Alec Weisman, Editor-in-Chief
Contributions by California Review Editorial Board
Last weekend, individuals from several fraternities decided to throw a racially-themed party mocking Black History Month, called the “Compton Cookout.” This ghetto-themed party was definitely offensive, as it urged people to wear specific outfits and fulfill various stereotyped behaviors. The party was obviously meant to be funny although the theme was definitely in poor taste.
In response, the administration of UCSD sent out not one, not two, but three emails within a week condemning the party. The email urged that respect for the UCSD Principles of Community be observed by rejecting acts of discrimination based on race, ethnicity, gender, age, disability, sexual orientation, religion, and political beliefs and asked that students come together to show support for the black community at UCSD. Although the initial letter from Penny Rue, Vice Chancellor of Student Affairs, urged that the “The remedy for dangerous, offensive or extreme speech is more speech, not less,” this attitude was not to last.
On Thursday, Koala TV decided to capitalize on the excessive reaction of the administration by ridiculing the school and critics of the party. It is claimed that the Koala used certain derogatory words to describe black individuals, and commented that the critics of the party were ungrateful for a party thrown in their honor. However, this is in the nature of the Koala, which is written to deliberately offend every race, religion, and belief system. In fact, the leadership organization of the Koala is made up of exclusively minority students this year.
Following this, the Black Student Union held a rally on Friday, which nearly 200 students attended. Holding signs reading “Racism= individual, institutional, systemic, structural” and “Stop Racism” the Black Student Union was furious about insensitivity at UCSD. After screaming at the Chancellor “Real Action! Real Pain!” dialogue began between students in the Black Student Union and Chancellor Fox. Allegations were made by several students that “we are in danger! It’s that serious” along with claiming that they feel “isolated every day on this campus.”
Both Chancellor Fox and Vice Chancellor of Student Affairs Rue expressed their strong dislike for the Koala and their free speech. The students at the rally showed themselves to be extremely self-centered, believing themselves to be entitled to all their demands; one of them screamed “I’m expecting all kinds of action from you, and all of these demands to be met, as soon as possible. Meaning Now!”
It was particularly depressing to watch some of the legitimate concerns of the BSU become sidelined as the crowd adopted a mob mentality. The rally became a joke, as half of the rally concerned students ranting about justice and the other half consisted of demands and threats made to the administration. During the Chancellor forum, one student stood up and said “The facts are people are hurting right now. The facts are that people are threatened right now. The facts are is that we need change right now. Those are the facts that you need to take into account. Those are the facts that are all you need.” This is extremely troublesome, as the entitlement of these angry students displays their lack of concern for legal procedure and the Constitution.
UPDATE (8:00 pm, 2/21/10) The real list of demands is far more shocking than those four presented in the Do UC us Report. To view the 32 Demands made by the BSU during their rally click here or scroll to the bottom of the article
The disconcerting fact is, although the BSU is rational, many of those people participating in the rally and forum were not. Many of the students’ arguments amounted to promoting equality of result rather than equality of opportunity. This flies in the face of American notions of freedom and equality. In 1996, California voters passed Proposition 209, which eliminated the consideration of race for admission to college campuses and government hiring. This ended the quota system previously in existence whereby a student of a minority background could be accepted with lower grades to a university over a much more qualified student of a different ethnic group in order to fill a specific quota required by law.
Although UCSD has the lowest proportion of black students at a UC campus, as blacks represent 1.5 percent of students at UCSD, this statistic is misleading without reference to both the overall racial distribution of UCSD students and that of the state population as a whole. According to census estimates, in 2008 California consisted of 42.3% white individuals, 6.7% black individuals, 12.5% Asian individuals, 36.6% Hispanic individuals, and 1.9% being either American Indian, Pacific Islander, or mixed race. If we look at this in comparison to UCSD admissions, we get a stark contrast. Although black underrepresentation (7% of state population, 2% of UCSD students) relative to their fraction of state population is nothing to scoff at, whites (42.3% of state population, 26% of UCSD students) and Hispanics (36.6% of state population, 13% of UCSD students) are also seriously underrepresented under that metric. Who takes up the largest proportional increase then? Asians, who comprise a 49% plurality of UCSD undergraduate admits despite being only 12.5% of the state’s population. So before the irrational and emotional students freak out about the underrepresented black population, they should look at their own over or underrepresented population at UCSD and decide how they feel about their poorly thought out quota idea. However, the poor choices of the school administration continued.
