current moment, not a debate. The 
second part of the event featured 
a 
workshop 
for 
developing 

policy recommendations for the 
University.

“This 
event 
is 
first 
and 

foremost a proactive, student-
generated 
response 
to 
the 

administration’s call to gather 
input from stakeholders across 
the University, and its primary 
objective is to gain insights 
and 
recommendations 
from 

a 
diverse, 
multidisciplinary, 

intergenerational 
and 
multi-

ranked 
community 
for 
our 

provost panel’s consideration,” 
De la Cruz said.

The first panelist, Howard 

Brick, 
professor 
in 
the 
Department 

of History, provided a brief 
overview of political regulation 
at the University in the 20th 
century. He noted the American 
Association 
of 
University 

Professors’ 
declaration 
of 

principles on academic freedom 
and academic tenure in relation 
to the University’s history with 
social activism. Brick highlighted 
the precarity of the AAUP’s 
1970 revision of the 1940 
Statement of Principles on 
Academic 
Freedom 
and 

Tenure, explaining how many 
components are undefined of 
what constitutes academic 
freedom versus violation.

“The point was not to avoid 

controversy, but in fact, the 
1970 statement said that the 
scholar could be controversial 
and polemical provided he or 
she was being so for the sake 
of facing scholarship,” he said.

Brick considered periods 

in 
which 
the 
University 

repressed faculty based on 
social 
or 
political 
views, 

drawing from war periods and 
the Cold War. He compared 
these to the social issues faced 
today on campus and the 
AAUP’s letter statement.

“It 
may 
be 
a 
little 

discomforting to recognize 
that 
oddly 
enough, 
the 

question of whether one has 
the right to deny a letter of 
recommendation on grounds 
other than solely merit,” he 
said. “It turns up here in 
the letter, in the context, of 
course, we would not approve 
regarding the disciplining 
of a student, which only 
shows how these questions 
of academic freedom are so 
fraught and dependent on 
context, and not fixed by 
nature as an absolute.”

The 
second 
panelist, 

Chandler 
Davis, 
was 
a 

University professor in the ’50s 
and was given a subpoena from 
the 
House 
Un-American 

Activities 
Committee 
along 

with three other U-M faculty 
for being branded a communist. 
Davis refused to answer HUAC 
questions, pleading the Fifth 
Amendment in the hopes of 
being convicted and appealing 
the case to the Supreme Court to 
protest against the government-
sponsored 
anti-communist 

campaign. Davis was ultimately 
fired from the University, lost his 
appeal to the Supreme Court and 
served a six-month sentence in 
prison.

“Any faculty member refusing 

to answer questions before the 
red hunter committees created 
a 
presumption 
of 
unfitness, 

I 
summarize 
the 
plight 

administrators face this way: 
They hoped there were no reds 
on the faculty, they hoped nobody 
would ask them if they were, but 
if the inquisitors obliged them 
to fire a red they would go along 
wholeheartedly,” Davis said.

The third speaker, Alan Wald, 

a professor emeritus of American 
Culture and English, compared 
his social activism as a professor 

in the ’70s and ’80s against 
apartheid in South Africa and that 
of the Boycott, Divestment and 
Sanctions movement in regard to 
Israel. According to Wald, both 
movements focused on economic 
targeting and have a history of 
colonization at the root of the 
problem. He also acknowledged 
the implications and history of 
the oppression of Jewish people 
searching 
for 
survival 
upon 

coming to Israel, and explained 
how discourse at the University 
is vital to understanding the 
multifaceted issue.

“I’ve 
heard 
it 
mentioned 

that everybody supported the 
anti-apartheid struggle,” Wald 
said. “That’s as misleading as 
imagining that the beginning 
of the movement against the 
war in Vietnam that everybody 
supported it. The battle for 
divestment from apartheid went 
on for close to 20 years, day in 
and day out for the core activists 
and U-M was far behind many 
universities. 

Despite 
nearly 
ubiquitous 

news coverage and relatively 
civil negotiations, New York 
state troopers came in with 
force. The troopers tortured the 
inmates but would come to deny 
such proceedings. There were 39 
fatalities.

“This 
book 
is 
about 
the 

uprising, but it was also about 
the coverup,” Thompson.

Thompson spent 13 years 

researching and writing “Blood 
in the Water”. New York sealed 
their archives regarding the 
Attica 
riot, 
so 
Thompson 

said she had to retrieve the 
 

information in a roundabout 
way.

“The 
thing 
about 
being 

a historian, it’s like being a 
detective,” Thompson said. “You 
have to think about where’s the 
secret. Who knows where the 
sources are? That’s the fun part. 
It’s amazing how creative you 
can be. Believe me, the stuff is 
there. You just have to look for 
it.”

