Student Advisory Committee so
as to have a representative within
City Council to speak on issues
that may not be involved with
the student government, as well
as to have a student sit on the
University of Michigan’s Board of
Regents, a position that has also
been pushed for under previous
administrations — the legality of
which is ambiguous.
Opportunity
CSG spent this past semester
working on resolutions aimed
at increasing accessibility for
students by means of providing
resources.
“A lot of resolutions have
come through the assembly that
have just sort of been focused on
making it easier to be a student,”
Sarkar said.
Five resolutions in particular
have worked to address these
needs, and have included the
funding of charging stations in the
Shapiro Undergraduate Library,
increasing the Career Center’s
Clothes Closet to provide free
professional clothing for students,
a calculator loan program and,
in beginning in January, free
menstrual products in bathrooms
across campus.
Momentum
The assembly looks to build
upon
initiatives
and
projects
from
last
term
to
continue
supporting programs that assist
student life. For example, while
no longer directly advocating
for the Leadership Engagement
Scholarship, CSG has continued
to work on a partnership with
those organizing the scholarship,
hoping to have funds available by
fall 2018.
Housing affordability is another
issue that began prior to eMerge’s
time in office, with former CSG
President
David
Schafer
and
Vice President Micah Griggs’s
administration
passionate
on
finding ways to lower Ann Arbor
housing costs.
Jawad, who assisted in the
research process that took place
last year on the issue, explained
how CSG is continuing work on
providing students with resources
to understand where to find less
expensive housing.
“Last year we did about a year’s
worth of research on campus
affordability, how to make things
more accessible, what you can do
to advocate for housing resources,”
Jawad said. “We finally were able
to put that into a guide called the
Campus Affordability Guide.”
According to Jawad, the new
housing guide, which just finished
the editing process, has a tentative
release date during the month of
January.
Controversial Speakers
In addition to taking action
on
initiatives
and
platforms
eMerge
campaigned
on,
the
representatives have also worked
to
find
a
balance
between
elaborating on established ideas
and addressing sudden issues
that have come up throughout the
semester.
The presence of controversial
speakers on campus is one that
Sarkar and Jawad have taken
a stance against and that has
reflected the advocacy portion of
their original campaign. In its first
statement
condemning
author
Charles Murray on campus, CSG
made the distinction between the
speaker’s right to free speech and
students’ right to free speech in
opposing speakers like Murray.
“There is a massive and crucial
difference
between
opening
our minds in order to consider
new and different ideas, and
allowing
pseudo-academics
to
portray racism as ‘new ideas,’” the
statement reads.
As questions and anxieties
continue
to
arise
about
the
specifics of a potential speech on
campus by white supremacist and
neo-Nazi Richard Spencer, CSG
has taken an active stand against
the possibility of Spencer coming
to the University.
At a Board of Regents’s meeting
in
early
December,
Sarkar
presented a petition, which had
already received 5,000 signatures
in two days from students, to
stop Spencer from speaking on
campus.
Reflecting on the meeting,
Sarkar explained that while she
believes the administration seeks
to continue prioritizing student
safety, tensions increase when
constant questions continue to
surround the issue.
“I believe that there are people
who have our best interests in
mind and heart when they are in
these decision-making positions,”
she said. “This issue arises when
there isn’t transparency around
how they approach doing that.”
Jawad
echoed
similar
sentiments, highlighting that the
work they have done this past
semester in condemning speakers
such as Spencer and Murray also
includes ensuring CSG continues
to support students who feel
unsafe from or fearful of a
potential Spencer visit.
“We really want to be a resource
for students, making sure that
if people need something, if he
(Spencer) was to come or even if
he wasn’t, because a lot of people
are experiencing just a lot of
anxiety with the thought of the
event coming,” she said. “We’ve
really just tried to make sure that
we can be a resource to students in
this time.”
Divestment
Reflecting on the #UMDivest
movement, Sarkar and Jawad
highlighted
the
eight-hour
meeting in which the resolution
passed,
emphasizing
students’
commitment to advocating for
what they so passionately believe
in.
“People felt so passionate about
this issue, no matter where they
fell on it ideologically, that they
spent eight hours in the (Modern
Languages Building) advocating
for what they believed in,” Sarkar
said. “That’s the sort of organizing
and Michigan spirit of activism
that I think keeps me motivated in
what I do.”
Jawad, who addressed the
assembly personally as a student
in
favor
of
the
resolution,
also reflected on this sense of
engagement and discussion that
surrounded the meeting.
“The thing that I took the most
out of it was the ability to create a
space where people can have those
long discussions and being willing
to be there and being so passionate
that they want to be there for that
long to talk about the things that
they care about,” Jawad said.
At the CSG meeting following
the
passing
of
#UMDivest,
however, Jawad explained she
received
criticism
for
taking
the floor, as one representative
questioned the power imbalance
they believed she created.
“Are you all clear that I spoke
during
community
concerns
as opposed to during executive
communications to try and share
my narrative (despite) being an
executive?”