As the forum progressed, Vice Chancellor Rue added to the irresponsible remarks, stating that there will be no “Racism, not in our community! That’s what we can say! We need more speech. We might not be able to shut them up, but our voices can be so loud that they cannot be heard!” What part of this behavior that Chancellor Rue advocates is any different from the behavior of those students during Michael Oren’s speech at UC Irvine? Shouting down people who you disagree with only serves to limit free speech. Now as stated before, any comments made by the Koala that were intended to provoke and insult the black community were made for that purpose, NOT to generate hate or crimes against black students.
As the forum began to conclude, AS president Utsav Gupta stated that “I’ve frozen all media organization funding until we rework these rules … It is still unacceptable that we still have the Koala. We’ve tried throughout this year to redo those rules and essentially not fund them. I don’t know if we’ll get rid of them, but on the part of the AS, we can defund them. We absolutely can defund them, and I believe we must defund them.” On this point, I must add (although I consider Utsav to be a good AS president and know him personally) that by admitting this fact on camera, he outed the Associated Students as being full of liars, as they swore during a media forum that their legislative attempt to form a media oversight board was not explicitly targeted toward the Koala. Utsav concluded by stating that “from this point forth no media organizations will get funding” until new media guidelines have been written.
Now why is the California Review weighing in on this story? First, we feel that the reaction of the school is excessive. Next, although we feel that the comments made by the Koala and the party organizers were inappropriate, THEY ARE NONETHELESS permitted by their freedom of speech. Third, we are directly affected by this media freeze, as up to this point we have been totally funded by the AS UCSD. Finally, it was brought to my attention that the California Review has been brought into the controversy by a staff writer of the Union Tribune due to our “Underwear Bomber” cartoon during the January issue of the paper.
In fact, we had to do a reprint of the issue because certain staff refused to allow it to be distributed until their names were removed from the issue and they were allowed to resign. As editor, I would like to state that although the cartoon was an anonymous contribution to the California Review, it was intended to be a satirical representation of the Underwear Bomber and RADICAL ISLAM, in a similar vein to the Danish Cartoons that were published in 2005. The cartoon was thus drawn to prove free speech existed on campus, and this was believed to be the case UNTIL this controversy over the party and the Koala arose.
The best part of the drama has got to be the latest few updates in this twisted story.
First, apparently the party was the brainchild, not of the frat boys, but rather the DJ for the event, who just so happens to call himself Jiggaboo Jones. He recently posted a youtube video explaining the real nature of the “Compton Cookout.” In it he called out the Black Student Union, the UCSD administration, and the Associated Students for blowing the event out of proportion.
Also, on Saturday February 20th, a facebook event was created by a UCSD student planning a Cultural Stereotypes Party, designed to allow people to pick a culture and harmlessly make fun of its stereotypes. The event is scheduled for March 4 at 8pm. And parties with offensive racial themes continue to draw students who want a good laugh and a stereotypical theme. To attend the “Compton Cookout Part Deux” click this link. Also, a facebook group has been established for everyone who is angry with the reaction that the school and media have had toward the “Compton Cookout,” click this link. Finally, another group was established for those angry with the Associated Students for shutting down free speech at UCSD, click this link.
Finally, state lawmakers (outgoing state Assembly Speaker Karen Bass (D) and incoming speaker John Perez (D) in particular) are showing their desire to play race politics by jumping on this issue and urging for sanctions and suspensions against the students who were involved in the “Compton Cookout” party. Also the NAACP got involved and urged similar punishments. Compton Assemblymember Isiadore Hall III also got involved in condemning the Compton Cookout.
Is this Political Correctness gone crazy? You be the judge.
In the meantime, please stand with us to oppose the UCSD AS’s attempt to destroy free speech.
More articles on this to come. In the meantime, please weigh in and comment.
***
UPDATE (8:00 pm, 2/21/10): The 32 Demands:
• We demand a Permanent Task Force to fund more outreach efforts and create more opportunities for hiring African-American Faculty.
• We demand the University fully fund the traditional and non-traditional events of the Black Student Union in our efforts to create a better climate for ourselves.
• Match Funds with Student Promoted Access Center for Education and Service (SPACES) budget including the Student Initiated Access Program and Services (SIAPS) and Academic Success Program (ASP) budgets.
Black Student Union Statement February 2010
• We demand that every time the freshmen class enrollment is cut the University matches the student fees that they would have been paying to SPACES permanently to SPACES.
