Free speech Friday

Institutionalize understanding

Judging from the content of [the May 26] Daily Opinion section, the controversial phrase "institutionalized racism" has apparently been the subject of a deep misunderstanding on our campus.

One Daily columnist considers it a mere "buzzword" to be dismissed, while certain letter writers, in their insistence on denying the existence of racism in the UW community, apparently overlook the phrase's crucial adjective "institutionalized." Reckless dismissals of racism as a thing of the past by the unrepentantly ignorant among us are unfortunately no surprise. But the ongoing misunderstanding of the distinction between mere bigotry and institutionalized oppression is a far more complex problem for those of us who care deeply about diversity in higher education.

When concerned activists such as MTT and similar coalitions raise the issue of "institutionalized racism," it's important to understand the complex situation evoked when these two words, already powerful standing alone, are combined. All of Wednesday's (May 26) writers seem to personally define racism as an attitude held simply by isolated individuals, with no collective effect on society as a whole. While this is arguably true of mere bigotry, the definition of racism is crucially more complex. But it can, at least, be approached with a simple sentence:

Racism is not an attitude, it's a system.

This system, unfortunately, does not make itself blatantly apparent to the naked eye or the simple mind. The lack on our campus of cartoonish expressions of racial hostility, such as burning crosses and slurring Southern simpletons, should not be mistaken for a lack of systematic racial oppression. In fact, such oppression can be perpetuated not only by brazenly ignorant bigots, but often also by individuals who genuinely consider themselves opposed to racial discrimination, yet still fail to grasp its deep and complex roots.

To those who either naively misunderstand or flat out deny the fact of institutionalized racism in higher education, I suggest they make a greater effort to listen more deeply and attentively to the message of MTT and other UW community groups concerned with the current state of diversity at the UW. These groups seek ultimately not to accuse, attack or condemn, but rather to educate all concerned about the deep roots of racial oppression in our society, as well as to reach out and initiate a positive solution to this problem -- one that can be tangibly pursued on an institutional level by the UW. Here's hoping our administration is wise enough to follow their example.

--Jeff Stevens

Graduate student, linguistics

Racism not a rumor

I am concerned by much of what I am recently hearing and seeing on campus. If I did not know better, I would assume that "minority" students have been running the show lately and getting more than their fair share. From Jason Chambers' editorials to conversations on campus, it seems that there is a "brown peril."

To those who would ignore racism, it does exist on our campus. Racism can come in many forms and it alienates students. Jason Chambers, in his (May 26) editorial, claims that racism is "found in small pockets across the country -- not in major decision makers at our universities or in our government." I disagree with this statement.

Last year as a new student, I attended a UW College Republicans (CR) meeting. Later I went to a sub-committee meeting on fundraising. The chair started out the meeting with this: "does anyone one mind if I tell a racist joke?" I never went back. To this day I see UW CR members who were there and laughing, people who are now part of the leadership of that group.

As for faculty racism, I had a professor who repeatedly made claims that American Indians "paid for it in the end, when they came in contact with European civilization." This was in reference to the Pleistocene over-kill theory and American Indians not being able to "build up their cultures" and suffering from colonization. I started a complaint that died somewhere in the process.

I had excellent professors, [teaching assistant]s, and counselors who served as resources but the institution fell short. I do not hate this University but I feel we can be much stronger with a more diverse campus. We live in a global and diverse world; students who can relate to people of other cultures are going to be stronger competitors on leaving the University.

--Jim La Roche

Junior, anthropology, biology

Naivete of war

I don't know whether it was coincidence, irony or sarcasm that prompted the headline of your recent story on ROTC training (May 21), "Rules of engagement." As the paper was going to press, the commanding officer of the 1st Marines in Iraq was commenting on his unit having bombed and raided a wedding party, killing 40 innocent people (more than half women and young children), saying: "We operated within our rules of engagement."

The feature serves as an excellent example of the naivete of our youth's approach to the concepts of combat, war and death. The author writes of spending the weekend in one set of clothes and consuming notoriously distasteful "meals-ready-to-eat," and follows the troop-trainees through their exercises seemingly oblivious to the fact that these students are being trained to kill people. What should be a sobering observation of militarism among our youth is reported as blandly as the weather, which makes the unsaid all the more sobering.

A caption tells us that the would-be soldiers reviewed the Geneva Convention details on treatment of prisoners of war (more than actual U.S. soldiers get, as evidenced by the treatment of Iraqi prisoners) and specific instructions on how to deal with armed reporters. But, the following morning, when the unit encountered two such "reporters" we read: "In the heat of the moment, the squad neglected the guidelines and shot their rifles." The evaluation afterward chided the cadets on having lost control of the situation -- nothing specific was written about having killed two innocent people.

