Opt out of vicious rhetoric

By A.J. Hughes, Staff columnist

“Campus politics are so vicious precisely because the stakes are so small.” These words from former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger are familiar to nearly anyone in this country with direct experience with collegiate student governments.

Since ASM’s inception in 1994, the stakes have been steadily rising. It didn’t take long for student activists and their organizations to realize how much funding was available if they only applied for it. Existing budgets skyrocketed, and a slew of new organizations signed up for exorbitant amounts of cash.

While the stakes may still be small in comparison to national, state or even local politics, the stakes are no longer small in the absolute sense. The millions in these budgets employ hundreds of students as interns and dozens of adults as full-time staff. Their livelihood depends on the passage of these budgets without hesitation.

The expectation implied in Kissinger’s words is that these rising stakes will lead to an increased civility in campus politics. To the contrary, campus politics are as vicious as ever.

Take this campus’ obsession with its “climate.” “Climate” is rarely defined, but our goal is to make it “better.” “Better” is rarely defined, but is sometimes equated to some arbitrary measurement of how comfortable we all feel.

Many student organizations claim they are improving the campus climate. They claim their work will be devastated if students are allowed to opt out of funding them. They claim it would be unfair for a student who opts out to benefit from the better climate these groups create without paying their share. Above all, they claim that an opt-out system unfairly targets people of color, so the mere consideration of a system hurts our campus climate.

These assertions are wrong on all counts. The students I know who passionately push the opt-out referendum are not racist. Since 1999, the largest seg-fee increases have gone to multicultural organizations; the controversy surrounding their budgets arises from their size and their growth, not because their leaders are people of color.

The people these groups employ disagree with my analysis. They see it as nothing but coded language to hide the truly racist intentions of the straight white males on this campus.

In a sign of how vicious things have gotten, a group called the International Terrorists’ Design Collective has created posters depicting opt-out supporters as a group of Aryan white supremacists.

Other students, wishing to preserve the status quo, stereotype opt-out supporters as “too male, too pale and too stale,” despite active support over the years from people of color, females and queers. Some supporters of the status quo have characterized these leaders as “Uncle Toms” for daring to believe in a student’s right to choose. Is this the sifting and winnowing we can continue to expect from the seg-fee industrial complex?

I refuse to accept the racist label. Opting out of fees is about freedom above all else. It is about forcing this university to create a marketplace of ideas, not ideologues. It is about altruistic activism instead of state sponsored speech.

I shouldn’t care about whether students have to pay for organizations they don’t use, but I do. I would be better if I could move on, but I truly believe this campus I love so dearly will be a better place without coercion. Perhaps, if my children one day attend UW-Madison, I won’t cringe thinking the tuition check I write for them is paying for $100 SAFEwalks or Greens Infoshop propaganda.

It is only possible if students who vote in this truly historic ASM election keep the big picture in their sights, refusing to get caught up with vicious distractions. The opt-out referendum is not an attempt to scare people of color from this campus. It is not an attempt for some cheap skates to get a free ride. It is not about silencing the campus left or the usual suspects.

A campus with an opt-out system will still have hippies, and there will still be daily demonstrations. There will still be resources for the underrepresented, and Plan 2008 will still work towards the goal of increased diversity.

A campus with an opt-out system may have less newspaper ink devoted to the vicious games of ASM, leaving more space for comics and crossword puzzles. This fact alone should motivate you to vote in favor of the opt-out referendum.

A.J. Hughes (ahughes@badgerherald.com) is a software developer and UW graduate.