• We demand that Chancellor Fox uses more energy and resources to providing research based scholarships for African-American students as apart of a retention component from the Chancellor’s Diversity Office.
• Demand the University to increase the African-American populations in all areas of the campus including, Students (undergraduates and graduates), PhD Candidates, Faculty, Staff and Administration.
• We demand the University directly fully fund Faculty-Student Mentor Programs.
• We demand the University staff the vacant Program Coordinator position of the African-American Studies Minor
• We demand the Chancellor’s office make the African-American Studies Minor and the Chicano Latina/o Arts and Humanities Minor a priority for the University.
• We demand the University to charge a Task Force to create the plan for an African-American Resource Center on Campus in two years to provide a safe space for the African-American community.
• We demand that Chancellor Fox create an Office for Diversity Affairs from her administration instead of a part-time position with a title.
• We demand the Chancellor fully funds the Chief Diversity Office.
• We demand a change of Admissions Policy from a Comprehensive to a Holistic Review beginning for the Fall 2011 applicant pool.
• We demand campus climate becomes the Chancellor’s number one priority, especially in this time of crisis.
• We demand Chancellor Fox and the University have mutual respect of the “Principles of Community” and create a precedent of prioritizing students of color and leading by example. When demand that there be repercussions when the “Principles of Community” are blatantly being violated.
• We demand the Chancellor’s Office charges the Campus Climate Commission that will work primarily on improving the campus climate and providing a safer and more welcoming space and experience for the students of underrepresented communities and the entire student body.
• We demand a permanent quarterly and annual campus climate report from this Campus Climate Commission. This Campus Climate Commission must report directly to SAAC.
Black Student Union Statement February 2010
• We demand the University create a space in the central part of campus safe for African-American students on campus.
• We demand the Chancellor, Vice Chancellor of Student Affairs, and Vice Chancellor of Academic Affairs, Chief Diversity Office meet with the chair and vice chair of the Black Student Union at least once every academic quarter.
• We demand the University provide financial education and counseling, teaching students from low-income, underprivileged communities how to manage their money being independent college students.
• We demand that the University sends out a campus-wide email presenting the Black Student Union’s Do UC us? Campaign Report on Yield of African-American students immediately.
• We demand the University live up to it’s “Principles of Community” and show leadership and integrity by giving up the remains of the Kumeeay tribe and respect the native land on which we are housed.
• We demand three permanent designated spaces for African-American inspired art to reflect the struggle and progress for students of color on this campus.
• We demand that Chancellor Fox fully funds this Art space. We demand that the moral “Chicano Legacy” become a permanent art piece on this campus. We demand that Native American, Latino and Asian-Pacific Islander cultural art is reflected publicly on this campus.
• We demand Chancellor Fox and the Vice Chancellor of Academic Affairs, and the Academic Senate mandate a diversity sensitivity requirement for every undergraduate student to take an African-American studies, Ethnic Studies, and Gender Studies before they graduate from UC San Diego.
• We demand the programs and departments such as OASIS, Campus Community Centers, Ethnic Studies, Critical Gender Studies, CLAH, and African American Studies Minor amongst others continue to have solid funding for the work they do in retaining African American students and educating the campus as a whole.
• We demand the University implements, maintains and fully funds BSU’s Student Initiated Yield Programs.
• Stipend for Student Volunteers- students deserves compensation for the hard work they do that the University should be doing.
• We demand that the Chancellor’s Office offers more campus-wide support for the African-American students on this campus, as well as the other historically underrepresented and under-served communities on this campus.
Black Student Union Statement February 2010
• We demand the University provide the African-American community with a temporary location for a safe space on campus while the African-American Resource Center is being planned and constructed.
• We demand the University provide free tutors for the African-American students who seek academic support. This can be structured similar to that of the Athletic Department’s services to Athletes.
• We demand a response!
UPDATE 10:45 PM 2/21/10: The Koala is outraged about the cookout:
February 20th, 2010: Compton Cookout. The Koala would like to condemn the organizers of the Compton Cookout. If history has shown us anything, you need more black people at your party to have enough black-on-black violence to actually justify the name “Compton.” Shame on you. SHAME.
The California Review 
Great Article Alec.
Nice analysis, i know more about this than I ever cared to know, but the fact that your funding’s in jeopardy, well that just sucks. This certainly would not be the first time a group of non-minorities were roasted on the spic for making racially insensitive comments and being loudly and repeatedly denounced as a racist by the self-appointed black leadership. The demand list is a joke though, it seems like it was written up by someone under the influence of some strong herb or perhaps the air is just very thin up their on those high pedestals the ‘leadership’ fancies themselves on.
