Share with friendsIt’s been a long time… and the wait ain’t over. I have been under piles of work and I won’t be able to really re-emerge until around Valentine’s Day. So here is my compromise, you won’t get any of my dazzling commentary, but beginning tomorrow, I will post links to stories of interest? Sound good? Thanks for your patience. It’s difficult being Black at Michigan ;)
Now you can affectionately call me Mr. MPD (multiple personality disorder). Because I go to sleep defending BAMN, and wake up asking why is CUM (Citizens for a United Michigan) advocating BAMN’s don’t sign campaign? Now fundamentally, I do not take issue with a don’t sign campaign, the issue I take is a strategic one. The opposition will be garnering signatures in the whitest of White locations, places like Livonia, etc. Which means they are gonna stay out more racially-diverse areas if they want to get the most bang for their buck. For the sake of argument, let’s suggest BAMN is effective at organizing …. Detroit, I said for the sake of argument- follow me, the MCRI would just side-step Detroit completely and hit the suburbs for their signatures. I cannot foresee middle aged White women meeting up with BAMN foot soldiers and saying, “Why wait a minute, this initiative is bad. I’m not gonna sign.” Having gone door to door in Metro Detroit (city and surrounding areas) I can tell you that its amazingly hard to get in the door, literally, and people will likely not be open to hearing you suggest an initiative against Affirmative Action is racist. Feel me?
“Thus the highest realization of warfare is to attack the enemy’s plans; next is to attack their alliances; next to attack their army; and the lowest is to attack their fortified cities.” -Sun Tzu Art of War. Does anyone else feel like we missed the first three levels? Ugh!
And as you can see from the article, people are now beginning to attack CUM’s alliances … Come on General Rice!
And on another sad note, Carol Mosley Braun has decided to drop her campaign for president. She’ll be backing Dean too.
Okay, okay, I have no idea why I am still await, and even less idea why I am reading Jason Pesick’s editorial entitled, “Please give liberals back liberalism.” The piece starts with some valid points about the roots of BAMN and immediately problematizes some of their tactics, but soon there after Pesick loses me. First, may I suggest that Pesick, nor anyone at the Daily invoke the Black Student Union’s name, in defense of your issues with a group. I doubt that you are fully aware of the history, and including the BSU name will not offer you a cloak of amnesty from being a racist. Actions define racism, not affiliations. But then again … The first thing Jason has to realize is that “liberalism” is not a static ideology. I’m sorry, but liberalism can not be quaintly defined as, “A political theory founded on the natural goodness of humans and the autonomy of the individual and favoring civil and political liberties, government by law with the consent of the governed, and protection from arbitrary authority.” Being liberal is a relative ideological positioning, if the center shifts, so does liberalism. With that said, at some point, the terms Marxist and Communist will cease to scare people. Wow, attempting to enact a code that limits the proliferation of symbols of hate in times of heated racial tension, boy of boy, you might as well be a conservative … oh wait, don’t they want less government intervention? I’m so confused, was that liberal or conservative? It’s a game of semantics. If you don’t like Bamn’s tactics, then suggest alternatives. Last year, SSAA was really successful at doing this. Oh wait, maybe liberalism comes from sitting behind a desk at the Daily writing editorials.
Wednesday’s Daily features an article on David Boyle, U of M Law School Alum’s, petition to end alumni preferences (and yes this is a real preference*) in the state of Michigan. Boyle faces the same hoops that Connerly and croons have jumped if he wants it on the November ballot. The acronym is darn hilarious, MERIT, but I am a little worried that too many people will take it the wrong way and endorse this initiative as part and parcel with Ward’s initiative. I can see people in Midland, Michigan saying, “Why yes I do believe in merit and I do not like discrimination.” Then we end up in a sick-sad world where the meagerly informed vote yes on both. Boyle is pretty outspoken and usually stands in favor of Affirmative Action.
*I say this is real preference, note the difference in wording and tone on the U of M page on factors considered in admission:
“Will alumni ties still be considered?
