Monday, May 6, 2002 - The Michigan Daily - 5 LETTERS TO THE EDITOR I Occupation unites all my attention in some capacity to -f the situation in the Middle East. who fight for social JACKE BRAY and economic justice LSA sophomore 'Progressives' must To THE DAILY: stand with the Iwas disappointed in The sadwt h Michigan Daily's editorial, "Not Palestinian people so simple," (4/11/02) which among other points commented negatively on progressive To TH DAtLY: activists heing vocal in the on- I am neither Jewish nor Arab yet going debate around the current I stand against the illegal and violent situation in the Middle East. The oppression of the Palestinian people. editorial warns against linking The editorial printed last "Not so issues such as sweatshop labor simple," (4/11/02) was an attempt to with the military occupation of silence those who share my situation the West Bank and the Gaza and myself. A call to stop broaden- Strip. The fact of the matter is ing the movement to support Pales- that economic imperialism, tinians in their just claim to which I consider sweatshops to self-determination is unfair and he, and the militarization and inconsistent with most movements occupation of areas are integrally for self-determination and liberation, linked. Both forms of occupation which have been most successful are abhorrent and should he spo- when supported by a broad base of ken out against, support. It is important and impera- The question to he asked now tive that progressive individuals is not why progressive activists apply their politics and beliefs to all are speaking up shout Israel's situations. human rights violations against By no means are the issues of Palestinians. Instead, the question Israel and Palestine simple, but that oaestis. w tehad taken us so does not mean that individuals to ask is what has takens should remain silent. Progressive long. For myself, it has simply people must make space to stand heen my inahility to overcome for what is right all the time no mat- pressure hy all to keep what are ter the complexity. Supporting an sometimes shaky progressive end to the illegal occupation of the alliances intact by not discussing West Bank and Gaza Strip does not this compelling hut divisive issue make me anti-Semitic, anti-Israel or coupled with what I have per- atroimspotr ceived as intimidation on the part a terrorism supporter. of po-Irae leder onthis cam- pcSupport for the Palestinian pe- puof proia leades onu s n l does not enke me a supporter pus to maintain this issue as one of Yasser Arafat or of suicide thton te peolethee he bombers. I simply believe in issue connected to their identity huaritsndjtceIheev ..human rights and justice. I believe can speak on. Intimidation is in both the right of the Palestinian ridiculous and I have enough faith people to self-determination and in my colleagues to begin to be the necessity of a Jewish state. I more vocal. make space in my actions to reflect A progressive alliance is all of those beliefs. I charge peo- important and I have enough ple to continue to stand up for faith in those of us working for injustice regardless of the complex- social justice everywhere to per- ity of the issue. severe through divisive moments. MONIQUE LUSE In fact, I believe that it will be LSAjunior difficult to move forward while President LSA-SG silencing differences among us. We must begin our own open and LETTERS POLICY honest dialogue that is based on the same principles we do our work with every day. The Michigan Daily wecomes let- Idor otsand with I nor ters from all of its readers. Letters from do not stand with Israelead- University students, faculty, staff and do I stand with Palestinian lead- administrators will be given priority ership. I support the struggle of over others. Letters must include the Palestinians for self-determina- writer's name, phone number and tion and an end to their status as school year or University affiliation. an occupied people and of course The Daily will not print any letter that their right to a state and I support cannot be verified. Ad hominem Israelis' right to feel safe and attacks will not be tolerated. Israel's right to remain a state. I Letters should be kept to approxi- firmly believe that the long-term mately 300 words. The Michigan Daily solution to horrid acts of terror- reserves the right to edit for length, clar- ism does not come with increased ity and accuracy. Longer "viewpoints" amounts of state executed blood- may be arranged with an editor. Letters shed, humiliation of a people and will be run according to order received the destruction of communities' and the amount of space available. infrastructure. If I am not mistak- Letters should be sent over e-mail to en the old proverb, "If you want Lttes@michigandaily.com or mailed to peace work for justice," comes to wail to the Daily wit gi en pio tty us straight out of the Bible. As a mie oteDiywl egvnpirt peson ahtout has deted le s over those dropped off in person or sent person who has dedicated my life yin the U.S. Postal Service. to working for both peace and justice I see no reason not to turn Racism 101: RA's diversity indoctrination KEVIN MCNEIL ANN ARBOR's RIGHT SIDE A glaring exam- ple of the backward logic surrounding the University's commit- ment to "diversity" is miles from any Cincinnati courthouse and closer to home than any of us would care to admit. Fierce debates over the mer- its of affirmative action have yet to move beyond the University's admissions prac- tices and focus on our own backyard.In fact, the fire raging in a U.S. Court of Appeals and likely to engulf the Supreme Court, stoked by rhetoric-spewing machines of the likes of the Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action By Any Means Necessary, have drawn our collective attention away from the numerous wrongs committed by a University administration bent on evoking its diversity mandate well beyond the admissionsprocess. The reality is that the University, staid and demure in its "defense" of race-based admission, is closer in practice to the Trot- skyite-apparatus of BAMN and its politi- cal wing, the Defend Affirmative Action Party. The University action arm reaches closer to home than any BAMN activist possibly could. Yes, the University's affir- mative action attack-wing is no less than University Housing. When DAAP looks to get the affirmative action word out it realizes that rallies, sit-ins and leaflets may be in vogue, but that the real opportunity lies with the wide-eyed fresh- men in the residence halls. The University realized this long before BAMN ever tookto the residence halls. What better place to jus- tify race-based admissions and hiring prac- tices than in the one arena where 97 percent of all undergraduates spend at least one year? And who better to serve on the front