Although the demand for tutors does seem necessary, just from reading the list of demands, one clearly sees grammar is not a strong suit.
This is a very well-written, persuasive argument. For the past week I have been too concerned about my own well-being and that of my Greek organization to voice my opinions on the matter. Is that right? To bully people into silence? All three of the administration’s emails pointed the finger at “Greek-letter organizations” so now we are getting harassed on campus. People come up to my chapter members and scream at them for being racist simply because we are wearing our letters.
The news coverage of this event has been appalling – every reporter claims it as a travesty to civil rights and that we should all be appalled. Why has it been ok for years, on every campus, to objectify women? Why is the annual white trash party acceptable? Or the annual Euro trash party?
February is Black History Month – a time to celebrate the black culture. It’s not “Racial Sensitivity Month.” It’s not “Walk on Eggshells to not offend anyone” Month.
It seems as though the parties that oppose the event simply rely on their emotions for argument. So far I have not seen one sound argument for the punishment of these students. “It’s racist,” “it’s hurtful-” that’s a part of everyday life. “I feel threatened” – by what? There were no death threats, no call for violence. One girl who was interviewed by the guardian claimed that she would go to classes “even if [she] had to be escorted by the National Guard.” This is not 1950’s Arkansas. There are no threats, there is no violence, and there was no threats to civil rights until AS got involved.
I do understand your argument of free speech but what if you were a black student at UCSD from Compton wouldn’t you be upset. You’re an underrepresented minority at a UC school who is stereotyped by whomever then insulted by Koala TV and their racist comments. Those students weren’t rational as you put it because they were angry at a society that purports equal opportunity for all when they no it is not. How can you feel welcomed and accepted by the school when everything tells you that’s how other students that don’t look like you view you and others like you.
Did any of you ever stop to consider that pulling the Koala’s funding does not in any way inhibit free speech? If they want to spout racist garbage they can do it on their own dime.
@UCSDalumna:
Yes it does.
By denying funding to organizations whose viewpoints are controversial or out of current fashion, administrators have a campus that lacks meaningful, substantive debate and that unfairly restricts speech. A 9–0 Supreme Court decision in Wisconsin v. Southworth (1999), in conjunction with the decision in Rosenberger v. University of Virginia (1996), ensures that student organizations must be funded without regard to the message they propound (in other words, that funding decisions should adhere to the principle of content neutrality).
I quote here one Leonard Alfred Schneider (better known as the late great Lenny Bruce)
* Are there any niggers here tonight? Could you turn on the house lights, please, and could the waiters and waitresses just stop serving, just for a second? And turn off this spot. Now what did he say? “Are there any niggers here tonight?” I know there’s one nigger, because I see him back there working. Let’s see, there’s two niggers. And between those two niggers sits a kike. And there’s another kike— that’s two kikes and three niggers. And there’s a spic. Right? Hmm? There’s another spic. Ooh, there’s a wop; there’s a polack; and, oh, a couple of greaseballs. And there’s three lace-curtain Irish micks. And there’s one, hip, thick, hunky, funky, boogie. Boogie boogie. Mm-hmm. I got three kikes here, do I hear five kikes? I got five kikes, do I hear six spics, I got six spics, do I hear seven niggers? I got seven niggers. Sold American. I pass with seven niggers, six spics, five micks, four kikes, three guineas, and one wop. Well, I was just trying to make a point, and that is that it’s the suppression of the word that gives it the power, the violence, the viciousness. Dig: if President Kennedy would just go on television, and say, “I would like to introduce you to all the niggers in my cabinet,” and if he’d just say “nigger nigger nigger nigger nigger” to every nigger he saw, “boogie boogie boogie boogie boogie,” “nigger nigger nigger nigger nigger” ’til nigger didn’t mean anything anymore, then you could never make some six-year-old black kid cry because somebody called him a nigger at school.
Excellent summary. Does anyone have a recording of Gupta’s remarks? If you have one, do not delete it, as it may become evidence in a First Amendment lawsuit.
No it doesn’t.
Rosenberger also states that when a university is providing funds for extracurricular publications, it establishes a limited forum in which it may discriminate against speech based on its content, but not based on its viewpoint. Rosenberger, 515 U.S. 829-30. If, for example, a publication expresses its disagreement with students who are outraged by an overt example of the negative effects of their underrepresentation, this speech is protected because it is a viewpoint (however misguided that viewpoint may be). However, if a publication uses racial epithets while expressing its viewpoints, and the use of racially offensive language is prohibited regardless of viewpoint, this speech is unprotected in a limited forum.