The University values the relationship it has with current and former students. These students are part of the Michigan community. Alumni serve as a vital part of that community both as lifelong ambassadors for the University, and as lifelong learners who are encouraged to continue to be involved in the life and programs of the institution after they graduate. Accordingly, we will continue to consider-as one of many factors, but not as a determinative factor- a direct relationship, or stepfamily relationship, with someone who has attended the University of Michigan- Ann Arbor as a degree-seeking student.”
“How will race factor into the new process?
Academic factors are the first and overriding criteria. Other factors will be considered, but the applicant must, under all circumstances, demonstrate the ability to succeed at and contribute to the University. Race will be only one of many additional factors taken into consideration during the review process, as will socioeconomic factors, geography, and special or unique experiences, skills and talents. All the factors we will use in the review process will be in the overall context of individualized consideration of each application. Furthermore, every student will have the opportunity to highlight his or her own special and unique qualities that will contribute to the overall diversity of the class. Multiple reviews by different staff members and validation by management staff will ensure that no single, nonacademic factor has a disproportionate impact on the overall admissions decision.”
And the statement of the obvious award goes to the Michigan Daily for echoing Monique Perry’s, VP of MSA, statement that the Trotter House is in need of renovation. Apparently the Daily missed that the facilities have been inadequete for the past …. 20 years. Good job Daily, it’s only news if someone says it at an MSA meeting. By the way this in no way a diss to Monique, she is right-on for bringing it up again in public forum!
The transformation of the Trotter House from a Black cultural center to a multicultural center reminds me of the demands of BAM I (1970), BAM II (1975), and BAM III (1987):
BAM I -Demand # 7 “The establishment of a community-located Black Student Center.”
BAM II- Demand- “The establishment of a Chicano Cultural Center;”
BAM III- Demand #2- The University of Michigan must grant the immediate endowment of $150,000 dollars for the William Monroe Trotter-House to insure that the integrity of African-Apreservedulture will be perserved in spite of the vile climate of racism that persists in the University.”
Seems like the U has historically had trouble handling biz around Trotter and neglected other communities despite demands for address!!!
And on a much lighter and two completely unrelated notes:
1) I finally joined Blackblogz, you’ll see it in the bottom left hand corner. Okay, I admit that I don’t fully understand it, but it seems like a good thing.
2) I am really wondering is it possible to really dislike people, but really love friendster? I am now obsessed with friendster.
So apparently the editorial by Steve Cotner in Monday’s Daily prompted quite a response. The editorial does really give BAMN a lot of credit, but the responses to the editorial are the most interesting. Penned by 2 sophomores- Jeremy Curtis and Kylie Burleson … yeah wise fools… I’m looking for the wisdom still. Cutis suggests that Affirmative Action has, “I am not one for affirmative action. I think it worked back when it was first started, but as times change, so do policies.” Kyle Burleson’s editorial states “The University is funded by taxpayers, why shouldn?t those taxpayers be given a choice in whether their money is used to enact an inherently racist policy?”
Okay, maybe I missed the boat but here is why these two propositions are too commonly uttered and make no sense! On the Aff Axn was good once but it’s out lived its utility.
1) We are at a time when more students of color are enrolled in higher education than ever before, but we are far below representative for most of these ethnic minorities.
2) What was the initial utility that has died? Increased opportunity- looks like it’s still working to me.
On the idea that Aff Axn is an inherently racist policy. 1) Have these people even read the new system of admission? Is the consideration of race a preference? If that’s the case, if so, everything on the application is a preference!!! 2) Do these people know what racism is? Do they know what discrimination is? Do they really care?
Okay, enough babbling, I’m just confused how people still utter these things but have backing!!! Can people at least argue with information and ideas that are relevant?
Lastly, the Ballot initiative from the MCRI has been launched. By the way, I will openly say, this is Ward Connerly initiative. If you notice the MCRI is trying to push that it is Gratz’s. If that is the case, then why the hell does it look eerily like the initiatives that Connerly has pushed before? Okay, maybe Connerly is a consultant …. yeah, just like a puppeteer with a puppet, just giving the lifeless characters voice.
PS. Special thanks to Rob Goodspeed for providing me with the new MCRI page, I was wondering why the old one was dead!
