I appreciated Chancellor Rebecca Blank’s message sent via various methods to members of the University of Wisconsin campus community on Jan. 26 concerning the UW student desiring to form an “alt-right” organization on campus. From what I understood, the main points of her message are the university does not tolerate discrimination, harassment, threats, hate crimes, etc. and the actions of this individual do not represent the university community as a whole. But I felt her letter could have been crafted differently to communicate those points without resorting to the belittling of that student’s viewpoint.
First of all, I felt the inclusion of the student’s 2005 arson convictions were irrelevant to the conversation. As stated in her message, some students may have made mistakes in the past, but having paid their debt to society, they should not be discriminated against. This information may have been appropriate to include if it was related to the organization the student is attempting to form. But the student’s desired organization claims to be affiliated with the American Freedom Party, which was not founded until 2010. As this student is not one of the founding members, the inclusion of this information only serves to unnecessarily vilify the student in question.
Secondly, the American Freedom Party, while holding relatively radical viewpoints, is an association of citizens of the United States of America, who have the right to express their viewpoints, no matter how unpopular they are. I do not necessarily agree with their viewpoints, and suspect most UW students don’t agree either, but they are still viewpoints.
As a member of a religious faith whose history is riddled with aggression and discrimination from the government because of viewpoints we hold, I feel the chancellor went too far in stating she was “heartened to see many students state their strong disagreement with the views of this group.” As the chancellor, she is a public figure and should attempt to keep the Office of the Chancellor in a viewpoint-neutral position whenever possible.
Third, the chancellor says, presumably in reference to the student expressing his opinion and disseminating literature supporting his opinion on campus, “the mere presence of this activity is concerning.” As she states in the following sentence, “handing out political information and expression [sic] objectionable, even hateful, viewpoints is not illegal nor a violation of campus policy.”
I would add the free expression of viewpoints, without fear of government reprisal, is protected under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and is the basis of a healthy democracy. I would conclude this activity should not be concerning, but encouraging. It is a sign our campus is a place that allows for the free exchange of ideas, even those that are unpopular.
Conservative, liberal student organizations denounce ‘alt-right’ movement
Let me be clear in stating I do not agree with the viewpoints expressed by this student on our campus. I do not agree with white supremacist groups, or with violent action against others, especially when motivated by racist, sexist, or otherwise inappropriate ideologies. But I believe, lacking any evidence of inciting people to violent action, this student has done nothing wrong.
And having done nothing wrong, it is unfair for him to be publicly disparaged in a message from the Office of the Chancellor. It would be appropriate to remind the student body that discrimination, hate crimes, threats, violence, etc. are unacceptable and illegal, and make it clear the actions of this student do not represent the viewpoints, policies and mission of the university.
I would hope in the future this information can be communicated to the student body without resorting to the denigration of a member of our campus community.
Glen Thurston ([email protected]) is a graduate student studying chemistry.