Put plainly, if the Koala wants to use the n-word, they’ll have to do it using their own money, not UCSD’s.
@UCSDalumna
Board of Regents Univ. Wisc. v. Southworth
“In a unanimous opinion delivered by Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, the Court held that the “First Amendment permits a public university to charge its students an activity fee used to fund a program to facilitate extracurricular student speech if the program is viewpoint neutral.” Justice Kennedy wrote for the Court that, “[w]hen a university requires its students to pay fees to support the extracurricular speech of other students, all in the interest of open discussion, it may not prefer some viewpoints to others.” Justice David H. Souter, in an opinion joined by Justices John Paul Stevens and Stephen G. Breyer, concurred in the judgment only.”
Alec,
While you and I rarely see eye to eye on political beliefs (just with this and the Michael Oren stuff thus far), I must say that this is a great service you are doing. AS should not be censoring student media. Yes the Koala is an issue, but unless they do something deemed truly illegal to go after the Koala is to go after everyone. Obviously AS has been more blunt than I would have actually imagined and went after everyone!
It is silly that things like the Saltman Quarterly (an undergrad bio research journal) or ISA Magazine, Voz Frontera, and Gach Noi Magazine (all of the three representing different aspects of this campus’ diversity) have been banned by this “moratorium.”
This is truly an issue where left and right should unite. Censorship this blatant has no place in American society. It also shows how out of touch with reality AS really is. A week ago I emailed AS and Gupta on an unrelated issue as a constituent. I received no reply. It is already clear he is out of touch with people who have the same opinions as myself and also as of now the media constituency.
Gupta is probably thinking of Division I football as we speak.
@ Peter
Rosenburger v. University of Virginia
“In determining whether state is acting to preserve limits of forum it has created so that exclusion of class of speech is legitimate, there is a distinction between content discrimination, which may be permissible if it preserves the purpose of the limited forum, and viewpoint discrimination, which is presumed impermissible when directed against speech otherwise within the forum’s limitations.”
Is the use of the n-word a viewpoint or opinion? (Just in case there is any confusion, this is a rhetorical question.) It is a racially degrading and offensive word. If the Koala wants to express its views without using racial epithets, it is free to do so. However, no university-funded publication can use racially offensive language, regardless of its viewpoint. UCSD has the right to restrict content, treating all viewpoints in the same manner, if the content runs afoul of the purpose of the forum, which is to encourage open discussion. The use of racial epithets for the sole purpose of being offensive does not fit within the confines of this limited forum. This is not viewpoint specific; this applies to all extracurricular groups, regardless of viewpoint.
@UCSDalumna
Please cite “However, no university-funded publication can use racially offensive language.”
I would beg the differ previous attempts to regulate the freedom of speech , including hate speech, have all been ruled unconstitutional.
Alec,
Thank you for posting the list of Demands. It is important for people who feel passionately about this matter, either way, to read the print behind the protest.
As UCSD cuts its budget and lays off faculty, where will the money for these demands come from?
@UCSDalumna
http://thefire.org/article/5383.html
@UCSDAlumna
http://www.thefire.org/index.php/article/5382.html
“It is essential that the ASUO understand that the principle underlying the Southworth decision is not some bureaucratic rationale devoid of moral reasoning. The Southworth decision recognizes that all students have viewpoints they would wish to support and those they would never support. In Southworth, some students were understandably upset that their money was being used to support student groups with causes with which they fundamentally disagreed . The Supreme Court came up with a sensible compromise: universities can collect mandatory student fees as long as they are distributed without any regard for the viewpoint of the group. In this way student fees become a subsidy for speech in general that supports a richer forum for ideas, rather than a mechanism that might force students to give money to support any particular cause or viewpoint. The Supreme Court declared this to be the only way to have a fair and equitable student fees system; therefore, discrimination against students on the basis of viewpoint in the distribution of mandatory student fees is considered illegitimate. ASUO must understand that by trying to use denial of student fee funding as a weapon to silence a group’s viewpoint, it is undermining the very student fee system that doubtlessly benefits its members every day.
