OPINION & EDITORIAL
Kaching! Cashing in on diversity
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Richard S.Girga:
Related Stories:
- Letters to the editor (November 1, 2001)
- The enlightened (October 31, 2001)
- Chancellor lies, betrays MCSC (October 30, 2001)
- Letters to the Editor, Nov. 6 (November 5, 2001)
- MCSC's budget (October 23, 2001)
by Richard S.Girga
Monday, November 5, 2001
Congratulations to Tshaka Barrows, the Multicultural Student Coalition and the Diversity Education Specialists. They successfully lobbied for, and received, the largest student organization budget ever passed. And yet, they still complain. Barrows was quoted Thursday in the Badger Herald as being satisfied overall, but “there were some areas where I was hoping to get a little more.”
A little more? For what? This “cross cultural education campaign,” which is supposed to increase diversity and cultural acceptance and understanding, sought funding for 19-inch computer monitors and laptops, on top of $120,000 for renovations for their office. Perhaps the MCSC and DES can explain to me why these luxuries are necessary in the fight for diversity. Last time I checked, diversity had more to do with culture than electronic accessories. A typical student organization is granted around $40,000 a year, and Barrows is upset that his cause received a mere million dollars. The shame.
Barrows backs his claim for more funding based on his assertion in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that “the ratios are extremely bad here” and that “other large or major universities are not really at the same crisis point of extreme levels of homogeneity as on this campus.”
A crisis? Based on what? The fact that the majority of students on the UW-Madison campus are white? This constitutes a crisis? I guess then, by being white, I and others like me are only contributing to the problem. My sincerest apology. It is ironic that this “oppressive” white majority, the same majority responsible for Madison?s liberal reputation, is the cause of the “crisis.”
If it is diversity that the MCSC and DES crave, then they are going about it in all the wrong ways. How does having more students of Western thought and culture, regardless of race, on campus increase diversity? If it is true diversity that is sought, perhaps we should use that generous $1 million endowment and send recruiters abroad to recruit students from Eastern Europe, the Middle East and Asia. Students from these cultures can truly add something to the overall learning environment here at UW — a different perspective. How does adding a few more students “of color” with similar backgrounds and upbringings really add to diversity? Answer: It does not. And, for this reason, the recent budget proposal and passage is nothing more than a sham.
The “diversity” budget attempts to increase diversity by establishing, among other things, a minority newspaper and minority housing. How does establishing minority housing increase diversity? By concentrating the minority students in one area of campus, does this not work against the entire principle of diversification? Diversification by concentration? Sounds very similar to self-imposed segregation if you ask me.
What is most disturbing about this notion of diversity is that it places undue importance on skin color. It is apparent from Barrows? remarks that the only established criteria for diversity is skin color. Just what exactly is the difference between minorities from Milwaukee and whites from the same area? The answer is simple: skin color. The stress placed on the importance of skin color makes this issue very sensitive. To say you object to this plan of “diversification” is to open yourself up to cries of racism and bigotry. However, it is those who believe that skin color is an accurate measure of diversity that are backwards and truly ignorant.
I do not disagree that diversity is a positive thing. However, I do disagree with the definition attributed to diversity. If it is minority enrollment that the university wishes to increase, then UW should come right out and say it. Do not hide behind vague program titles such as “Plan 2008” and contrived acronyms, which, unless you are directly involved with or are closely following, have no idea what they represent.
Giving a group an unprecedented amount of funding to combat a supposed lack of diversity is simply irresponsible and reckless. I urge the Board of Regents to reject this budget passed by the Student Services Finance Committee. Instead, allow for student input on the topic. When large amounts of student fees are allocated, students should have some say. Lost in all the rhetoric of “race relations” and “campus climate” is the voice of the student body. In order to properly gauge the “temperature” on campus, ASM owes it to the students of this campus to hold an open forum at which these issues of diversity can be more thoroughly examined. Then we can see just how homogenous this campus really is, and see what price the UW system is willing to pay so it can call itself “diverse.”
Richard S. Girga (rsgirga@hotmail.com) is a junior majoring in political science and economics.