Thompson looked at union 

records for prison guards and 
coroner’s reports for autopsies. 
She interviewed inmates, prison 
guards 
and 
state 
troopers 

alike in order to offer every 
perspective.

“Who’s really telling the truth 

of the narrative?” Thompson 
said. “That’s kind of the most 
vexing thing.”

Thompson said she views it as 

her responsibility as a historian 
to tell stories comprehensively 
to the best of her ability. She 
said this is compounded by her 
privilege as a white woman 
covering such volatile research 
regarding race and ethnicity. 
She assured the audience that 

she is “not pretending that it’s 
my story.”

“I see that as a privilege, but 

I also see it as an obligation 
to figure out what the hell 
happened and report back,” 
Thompson said.

Thompson’s 
work 
revolves 

around this idea of responsibility 
to find the truth. Her favorite 
kind of writing is not weighty, 
academic 
works, 
but 
rather 

breaking news opinion pieces 
regarding 
current 
affairs. 

Thompson called this her work 
as a public intellectual and 
describes it as trying “to correct 
the record in the moment.”

Thompson writes often on 

issues 
regarding 
police 
and 

prisons. Public Policy junior 
Bhavya 
Sukhavasi 
said 
she 

enjoyed the fact that Thompson 
delved into this aspect of her 
work at the event.

“It isn’t just about writing a 

professional book, but writing 
just day-to-day,” Sukhavasi said.

Thompson told the audience 

about 
an 
opportunity 
that 

she had to write an op-ed 
for 
The 
New 
York 
Times 

regarding a recent prison riot 
in South Carolina. She publicly 
condemned the story of the 
police — claiming they were not 
telling the whole truth.

Following 
the 
release 
of 

Thompson’s 
op-ed, 
inmates 

came forward with videos from 
inside the prison during the riots 
that confirmed the misdeeds 
of the police. Thompson said 
she enjoys being able to write 
important 
stories 
using 
her 

historical expertise in order to 
facilitate a dialogue about the 
issues at hand.

“There’s 
no 
choice,” 

Thompson said. “You weigh in 
now or you don’t. You write now 
or you don’t.”

It is with this courage that 

Thompson advised her students 
to write. She said she is happiest 
when it seems her students 
portray “a confidence to have 
some mastery of the sources 
rather than the sources master 
them.”

“They need to just have some 

confidence in their own voice,” 
Thompson said. “You kind of 
have to have a little bit of that 
bravery to step in front of it like 
that.”

Julie 
Babcock, 
a 
lecturer 

in 
Sweetland 
Center 
for 

Writing said as an educator, 
she reverberated Thompson’s 
sentiments 
regarding 
the 

necessity for students to present 
confidence in their writing.

“We 
want 
to 
hear 
your 

thoughts, and we want to see you 
engage in such conversations,” 
Babcock said.

In sharing her experience, 

Thompson said she finds one 
of her most important roles is 
instilling hope in her students 
suffering the frustrations of 
entering into writing.

“It’s so overwhelming when 

you’re in it,” Thompson said. 
“It’s important that students 
understand 
all 
the 
barriers 

you have also faced and how 
you overcame them to kind 
of brainstorm strategies for 
moving forward.”

Thompson 
is 
currently 

researching for her next book 
on the bombing of a building 
housing MOVE Black liberation 
activists in Philadelphia in the 
spring of 1985. This past year, 
she was awarded the Bearing 
Witness 
Writing 
Fellowship 

from the Ford Foundation’s Art 
of Justice Fund to allow her to 
conduct more research. Next 
year, she will be teaching at 
Cambridge University and she 
plans to release her next book in 
about three years.

The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
News
Wednesday, November 28, 2018 — 3A

PULITZER
From Page 1A

interview. “I find those results 
encouraging - they are a valuable 
reminder that most people don’t 
follow politics very closely and 
that many democratic norms 
still enjoy bipartisan support.”

Both representatives from the 

University’s chapter of College 
Republicans and chapter of 
College Democrats, however, 
said they were not surprised 
by the bipartisan support for 
independent 
investigations. 

LSA 
sophomore 
Dylan 

Berger, president of College 
Republicans, said the study 
reaffirmed what he already 
knew.

“I 
don’t 
think 
that 
(the 

finding) surprised me because in 
this country, it’s very important 
that we put conservative and 
liberal aside and do what’s 
right, and I think the majority 
of people want to make sure that 
we’re bridging those divides and 
have good government,” Berger 
said.

Public 
Policy 
junior 

Katie 
Kelly, 
director 
of 

communications 
for 
College 

Democrats, said she was also 
unsurprised by the results.

“I 
don’t 
think 
that 
this 

finding 
is 
that 
surprising,” 

Kelly said. “In a country where 
bipartisanship has become more 
difficult to achieve than ever 
before, it is very important that 
we focus on the issues that we 
all agree on. This survey shows 
that the majority of Americans 
are united on this particular 
issue, 
not 
just 
Democrats, 

Republicans, or independents.”