It cannot be doubted that the Oregon Commentator’s expression was fully protected satire under the law. Even highly offensive material, including both satire and profanity, is fully protected under the First Amendment. We strongly encourage you to read Hustler Magazine, Inc., et al. v. Jerry Falwell (1988), a case that firmly rejected on First Amendment grounds an attempt to punish a publication for mocking a prominent figure. The Falwell case involved a published (and widely circulated) cartoon suggesting that the Reverend Jerry Falwell lost his virginity in a drunken encounter with his mother in an outhouse. Falwell, along with hundreds of other cases, decisively and clearly protect offensive material, farce, satire, profanity, and exaggeration, and even recognize that the “right to offend” serves a vital societal function.”
the list of demands is atrocious! demanding services that other students do not have, for free, demanding money to build “safe spaces”. the BSU really is not after equality, they are after achieving superiority! as students, we all deserve the same things…. what do YOU NOT HAVE that a white student does at UCSD???? second of all, we are in a financial crisis. I have a class of 600 people being taught in three roome because the school cannot afford the extra lecture times. all the libraries close early due to lack of funding and upper division bio labs are closing all over campus…. some of which are crucial for graduating…. and because of a fucking party…. u think it is reasonable to demand money! FUCK U
I wonder if BSU and their new-found supporters realize that they’re only promoting conflict at UCSD by polarizing student opinion. Their unreasonable demands, claims of institutional racism, and propagation of unrest really tarnishes an otherwise honorable pursuit. The other day one of my classes held a forum to discuss the incident (you know, instead of a lecture) and I shit-you-not some asian girl got up and said she no longer felt safe walking around campus of racists. really? half of your peers are asian.
and now the whole campus is skating and thin ice- and the BSU shall be beneath it when it breaks.
great post!
This is the only thoughtful article I’ve read on the issue.
I’m surprised by how many people assume that they have the right to not ever be offended.
Local editorials are saying that the party-goers were out of touch with the rest of the student body, but take a look at that list of demands!
Things for you to consider as an educated, not ignorant, not racist, defender of free speech. Here is my attempt to insight empathy on you.
-Why is it okay to Negatively stereotype a race on a month set up to celebrate their achievements despite many obstacles (look back in history)?
-Some argue that groups will always be stereotyped and that its human nature, and they should just get over it and tolerate it just like Asians do. But how did the USA get to be founded, wasn’t it founded by people who were disenfranchised based on their race and religion in Europe?
-Asians are considered Model Minorities because many of them are not politically involved. If you look back in history many white people looked down on Asians because all they did was work, which made them look like they didn’t care about this country, they just made money and left. But then when it became appropriate they use them as weapons against those minorities that don’t take Bull-shit from no one, and stand up for their rights.
-When you see a Caucasian walking down the street you can’t tell whether they are Irish, English, Dutch, Spanish or what have you. But a black person is just that black regardless if they are Jamaican, African, mixed black, etc.
-Don’t compare a White Trash Party to a Compton Cookout!!! Its not the same. If a group of Black Frats were to throw a White Trash Party it would not be funny because they will realize that at the end of the day they are the ones misrepresented in Corporate America, in institutions such as UCSD that were established for whites. At the end of the day, these black frats will realize they are at the bottom of the racial hierarchy in America. That it was people like them who were humiliated by being displayed nude in ‘markets’ to white slave owners.
-Racism will never go away as long as black, white, Latin@, Chinese, Japanese, etc exist.
-Freedom of Speech is Powerful!!!! But is it really okay for people to say what they want where they want? Am sure the world will end in doom, but can we delay that for a while please!!!
-The Compton Cookout is a small incident that has allowed light to be shed on a bigger issue that is present at UCSD…Institutional Racism (IR for short). IR is the most deceiving form of racism because to many it seems nonexistent, invisible. It is historically embedded in the infrastructure of this school and this country. We raise hell about the Compton Cookout to make the school realize what its student body considers “acceptable behavior”. If the school chooses to do nothing about the issue, they allow themselves to be labeled as a ‘racist institution’ because they tolerate such incidences. These students are the future leaders of this country…I don’t want to ever meet my future president and he/she thinks of me as a ghetto chick.
-PLEASE realize that stereotypes about blacks and Latinos hint at their inferiority!!! When you think of a race you identify them by their stereotype
*Asians can’t drive (okay so…what does that say about asians??)
*All Asians are smart (I would be sooo proud to be Asian)
*White Man can’t jump (So they can play football, 43/44 North American presidents were white)
*Black People are ghetto (they are poor, uneducated, loud, obnoxious, THE BOTTOM OF THE BARREL)
….I hope you get my drift.
