When Biddy Martin began her chancellorship at this
university, a group of legislators circulated a blog post accusing the
flagship’s new steward of being “an obscure, self-indulged, theory-laden,
post-modern scholar.”

Noting that Martin’s seminal book included such chapters
as “sexualities without gender and other queer utopias,” the conservative Republicans
seemed almost delighted by the prospect of one of the world’s largest research
universities going down in flames with a feminist at the helm.

Fast forward two years. A very similar picture of good
intentions marred by bizarre propaganda emerges. This time, however, you’re
much more likely to hear Martin called a corporate tool than a Marxist.

Her current woes can be traced to the revelation of a
message she sent to Department of Administration Secretary Mike Huebsch which indicates she knew Gov. Scott Walker was planning to classify this
university as a Public Authority in January.

In the message, Martin laid out a series of criteria Walker
would need to meet in order to make UW-Madison’s transfer to a Public Authority
possible.

Among her requests was the provision of a block grant from the state
the university could then spend at its discretion, a clause that protected any
operating surpluses from being reclaimed by the state and a firm commitment to
shared governance.

The reaction was as abrupt as it was dumb. Former Herald
columnist Steve Horn railed against the impending “corporatization” of
research. Student activist Max Love has called for Martin’s resignation. The
Teaching Assistants’ Association sent out an e-mail expressing opposition to a
Public Authority model for, among other things, its supposed ability to remove
a state cap on tuition increases. The e-mail also decried the fact that, if a
Board of Trustees were to run UW-Madison, the body could be “entirely appointed
by Gov. Walker.” 

But intellectual bankruptcy deserves no place at such a serious moment: there
is no state limit on tuition. And under the board proposed by Martin, 11 of the
21 Trustees would be appointed by Walker – not all of them. While Walker
appointees would hold a simple majority, as Erik Paulson so ably pointed out,
Walker will appoint a similar majority to the current Board of Regents by the
end of his four-year term. 

The TAA released a follow-up email on Friday, in which the senders urged a more
deliberative approach. Yet no clarification was offered to the thousands of
recipients about the fact that the original email made up a state law and then lied about
the composition of the proposed board.

The effort necessary to understand Martin’s balancing act is
not a trivial one.
The greatest possible disfavor this campus could do itself is to allow a
sincere discussion about this university’s future to be dominated by those
whose broader vision quite literally amounts to an excess of snide Twitter
messages.

There are very reasonable concerns about Martin’s political efforts – even if she was pitted against a governor whose imperviousness to discussion
borders on deafness. Walking a tight rope is difficult when there are propagandists
clamoring for your head on either side. If Martin has done something worth
noting in the past month, it is her refusal to sit and wait for outside forces
to provide the type of utopian relief the demagogues so falsely insist is on
its way.

So let’s have the inevitable discussion about what it means
for this university to redefine its relationship with the rest of the
University of Wisconsin System, and the state in general. Educate yourself.
Argue. Get angry. Above all else, read.

After weighing the facts, you may even end up believing that
Biddy Martin really is the corporate tool she’s been painted as in the past
week. Just remember that as things stand, the state government is able to
confiscate surpluses in this university’s budget. It is able to deny our
employees domestic partner benefits. It decides who we buy our resources from,
who constructs our buildings and how we buy property insurance. Martin’s
proposal may not alleviate every problem associated with the manifold growing
pains of a research university. It is, however, a step in the direction of
something tangible.

As for me, I’ll admit to some confusion. There are moments
where I wonder if we will all be substantially worse off 10 years from now
because an obscure radical from Milwaukee County became too infatuated with
power to resist his base’s populism. But as ugly as the future looks, I’ve
never been prouder of the obscure, self-indulged, theory-laden, post-modern
corporatist who is fighting so magnificently to get us there in one piece.

Sam Clegg ([email protected]) is a senior majoring in economics.