Jawad
responded
during the meeting. “And though
I know that it wasn’t a way to
take away what I am as the vice
president, it wasn’t my intent to
abuse my power. Are you aware
that other (executive) members
including
the
president
and
former vice president of student
body vocally supported a stance
on the actual politics and not on
the resolution?”
This
particular
meeting
brought
debate
among
CSG
members, as the impacts of
#UMDivest
were
discussed.
Public
Policy
senior
Andrew
Watkins spoke in opposition to the
resolution and voiced his concerns
with specific context of the passed
resolution.
“This assembly emboldened
the BDS movement,” Watkins
said during the meeting. SAFE
previously stated #UMDivest is
not associated with the “Boycott,
Divestment
and
Sanctions”
movement. “They did not say a
word to denounce the movement,
and to me, that silence rings
louder than anything else they
said,” Watkins said.
In a statement that signified
her thoughts on the resolution
released
the
Tuesday
before
Thanksgiving, Sarkar explained
the
changes
before
signing,
including removing the words
Israel and Israeli and the names
of specific companies, so as to
investigate all investments that
violate Palestinian human rights.
Looking Ahead
In looking forward to the work
to be done next semester, Sarkar
and Jawad hope to continue
building upon their resources and
community organizing strategies
in response to conflicts that arise
rather than forgetting about the
facilities already available to them
during moments of intense issues.
“I’ve often observed from this
position that when we have tense
moments in our campus climate,
we sort of put constructive
counter-programming
or
resources to the side to evaluate
the conflict itself rather than
evaluating what we have at our
disposal to counter it,” Sarkar said.
In particular, Sarkar looks
forward to continuing work on the
public service pitch competition
Innovate, which will be run by
CSG and will emphasize the
importance of providing positive
and
helpful
programming
to
students during times of a difficult
campus climate.
Jawad anticipates the creation
of a CSG biweekly or triweekly
video that will be posted on
social media to increase student
awareness of programs available,
specifically those campaigned on
last winter.
“Some of our platform points
had a lot to do with awareness and
kind of just recognizing resources
on campus and thinking about
how we can streamline them
or make them more visible to
students,” Jawad explained.
Overall, the assembly looks
to continue supporting students
during a time when political
climate has raised concerns and
anxiety among many members
of the University. In continuing
programming already available
and expanding upon ways to
provide students with resources
advocating for safety, student voice
and constructive conversation,
Sarkar and Jawad anticipate the
work and dedication to be put into
the coming semester.
“Because the University is
so decentralized it can be very
difficult to identify where you go
to get something, to get a resource,
to
talk
to
somebody
about
something,” Sarkar said. “It’s
the point of student government
to be a liaison between students
and
decision
makers
and
resources, so I would hope that
we can continue doing that next
semester.”
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
News
Tuesday, December 12, 2017— 3
ALEXANDRIA POMPEI/Daily
The UM Productions Team and School of Music Theatre and Dance Students make holiday decorations at the Power Center Monday.
HOLIDAY WR AP UP
a Jewish person, he has a role
to play in speaking against
Zionism.
“I spoke at the divestment
hearing, and I generally think
it’s important as a Jewish
person to … talk about how
there’s this Zionist impetus to
speak for Jewish people,” he
said.
The
student
continued,
adding he believes the views
of Jewish students on campus
differ from the views of people
who are pro-Israel.
“I don’t even think it’s
accurate to say that they (the
University of Michigan Hillel)
speak for the majority of Jews
because
statistically,
most
Jews, at least on campus, are
in the middle and apathetic
to this issue and they sort
of present it as any attack
on the state of Israel is an
attack on Judaism itself and
I try to rebuff that at any
opportunity.”
space. I want to be by myself, I
want to process this.’ Sometimes
a sense of wellbeing and safety
doesn’t come just from a clinical
practitioner. Sometimes it comes
from who you know and who
you feel comfortable with — and
making sure that we’re mindful
of all of those kinds of options for
students. Some folks will choose
to go home, or choose to do what
they would normally do with their
friends. So depending on how
you respond, what makes you feel
safe when you’re in a dangerous
situation is what we want to make
sure that we provide a lot of options.
TMD: One of the things
Richard Spencer’s team said, in
pushing the University for an
earlier decision date, was that they
need time to make arrangements
to bring numerous people to
campus. How big of a concern is
that for the University and are
they going to push back on that?
Harper: I don’t know if the
University would push back about
who he brings or invites as much
as taking into consideration what’s
the safety implications of that.
The other thing that I would offer
around this idea of psychological
safety and emotional safety, where
we want to be really, really careful,
is — and I think it’s a delicate
path we walk — I don’t want my
whereabouts restricted because
somebody looks at me and decides
I’m unsafe. Or they look at my
grandson, who’s tall and lanky, and
decide he’s unsafe. So for me, as
an African American, this idea of
not feeling safe, this idea of ‘I only
want to walk down the street when
I see certain people, I don’t want to
get in an elevator with other’ — all
this idea of ‘I feel psychologically
unsafe’ really creates a ripe area
for discrimination. This is what I
would offer: I think students are
saying that that’s the argument
we’re using. I would frame it
this way: that’s the caution we’re
taking. That’s what we’re trying
to weigh. I’m not saying that that,
in and of itself, is enough, but I am
saying we should consider that. We
should fold that into our thinking.