-If you are not racist or ignorant and describe yourself as an educated individual just realize that the issue is beyond Freedom of Speech. Dismissing the issue to protect the perpetrator’s Freedom of Speech is easy…putting yourself on the receiving end of the insults is hard.
—->Please answer me one question…what good does it do to say whatever you want wherever you want? Isn’t it better to say and do things that you KNOW will better humanity? Insulting a group of people based on negative aspects of their culture does not better humanity (it further divides us because you are implying that you are superior and they are inferior).
The professional victims desperately need this kind of outbreak of self-pity periodically to recharge their batteries and to demand additional resources.
What a pathetic and contemptible collection of spineless jellyfish the UCSD administrators are.
[…] The UCSD California Review has an excellent summary of the University’s overreaction and the inevitable “demands” of the […]
Great article.
Are you kidding me? Our tuition just skyrocketed and they’re demanding all of these?! I’m sorry, but I’m maxing out my loans right now and I don’t want any of my money going towards the majority of these demands. Ridiculous.
@ Voice of Reason
When people are allowed to say what they want, wherever they want, it allows us to truly gauge their opinions and have a dialogue. It is not “better to say and do things that you KNOW will better humanity” if you don’t believe it. Then, it is just a facade and I’d rather have the nasty truth over empty rhetoric. Similarly, imposing those things will only detach people from otherwise commendable efforts.
By infringing on their right to speak freely, you mask it and allow it to fester. Censorship allows those censored, for even legitimate reasons, an excitement they would never have had in a free exchange of ideas. On a similar note, when you impose collective punishment on reasonable people of a similar craft you legitimize the fringe, giving them a banner to hide their otherwise unacceptable position under.
As the old saying goes, sunlight is the best disinfectant. We will beat racism into the ground in the realm of public opinion under the guise of intelligent, open debate, not censorship.
Alec, you have posted a thorough and fair article on the issue.
If the BSU wants special priviledges, isn’t that in a way discrimination, or even racism, in itself? Favoring of one racial group over another? I mean, as one commenter posted, what about all the budget cuts? If the BSU wants special treatment over other ethnic groups, then they can provide their own funding for it. In their cries for equality, I’m not quite seeing it.
On another note, the Koala has the right to free speech and Gupta just got himself into a whole lot of trouble and headache attempting to shut it down. The way to go about this is not to punish the Koala or cut their funding, but to ignore them. If no one reads their newspaper, then there won’t be any need for them to supply it. Basic supply and demand concepts from economics 🙂 I mean, one of my friends pointed out that they always make racially insensitive jokes, about every race and religion, all the time. Why is it any different now?
A brilliant expose, Alec! Right or left, it’s time to unite against AS to be able to print our publications and not have our First Amendment rights to free speech be inhibited in any manner. Censorship should not be happening, for it will lead to endless repercussions.
You real can’t take these uneducated UCSD white trailer trash anywhere. This is what happens when more than one of these guys puts their minds together.
Can someone tell me whether these funding decisions come up to a student vote much like the fee referendums do? I would like to know.
It amazes me that UCSD will pat professors on the back when they do something offensive like burning the US flag (yeah, I agree it’s free speech to do so though) during their taxpayer-funded job teaching our youth, which is about 1000 times more offensive to me personally as a self-proclaimed patriot, but will get all in a tizzy about an off-campus satirical party.
[…] the best summaries so far have been written by UCSD student publication The California Review here and here, which include a lot of details unreported elsewhere and with many links for further […]
Do not spread misinformation about the party. It was not the brainchild of Jiggaboo Jones. Yes, his picture was used for the event invite. His taking credit for the party in his video was also a joke that most people didn’t get. He weighed in on the issue so he could capture some attention, which so far he has successfully done. I hate to say it, but he’s pretty smart when it comes to opportunism. Now he has a fresh new crop of fans.
The majority of language used for the event invite was taken from urbandictionary.com from an entry made in 2006.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=ghetto+girl
Although I do agree that speech should be free, I don’t think ANY hate speech should be state funded.
Also the BSU’s list of demands are based on services available for various minorities at UCLA and Cal.
At UCLA we ask(ed) the students to give freely of their funds to support these programs. Those who didn’t like it voted no, those who did voted yes. The money comes from the student body as part of their fees, but it was a democratic choice of the student body to support these programs and spaces. That where the money COULD come from.