lines in this propaganda war than the resi- dence advisors. The RA hiring process is slanted towards minorities from recruitment to selection. A quota of slots are reserved for minorities under the title of Minority Peer Advisor - a position with aset of selection criteria based entirely upon race. It is but one method employed by University Hous- ing to guarantee a certain quota minorities. Furthermore, how many white males make it through the process, much less are recruit- ed to apply? A handful at best even though the application process lacks race/sex/sexual orientation/ancestry-based qualifiers as any other legitimate employment process. Uni- versity Housing utilizes an intensive day- long interview process to screen out non-minority applicants. Residence advisors must elect a semester long course, Psychology 405: Social Psychology in Community Set- tings, as part of their "community" train- ing. For several hours a week, soon-to-be RAs learn not a single tangible skill for becoming an effective residence advisor. Security guidelines and safety measures are absent in this course and are even dis- couraged from being discussed. Rather, soon-to-be RAs work through several modules with titles like "Difference and Domination" and "Intergroup Conflict." Required course readings range from the bizarre to the overtly racist. One entitled, "Uprooting Racism: How White People Can Work For Racial Justice," seeks to teach RA's how to edu- cate "white people" (i.e. white students and residents) to use their privileged, oppressive history to benefit those they "subjugate." Another reading, entitled "Identity" teaches RAs that most students (i.e. their white residents) are ina passive stage of acceptance of society's inequities and their structural advantages, but that later stages involve redefining "white- ness" in "non-racist" terms. The upshot of the entire reading to RAs is that nearly all of their white residents are inherently racist - a position that is "correctable" through various techniques at the heart of the RA program. The entire RA education program is but a reflection of the backwards thinking that the University is willing to promote in an effort to achieve racial "diversity." Using race asa factor in admissions is but a small part of a grander University scheme to advance an agenda more radical than any rhetorical platform spewed forth by BAMN. How deep does this ideology. run? Time may only tell, but the Universi- ty is well-prepared for a loss at the Supreme Court - race continues to drive the University and its effects run far deep- er than the admissions office. Kevin McNeil can be reached at /ancneil@umich.edu. VIEWPOINT The University's troubled labor By DAVID DEEG, ROBERT HOWSE, SCOrT TRUDEAU AND JOE SEXAUER The University Committee on Labor Standards and Human Rights was estab- lished three years ago with three goals: To advise the University on issues sur- rounding its licensing and supply con- tracts, to evaluate systems of monitoring factory conditions and to finalize the University's code of conduct. Since its creation, the committee has been a bureaucratic barrier to positive change. The committee is composed of three students, three professors and four mem- bers of the University administration. Each member must apply for a position and is then appointed by either the administration or the Michigan Student Assembly. The committee at its inception was charged with "advising the University concerning policies and practices to ensure that corporations engaged in the manufacture of licensed goods bearing the University of Michigan name and/or logos are not engaged in unlawful or unconscionable labor practices." One of the committee's first projects was to finalize the University's Code of Con- duct. The University's Code of Conduct delineates acceptable and unacceptable business practices to those companies which use the Michigan name and logo. After almost a year of drawn out meet- ings, unproductive disagreements, and pressure from the Michigan community, the committee finalized a one-and-a half-page Code of Conduct. Now, the University has a strong Code, which it should be proud of- but the tradition of drawn out meetings and unproductive disagreements continues. The committee's first stumbling block is an apparent lack of commitment of some of its members to the stated goal of that body, or at least serious ambiva- lence. Some of those who sit on the committee do not apparently support its purpose, do not believe that strong codes of conduct are a positive tool for bring- ing about change, and are not dedicated to the University's Code of Conduct. The committee's second problem is participation. Attendance and participa- tion have been poor, to say the least. Not once this year have more than eight of the committee's ten members been present; average attendance hovers near six. This problem is frustratingly com- pounded by the committee's lack of by- laws. Without rules to set quorum, procedure and record-keeping, chaos reigns. Often, decisions made after hours of in-meeting debate are under- mined or altered in e-mail discussion - a method of deliberation which is confusing, unprofessional and by its very nature, closed to the public. It is understandable for a committee chair to occasionally act alone, for the sake of expediency, on issues on which s/he believes the group to be decided. The committee, however, has watched its committee chairman, Prof. Lawrence Root repeated- ly violate common sense standards. In one instance, Prof. Root actually admit- ted to acting outside of the will of the committee (by informing New Era Cap Company of our potential actions and hence delaying the process further), and there is reason to believe his breach of faith is part of an ongoing trend. We have no wish to make an attack on Prof. Root's character, but we do have a responsibility to judge his actions, at least within the context of the committee. We steadfastly believe his behavior to be incompatible with his position. The University administration must mend the three fatal flaws of its Commit- tee on Labor Standards and Human Rights. To do so, it should appoint to the committee only those applicants who, while possessing a diversity of view- points, both support the University's Code of Conduct and are committed to developing and utilizing means to enforce the code including active partici- pation with transparent, democratic mon- itoring organizations. In addition, the administration should replace the chair- man of the Committee, Prof. Root, with someone committed to democratic and- productive work towards the enforcement of the University's Code of Conduct. Dee is an RC ssior andmember of UCLSHRIHowse is aformer member of UCLSHR and Law Prbfesso Trudeauis a former membr ofUCLSHR and Sexauer is a University alum.