The study cautions readers 

from interpreting the bipartisan 
support 
for 
independent 

investigations 
in 
an 
overly 

optimistic 
way. 
As 
Nyhan 

pointed 
out, 
even 
though 

Democrats 
and 
Republicans 

may believe the same underlying 
principle, they could potentially 
interpret 
the 
meaning 
of 

an 
“independent 
and 
fair” 

investigation in different ways.

“As we describe, it is possible 

for a consensus to exist on 
various democratic principles 
but for partisans to disagree 
sharply on how to interpret 
or apply those principles in 
particular 
cases,” 
Nyhan 

wrote. “Imagine two people 
who say investigations should 
be impartial but one opposes 
political interference in the 
Mueller investigation and the 
other thinks the investigation 
is a partisan ‘witch hunt’ that 
should therefore be shut down.”

The study raises questions 

about how the U.S. electorate will 
react if Mueller’s investigation is 
ended prematurely by Whitaker. 
Both College Republicans and 
College Democrats say they 
have conversations within their 
organizations about the Mueller 
probe.

Berger said he is confident 

President Donald Trump will 
allow Mueller’s investigation 
to 
be 
carried 
through 
to 

completion, while Kelly saidshe 
saw real concern among voters 
when canvassing before the 
midterm 
elections 
that 
the 

investigation would be cut short.

“Outside of our members, I 

personally saw a good amount 
of 
discussion 
on 
the 
issue 

when knocking doors during 
the election cycle,” Kelly said. 
“Many people were concerned 
about the investigation being 
cut 
short. 
We 
in 
College 

Democrats share that concern. 
It is important that Robert 
Mueller has the appropriate 
time and resources to complete 
a full investigation.”

Another major finding of the 

study was that parties divide 
sharply on the issue of voting 
rights. Based on the survey, the 
public ranked the importance 
of equal voting rights very high, 
with 89 percent of respondents 
calling it important or essential, 
but the two parties perceive 
this 
democratic 
principle 

differently. 
Republicans 
are 

concerned with enforcing equal 
voting 
rights 
by 
combating 

voter fraud, while Democrats 
are focused on protecting voter 
rights by ensuring equal access 
to the ballot box.

Nyhan made the distinction 

that widespread voter fraud 
is not an issue the U.S. faces, 
whereas voter suppression of 
marginalized groups does exist.

“The problem is there’s a 

factual misperception at the 
heart of this dispute,” Nyhan 
wrote. “Every serious inquiry 
has shown that widespread voter 
fraud is virtually nonexistent. 
By contrast, the risk of voter ID 
laws creating undue burdens 
on voters from disadvantaged 
groups is real.” He also pointed 
out, though, that the literature 
is mixed as to whether stricter 
voter ID laws do reduce voter 
turnout.

Berger said it is important 

to 
both 
protect 
Americans’ 

constitutional right to vote and 
ensure that only those that are 
supposed to vote actually go out 
and vote. He said he believes 
voter fraud is one of the most 
important issues facing our 
country.

“I would really like to see both 

sides become more interested 

in protecting from voter fraud 
because if you have voter fraud 
going on in this country, our 
election system will not be able 
to stand up, because in order to 
retain legitimacy, you’ve got to 
make sure that only those that 
are supposed to vote actually 
vote,” Berger said.

Kelly 
affirmed 
College 

Democrats are concerned about 
voter suppression across the 
United States.

“Both as College Democrats 

and as college students, we know 
firsthand that voter suppression 
is a problem in this country,” 
Kelly said. “As stated in the 
survey, research has shown that 
voter fraud is not a problem 
in this country. I think that 
elections like those in Georgia 
show that we have a long way to 
go to ensure equal voting rights 
for every American citizen.”

Kelly is referring to voter 

suppression efforts in Georgia 
during the midterm elections, 
in which Brian Kemp, governor-
elect and former secretary of 
state of Georgia, purged the 
voter rolls prior to the election, 
under 
the 
justification 
of 

removing people who haven’t 
voted in recent elections, as 
well as those who had died. 
His office held 53,000 voter 
registrations, nearly 70 percent 
of which were Black voters, 
because the name used on the 
registration did not exactly 
match 
one 
on 
government 

records. When ending her bid 
for governor, Kemp’s opponent 
Stacey 
Abrams 
lamented 

an “erosion of democracy” that 
she believed kept some of her 
supporters from voting.

Looking 
forward, 
Nyhan 

believes 
the 
study 
has 

implications 
for 
the 
2020 

presidential 
election, 
mainly 

in 
the 
general 
election 
if 

Trump’s 
democratic 
norm 

violations 
contribute 
to 
his 

underperformance in the polls.

