical violence. The situation was diffused when an enormous man told every- one to calm down and the police ordered the skywalk evacuated. The rally continued anticlimactically, and we walked to the courthouse. After clearing securi- ty, we tried to sneak into the main courtroom only to be rebuffed by an officer of the court. While the decision of the appeals court will only immediately affect the 6th Circuit, the en banc hearing (a case heard by all nine judges as opposed to three) signaled that these cases are headed straight to the Supreme Court and would affect the application of affirmative action nationwide. During oral arguments all parties presented their respective sides. It was a weighty proceed- ing; the lawyers understood the possible impact of their actions. Then the attorney for the Law School student interveners, Miranda Massie, tried to intimidate the lifetime-appointed federal judges with petitions in support of affirmative action - making herself and the University's defense appear childish. One judge took Massie to task, saying some- thing along the lines of, "Ma'am, I know that I speak for all of us on the bench when I say that this is a judicial process, not a legislative one and we are not swayed by public opinion and are unimpressed by petitions and rallies." The imperious image of the judges presiding over the bench made the ramification of the Uni- versity's affirmative action cases suddenly lucid. And hitching a ride back to Ann Arbor with an expert in Constitutional law did not hurt either. We were thankful the legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan had extra room in his minivan for two, tired and wet students who did not want to endure the bus ride home. And it gave us an opportunity to listen to his professional opinion on the cases and the possible impact of a ruling striking down affir- mative action. As you would expect, the man did a good job of putting the cases in perspective and made it very clear to us these cases were far more important than most, especially University students, were treating them. Bottom line - when these cases start in the Supreme Court, University students, on both sides of the issue, better recognize its implica- tions for the future of higher education. Peskowitz and Secreto are members of the Daily's editorial board. Amer G. Zahr can be reached via e-mail atzahrag@umich.edu. Y LETTERS TO THE EDITOR Illinois GSIs being smothered by Cantor administration TO THE DAILY: Many thanks for the Daily's fine editorial of Dec. 4 ("Let the GSIs unionize"). Those of us at the Graduate Employees Organization here in Illinois look with admiration (and perhaps a bit of envy) at the tremendous positive impact Michigan's GEO has had on the lives of gradu- ate employees and undergraduates alike. It is an example we hope soon to emulate. In our recent two-day work stoppage, we had the support not only of graduate employees, but also faculty members, University staff, local cler- gy, community activists and undergraduates - even the president of the Illinois Student Govern- ment picketed with us. The whole University community realizes that giving graduate employ- ees a recognized voice in our work is not a ques- tion of money, it is a question of justice, fairness, and quality education for all. It is a source of unending frustration and sadness that the Illinois administration, including Chancellor Nancy Can- tor (the recently-departed provost of the Univer- sity of Michigan), refuse to recognize the simple truth that we are workers with the right to choose union representation. The GEO membership is enthusiastically in favor of further walkouts to win the right to col- lective bargaining. We have exhausted all other political, legal and diplomatic options, so all we have left is our labor. Thanks again to The Cartoonist probably fell asleep in class TO THE DAILY: The editorial cartoon of Nov.27 showing the Pope preparing to "bless" sperm is bla- tantly offensive to Catholics. If you are going to mock the Pope and Catholic teaching, you could at least get it right. The cartoon says that the Pope holds that "embryonic cells" are "potential lifeforms." No, Catholic teach- ing holds that embryonic cells are human life forms, not potential. This is simple Biology 101 not theological sophistry. Maybe the artist was asleep in class when the professor went over this. LOUIs GIOVINO The letter writer is assistant to the president of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights. Isenberg's column on dating a waste of time To THE DAILY: I'm just bored enough to spend the time to respond to the waste of time I spent Fri- day reading Rebecca Isenberg's ground breaking and socially controversial ideas on modern dating which she summarized in her column called "Are non-relationships the new relationship?" Surrounded by writing concerned with electronic privacy legislation and civil rights, I fell upon a column that could best be described as a sociological study in the future of American suburbia. The sup- posed problem Isenberg has so happily decided to describe to Daily readers has the depth and complexity of a primate on Via- gra wondering if it should be "relationship- py" with just one person/thing or if it should "hook up" a few more times with _ FILE PHOTO Contract negotiations between GSIs and the University of Michigan were at an impasse in 1999. Michigan Daily for supporting our struggle. DAVE KAMPER The letter writer is the communications for the Graduate Employees Organization at the University of Ilinois at Urbana-Champaign. I Raiji clouds real issues of affirmative action TO THE DAILY: It's been said that you should write what you know. Maybe Manish Raiji has never heard this, because in his column "The Liberal Right Turn" (12/5/01), he makes a blatantly false statement. sions policy is not simply the underrepresenta- tion of minorities at the University. It is the dis- crimination that is obviously still pervasive in our society that the policies also attempt to over- come. Until we eliminate the attitudes of racism, we cannot be blind to the issue in admissions poli- cies, or any other facet of life. It is a myth that life in the United States is based on a system of meritocracy. To ask that all students be judged