I grew up as a political cynic. I distrusted political parties, pundits, and anyone else who thought their way was the only way. To me, such certainty was shortsighted, arrogant, and dull.
So at first, opposing multicultural, sexual, aggressive organizations seemed malicious; my political cynic took over. The argument, that an opt-out system would save students money, looked like a smokescreen — a guise for de-funding organizations for ideological reasons. Then some of my colleagues on SSFC and student council raised opposition to SAFEwalk, a program with a positive service premise so basic and universal that it was hard to determine exactly what possible ideology could ever oppose it.
I was left with the only possible reason to oppose Safe Walk: it’s expensive. Not expensive relative to the service it provides, of course, but expensive in a broader sense. Clearly, efficient government and limited taxation are cornerstones of traditional conservative ideals, but it took time to see how they applied to sensitive college politics.
Now I understand how our friends in the Badger Party have integrated the two rationalizations: the opt-out system will produce a marginal tuition savings for students, but conveniently no one argues that the organizations that will take the greatest hit are those with traditionally unpopular viewpoints. In fact, supporters of the opt-out system have voiced their hopes to me that the two organizations that will take the greatest hit will be the Multicultural Student Coalition and Diversity Education Specialists. Students, when given a list of organizations and their budgets, will choose to opt out of the two with the largest budgets, unaware of the depth of service these programs provide — efficiency and xenophobia, together again.
Sure, student choice will lead to increased efficiency, but an efficient education is a waste of time.
The underlying premise of education is inherently inefficient; the process of integrating knowledge can’t be understood by reading an instruction manual. Instead, the concept of how to hold two opposing thoughts at one time comes from insecure academic stumbling, uncomfortable discourse, and inherent uncertainties. Despite their (relative) inefficiency and high cost, student organizations provide the ideas and values that make us uncomfortable on campus.
Free speech doesn’t mean simply inviting speakers to campus; it means allowing students to build their own institutions around ideas, values, and traditions that others will hate, fear, and avoid — the more threatening, the better. The funding of Collegians For a Conservative Tomorrow, a “free-market” environmental group, may seem like a waste of money to some liberals, but it also might force them to question their own ideals.
Certainly, many will choose to shelter themselves, to continue along their unchallenged path through college, but these students are intellectually lazy. Universities aren’t designed to teach a trade; that’s what technical schools are for.
Why do I oppose an opt-out system of segregated fees? Because I am unwilling to give the academically apathetic the choice to limit the education of the dedicated. Universities represent one of the last great examples of how intellectual benefit can come from monetary inefficiency, and I want to keep it that way.
The opt-out referenda will never happen. Joe Laskowski and I have filed a case against the petition with the Student Judiciary because we believe that so little respect was paid to the privacy of students, the policies of the university and ASM that nonacademic misconduct hearings from the Dean of Students office are possible. At a minimum, the signatures collected have no mandate.
The misconduct of the petitioners spread far beyond library policies. Students in residence halls were harassed door-to-door (a strict violation of UW System policy), and many were mislead when the petition’s meaning was explained to them. In fact, once our evidence is presented, the whole two-month effort will appear bankrupt.
Long live inefficient, threatening education.
Josh Orton ([email protected]) is a senior majoring in political science.