Elsewhere, a student studies biology between field exercises, kids' toys are used in a terrain model and the group couldn't find its backpacks when the day was done. We are left wondering to what extent these kids are merely playing soldier with no real understanding of what they are acting out.

While across the globe more images and details were being released of Iraqis abused at the hands of U.S. forces, the author briefly interviews a cadet looking forward to joining "military intelligence," but doesn't know enough to ask about any misgivings in joining the very branch of the military that ordered and orchestrated the torture, rape and murder of innocent detainees.

The cadets and the author are all of draft age, and yet none seem to genuinely grasp what they may be called upon to do as soldiers in the field. Whether through coincidence or irony, the article foremost exposes this naivete, and begs the question whether we are prepared at all to fight or prevent war.

--Christian Skoorsmith

Fiscal Technician 3, Applied Physics Laboratory -- Purchasing Dept

Learning from the past

I walked out of the new movie Troy last week with a pit in my stomach, not because of the violent content, but because it reminded me of the war going on in our own day and age. Men and women are dying every day, and for what? The love of a beautiful woman? The honor of a lost brother? Or the fear of cultures that we don't understand? The war in Iraq has been named as a part of the war on terrorism, but that title is misleading. Everyone in the Middle East is not a terrorist, and there are many other countries around the world that disagree with practices of the United States. Attacking them one by one is not the answer to our problems.

We've lost a basic respect for our fellow human being, which is glaringly exemplified by recent images of prisoner abuse. Our soldiers were put in grueling conditions unfit for a human being, and thus felt justified to treat those beneath them as less than human. Beyond that, how many times do we hear about the families of the deceased and many others affected by each life lost? War necessitates atrocities on both sides.

Not only do these injustices exist, but also I don't feel that I have much influence to stop them. What I would like to see from our leadership, but more importantly from my neighbor on the street, is action. It's easy for us to live our life each day, oblivious to the horrors being experienced across the world. There are no bombs falling tonight in our backyard. I would like to call out for the courage, not to fight for your country, but to stand up for humanity. Diplomacy toward other nations or the driver who cuts you off is often disregarded as weak and ineffective, when in fact patience and forgiveness are not only tools of success, but very rarely lead to casualties.

It may seem a little silly to equate our war in Iraq to a Hollywood movie based on a war of another era, but I see a very basic reason: We haven't learned from our mistakes. To quote Achilles when asked, after losing a soldier, and in return slaying another, when this would all end, his reply was simple: "It never ends." Until we as human beings can move beyond violence to solve the world's problems, mothers and fathers will continue to lose their sons and daughters, and I can't say that's a world I'm proud to live in.

--Auburn Scallon

Alumna, 2003

You can have cake too

On Thursday, The Daily ran as its leading article "Course fees under review." The article details the efforts of ASUW leaders to ensure the legal and fair implementation of course fees. What the article fails to mention is that the Student Senate has passed a resolution regarding these fees, and its follow through was an integral part in attaining a response from the University administration. Ironically, in the same issue, The Daily Editorial Board inaccurately claimed, "the Student Senate has succeeded in following through with only one 'practice resolution' this year." Obviously, this claim could not be further from the truth.

The course---fee article is not unique. In fact, The Daily has reported on many of the Student Senate's "movements toward helping the student body." When students were threatened with an extension of the conduct code, The Daily followed our efforts. They printed articles on our resolution in opposition to the code and reported on our "follow through" efforts in Olympia where the extension of the code was stopped. When students were threatened with parking-fee increases, The Daily followed our efforts once again. The headline, "Student Senate opposes parking-fee increase," graced the pages. The Daily also continued its coverage when the senate membership coordinator presented the resolution to the Board of Regents. And these are just a few examples.

We are in agreement with the sentiment that the senate has done a "poor job of letting students know" about its accomplishments. This is a persistent problem that comes up every year and we are working to solve it. With the passage of the "Next Step" proposal, senate leaders are drafting new bylaws and rules with the intention of officially creating an Outreach and Publicity Committee of senate.

However, we fully recognize the difficulty of this task and another committee, though helpful, may not suffice. "We have high hopes for the senate" too. After all, we would love to share our cake with you.

--Cammie L. Croft

Outgoing Senate Chair

--Zach Tobin

Incoming Senate Chair