TMD: There seems to be, in
all these protests and debates
around
Spencers
appearance,
a
pretty
clear
disconnect
between the students who are
protesting and the administrators
responding to those protests, in
that administrators feel they’re
listening to students’ concerns
and students feel they’re still not
doing enough to address those
concerns. Why do you think that’s
happening?
Harper: Two things happen:
We behave internally, like we can
have an internal conversation
that nobody else is listening to.
So, if Richard Spencer and those
who follow him are dangerous
— and I actually believe they are,
and intend to do harm — why
would I publicize where, when,
how? Because if your intent is to
do harm, the more I tell you, and
the earlier I tell you increases
the likelihood that you could
create more harm. So I think the
disconnect comes because what’s
reassuring to students isn’t just
contained in that population.
We’re trying to have a kind of
private conversation about how
we secure our community in a
public forum. And students are
saying, ‘Tell us everything.’ Well,
the ‘us’ is much larger than the
student body or the community
harmed. I think that there is an
expectation from students of
administrative behavior that, on
its surface, appears pretty easy,
until you add a layer of complexity.
There are times when everything
a community wants to know,
feels like it’s entitled to know, is
simply not appropriate to share.
And that’s when trust becomes
important, and giving people the
benefit of the doubt. And I think
we’re sort of low on that right now.
TMD: What I hear students
say is that they’re not able to self-
determine their safety.
Harper: Sure they are. Sure.
You can go, or not go. If your own
sense is ‘I am unsafe, Royster.’ I
don’t want to hear what this guy
has to say, I am not going. There
is nothing he’s going to say. I do
get to self-determine, I do have a
choice, I do have agency. I don’t
have a choice over what other
people do, but I do have a choice
over what I do, and the decisions I
make. I always have a choice, and
I’m not giving that up to Richard
Spencer, I’m not giving that up to
the University of Michigan, and
I don’t need everybody to agree
with me to use my sense of agency.
So I will not concede that. I cannot
say that there is some person,
or someone external to me, that
takes away my agency. No. And I
certainly won’t concede that to
Richard Spencer.
TMD: In your tenure as vice
president, and more specifically
this past semester and year, how
have you seen these issues facing
marginalized students change,
and how has the relationship of
marginalized students with the
administration changed?
Harper: I do think it’s in a
national context. The national
divisiveness has come on campus
also. Much more difficult to not
find common ground, but to hear
each other’s common ground. It’s
not that we don’t have it, but the
national narrative is extremes. Us
and they, rather than a we. And
Richard Spencer is coming here to
harm ‘we’ — us. Think about who
he targets — I’m not sure who he
doesn’t target, other than a very
small portion of the population
which looks exactly like him. So
that we would then be in conflict,
rather than in community around
this, that would be a change.
We’ve got folks in Puerto Rico,
months
later,
without
water.
And the old us would’ve been
busy doing that work. The new
us — we’re fighting about, on the
scale, way less important things.
We’ve somehow managed to get
ourselves to where every issue
is of the same importance. And
it’s not. I don’t want to downplay
Richard Spencer — but really?
At best, he’s going to come, if
he’s allowed to come, talk for an
hour, and go somewhere else and
say the same thing. At best. But
a travel ban? A tax cut that hurts
education and graduate students?
A tax cut that hurts the poor? If
given a choice, that’s probably not
where I would spend my time and
energy. If given a choice.
TMD: As you saw at the
Regents’ meeting, the calls for a
ME/NA checkbox on University
documents and collection data
is growing, and a number of
supporters were at the meeting.
Do you support the addition of a
ME/NA checkbox?
Harper: Again, here’s another
one where work is being done. I
don’t think there’s anything wrong
with the community saying, ‘I
want to be identified, and I want
to be able to check a box.’ It doesn’t
matter, in the community I’m in,
whether I check it or not. And I
think having the numbers to make
sure the resources are there, and
that we can help students, I get that
and support that. I think where I
struggle personally is when that’s
an affirmation, when that’s a way
to say, ‘I’m being seen.’ But I don’t
have to understand it to be able to
respond to it. So this idea of making
sure that we know the numbers,
and that students are getting the
support that they need, absolutely.
And the strategy students want to
use for that is a box. I guess that’s
the right strategy. There are other
students who say: ‘I don’t want to
be targeted that way. Leave me
alone.’ There are students who
don’t want it. There are students
who do.
TMD: Do you think we’ll see a
resolution to this debate around
the box in the near future?
Harper: Boy, I hope so, as long
as we’ve been working on it. And
trying to figure out, how do we
get at what’s being asked, separate
from how it’s being asked.
CSG
From Page 1
HARPER
From Page 1
SAFE
From Page 1