“His approval ratings are well 

below what we’d expect given 
the state of the economy,” Nyhan 
said. “If Trump continues to 
underperform because of factors 
like democratic norm violations, 
it could put him at greater risk of 
defeat in 2020.”

Both Berger and Kelly said 

they think the study indicates 
the American electorate will 
want a candidate who can put 
the needs of the country over 
party and respect American 
democratic institutions.

“I think this survey shows 

that 
there 
are 
issues 
that 

Americans agree upon,” Kelly 
said. “Future candidates must 
focus on uniting our country 
instead of dividing it.”

COURT
From Page 2A

ACADEMICS
From Page 1A

pockets and CSG has not 
been 
effective 
enough 
in 

accessing those pockets and 
making sure they are seen 
by us and supported by us, so 
we are going out to them, we 
are asking them to come to us 
and meet with us regularly 
so we can serve with them 
regularly.”

The proposed organization 

of the program is to use 
a cohort system in which 
student organizations will 
be separated into groups. 
To determine the groups, 
CSG offered organizations 
several different categories, 
such as “service,” “identity” 
and 
“professional,” 
which 

they could place themselves 
into. 
To 
best 
represent 

their groups, organizations 
had 
the 
option 
to 
place 

themselves 
group 
into 

multiple categories.

“In 
the 
conversations 

to see how we can really 
empower the students and 
give them the platform, we 
decided to compartmentalize 
student orgs based on their 
identities and based on their 
missions,” LSA sophomore 
Jacob Pollitt, CSG external 
relations 
officer, 
said. 

“Hopefully by bringing them 
together, they’ll be able to 
share 
their 
experiences, 

share 
their 
information, 

begin to understand sort of 
how similar orgs face similar 
issues and maybe how they’re 
different and how through 
the collaboration they can 
sort of help each other with 
the issues that they face.”

Every student organization 

will appoint a liaison who 
will work with Adjei and 
Pollitt. 
Each 
liaison 
will 

funnel into a cohort, which 
will interact directly with 
CSG to create action plans, 
facilitate 
activities 
and 

provide necessary resources 
through bi-weekly meetings. 

As part of the program, 

CSG would collaborate with 
student 
organizations 
to 

establish 
workshops 
and 

seminars for the groups to 
attend, potentially discussing 
topics 
such 
as 
money 

management, technology and 
social media.

“The seminars that we 

are going to be hosting, they 
optimize 
the 
benefits 
of 

organizations,” Adjei said. 
“Workshops can focus on 
ways 
the 
administration 

as an entity can work with 
organizations more directly 
to 
remove 
barriers 
that 

they’re facing or to help their 
agendas.”

According to Pollitt, the 

liaison program will provide 
multiple 
short-term 
and 

long-term benefits for the 
University. 
Some 
benefits 

include 
opportunities 
to 

build networks, being able 
to use CSG as a platform 
for advocacy and increased 
accessibility 
of 
CSG 

initiatives.

“Accessibility 
to 
other 

CSG 
projects, 
current 

and future, that’s a really 
important thing to touch 
on,” Pollitt said. “We do have 
projects in the work and the 
Liaison Program will sort 
of smooth the way in terms 
of implementation that not 
only will benefit the student 
orgs and their experience on 
campus, but also will help 

CSG achieve the visibility 
that is necessary.”

During the presentation, 

LSA 
sophomore 
Amanda 

Kaplan, CSG vice chair of 
the 
finance 
committee, 

raised a concern about the 
logistics behind integrating 
student organizations with 
a 
pre-established 
internal 

governmental structure.

“What is your plan for 

different types of student 
groups that kind of already 
have 
an 
established 

government hierarchy like 
sorority 
and 
fraternity 

life, how are you going to 
incorporate them into other 
cohorts?” Kaplan asked.

In response, Adjei and 

Pollitt said even if groups 
such 
as 
sororities 
and 

fraternities 
already 
have 

their 
own 
hierarchy, 
by 

coming to CSG, they can 
receive additional help and 
have an additional resource 
to overcome any barriers. 
Ultimately, they said, CSG 
would just be an additional 
platform to help make their 
voices 
and 
perspectives 

heard.

Toward the end of their 

presentation, 
Adjei 
and 

Pollitt proposed their goals 
for the program in the next 
five 
years, 
stating 
they 

hope for an annual summit, 
guest presenters, consulting 
sessions and more.

“Ideally we want the entire 

campus to be in on this,” 
Adjei said. “In five years we 
want to be up and running 
fully efficiently at maximum 
velocity. 
We 
want 
every 

corner of campus to at least 
know that we are there as a 
resource and have a direct 
line to us.”

CSG
From Page 1A

Read more at 
MichiganDaily.com