Also the services will be tailored to a population, but by UC guidelines can’t given to any particular group.(Prop 209 and all) This is of course if the BSU follows the UCLA/Cal model (which I believe they are.)
I will not drone on about the institutional difference of opportunity and how these differences create the need for these resources. Just clearing up the fund and unreasonable demand cries. It’s working relatively well at UCLA.
A respectful post with decent arguments for the other side? Wow, I’m impressed!
“Although I do agree that speech should be free, I don’t think ANY hate speech should be state funded.”
Yeah I do see there’s a problem here; how can the Koala be held accountable at all at this point? They’re really not that funny (maybe they once were?) and it would be nice to give that funding to a more deserving humor group perhaps.
“Also the BSU’s list of demands are based on services available for various minorities at UCLA and Cal.”
I suspected that this was the case (this is California after all). Many schools have special RAs for their minority students as well as special tutoring centers, if not completely separate dorms. Still, just because it’s happened else where doesn’t mean it’s a good idea.
“At UCLA we ask(ed) the students to give freely of their funds to support these programs. Those who didn’t like it voted no, those who did voted yes. The money comes from the student body as part of their fees, but it was a democratic choice of the student body to support these programs and spaces. That where the money COULD come from.”
Herein lies the problem with California’s obsession with voting on everything: you get only those people who actually care about the issue to show up and those who casually oppose it don’t bother to vote. If not voting counted as a no vote, then I would feel more comfortable with using the initiative option. But as of now, it’s simply a way for highly motivated interest groups to jack up the funding for their own special issues. Still, this is a far more fair way for things to be done and I applaud you for suggesting it.
“Also the services will be tailored to a population, but by UC guidelines can’t given to any particular group.”
This is probably what will happen, but it’s still wrong and a waste of resources that could be better targeted at all students.
“I will not drone on about the institutional difference of opportunity and how these differences create the need for these resources”
But this assumes that all African American students suffer from institutional inequality in their high schools and homes, and that’s certainly not the case. Many white and Asian students also go to underachieving and poorly-funded public high schools- would they benefit from tutors for African-Americans only? I’d support raising financial aid in general, not to specific ethnic groups. Budgeting is a zero-sum game unfortunately and when you add “diverse” goodies, you take away from the “non-diverse” things like teaching real classes.
How does one determine whether the measures are “working”? Is there a numeric index that is used? Or is it denoted with colors, like the national threat level? Will we get a text message with the words “Attention students! The Race Alert Level has been raised to Red. Please proceed at your own risk.”
I don’t see how creating African-American-specific resources is going to solve anything besides BSU’s unprecedented greed and hunger for power over the university administration. It will bring us straight back to the 60’s, we will have “AA Only” zones. (Also, I notice BSU predominantly uses the PC term “African American”. Does that mean black international students from Canada, UK, France, and African countries are not allowed to take advantage of those resources? Just picking the nits here …)
I am glad that people are bringing up Dr. King in conversations. He has been one of the most intelligent and influential leaders this country has ever had. However, an increasing number of African Americans choose to forgo his vision for that of Malcolm X. This will not do anyone any good, and it will only drive the races further apart from each other.
Careful, the race alert level that you suggested is racist. Keep away from the Thought Police.
There is no such thing as freedom of speech in this context. The Constitution only protects freedom from THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT impeding your speech. As much as I’m sure you want to think it, the UC system is not a government entity in this regard.
Mildred, actually you’re quite wrong, as the Supreme Court has pointed out many times that public colleges are bound by the First Amendment. The First Amendment was incorporated as applicable to the states, and the UC System is a state entity. There is no doubt about this. Furthermore, CA colleges are bound to similar, perhaps even stronger, protections of free speech by the California Constitution and the state Education Code.
The cookout was out of line. KOALA is out of line. Some things are just wrong. There should be zero tolerance. Period. Some expulsions might even be justified.
alec- i just heard you on NPR- great job! free speech is free speech, regardless of funding and/or location. i’d be willing to bet that other people have said and done rude things on behalf of the black caucus, the white athletes, the hippie communers, and beyond. getting all the black students up-in-arms about a party when the very same cultural references are all over the tv, radio, and web is hardly the solution to the real epedemic: excessive victimhood on everyone’s part. just because a bunch of drunk kids say mean shit doesn’t mean that mountains of money should be spent on other people. the demands are absurd. if the school decides to pander to these demands, they are seriously mistaken in their attempt to resolve the social tension. assigning blame is not the solution.