February 2011 - Binghamton Review

TRUTH AND TWO STAPLES

FEBRUARY 2011

BINGHAMTON REVIEW

FREE SPEECH GREEN LIGHT RATING Coming Soon To Binghamton (We Hope)

Binghamton Review

P.O. BOX 6000 BINGHAMTON, NY 13902-6000

EDITOR@BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM

FOUNDED 1987 • VOLUME XXIV NUMBER 3 • FEBRUARY 2011

EDITOR-IN-CHIEF Michael M. Lombardi

Contents

Editor Emeritus Adam Shamah Managing Editor Nick Valiando Associate Editors R. John Meyer Ethan Day Copy Editors William Obilisundar Brian Parente Secretary Marissa Beldock Treasurer Marissa Beldock Contributors Ethan Day, Nick Valiando, Adam Shamah, Ashleigh Hruz, Taylor Arluck, Kate Flatley, Will Griffin, Joseph Aguiar, Nick Fondacaro

9

Feature: Free Speech Update by Adam Shamah

Godfather of the Review Louis W. Leonini

6

Rate Our Professors by Daniel Rabinowitz

Friends of the Review Dr. Aldo S. Bernardo The Leonini Family Mr. Bob Soltis WA2VCS The Shamah Family The Grynheim Family The Menje Family The Leeds Family The Lombardi Family The Packer Family Mr. Michael O’Connell

13

Cheapened Accomplishments by Meghan Donohue

Binghamton Review is printed by Our Press in Chenango Bridge, NY. We provide the truth; they provide the staples.

2

BINGHAMTON REVIEW

The Battle for SOOT Surveys

A Take on Black History Month

Departments 3 4 5

EDITORIAL CAMPUS PRESSWATCH INSTIGATIONS

Tell us what you think!

Direct letters to editor@binghamtonreview.com.

FEBRUARY 2011

EDITORIAL

Dear Readers,

A

s we enter a new year and new semester, so much is different yet so much stays the same. Recently, President Obama delivered the State of the Union address. If we take what Mr. Obama says literally, then the state our union is in shambles. This rambling, boring and overall uninspiring address spent more time detailing how the United States was lagging behind other countries than actually tackling the issues.

While it is indeed true the United States has a plethora of problems to address, Mr. Obama’s words were far from legendary.

Our great nation has faced much greater problems in the past and presidents have uttered words which continue to resonate to this day. Two examples immediately come to mind. One was John F. Kennedy’s “ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do to your country” speech at the height of the Cold War, when many Americans’ daily fear was of World War III and nuclear holocaust. He inspired Americans to be bold and consciously work to keep our nation strong.

The other was when it fell on President Ronald Reagan to comfort a stunned nation that had just witnessed the Space Shuttle Challenger explode in full glare of the news cameras. His solemn words “...they slipped the surly bonds of Earth, and touched the face of God” will be remembered by generations of Americans to come.

It is words like these that inspire greatness, and allow us to overcome adversity. The speech Mr. Obama delivered, read off a teleprompter to boot, did neither of these things.

It’s far past time that Americans stop apologizing and rambling on about their flaws. We must tackle them instead. Regardless of what the pundits and the naysayers claim, the United States is still by far the greatest country in the world. The responsibility to keep

it that way falls on our generation, so that we can guarantee a better and brighter world for our children, not a debt laden hell replete with slipping educational standards and crumbling infrastructure. It is my sincerest hope that true bipartisanship will return to Washington.

Speaker Boehner has kept his campaign promises so far, and now the ball is in President Obama’s court. We will see if he really has the best for our nation in mind, or if he simply will not stop pushing his failing and flawed agenda. I have great hope for our nation as we go into the future. But this hope comes with the realization that it is up to every single one of us to step up and make this country better, brighter, and stronger every day of our lives.

Sincerely, Michael M. Lombardi P.S. My heart goes out to all of those suffering in the current strife in Egypt. It is my great hope that the recent protests culminating in the resignation of President Mubarak will lead to free and fair elections, and allow a democratic government to take root. The people of Egypt deserve liberty, not another autocratic dictator or even worse a government run by Islamic radicals, such as the Muslim Brotherhood. Violence is never a good thing, and I hope a peaceful resolution can soon be found.

P.P.S. Myself and many members of the staff just attended the CPAC conference in Washington D.C. Expect full coverage of the conference in the next issue of the Review. B

TELL US WHAT YOU THINK! Direct letters to editor@binghamtonreview.com.

Our Mission Binghamton Review is a non-partisan, student-run periodical of conservative thought at Binghamton University. A true liberal arts education expands a student’s horizons and opens one’s mind to a vast array of divergent perspectives.

In that spirit, we seek to promote the free exchange of ideas and offer an alternative viewpoint not normally found on our predominately liberal campus. It is our duty to expose the warped ideology of political correctness that dominates this university.

We stand against tyranny in all its forms, both on campus and beyond. We believe in the principles set forth in this country’s Declaration of Independence and seek to preserve the fundamental tenets of Western civilization. Finally, we understand that a moral order is a necessary component of any civilized society. We strive to inform, engage, and perhaps even amuse our readers in carrying out this mission. www.binghamtonreview.com

3

CPampus resswatch Pipe Dream “The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly” February 4, 2011 “Gov. Cuomo’s budget makes all the wrong people pay. Rather than galvanizing the state to carry us through tough times, it’s letting the wealthy off the hook, putting students up against a wall, and leaving a whole host of disenfranchised New Yorkers on the firing line.”

While we are skeptical of Mr. Cuomo’s rabid fiscal conservatism, given the record of his party in New York and his father’s tenure as Governor, we fail to see how a promise to not raise taxes on anyone is “making all the wrong people pay.” For far too long, the excuse has been made that the “rich” do not deserve equal rights and protection from unfair and exorbitant taxes. It is not the job of the rich or any other group of New Yorkers to pay out their noses to fill the massive budget holes caused by years of state government incompetence. We hope Mr. Cuomo stays true to his promises to not raise taxes, and cut government waste and spending.

Pipe Dream “The Battle Hymn of the Tiger Car-owner” January 28, 2011 As I was sitting, I watched a woman pull up far too close in

4

BINGHAMTON REVIEW

the spot next to me in a beat-up Hyundai Elantra. I stared at her as she flung her car door open (barely missing my gorgeous child) and proceeded to rummage about in her embarrassment of a vehicle, looking for her wallet or her dignity, whatever. It was a windy day, I had a feeling of dread in the pit of my stomach, and lo and behold, the wind pushed her car door into mine!

Dear “Tiger Car Owner” while it is commendable to see car advice coming from the Pipe Dream, we have several problems with this quote. First off it is quite uncalled for to call another car an “embarrassment” just because it may be old or look beat up. Last time we checked we were fiscally conservative, and purchasing a new car is in fact one of the worst investments someone could make. New cars lose a large percentage of their value the moment they are driven off a lot, and for many people are simply out of their financial means. I find it ridiculous that in these economic times you would make fun of a woman for driving a shabby car when it may very well be the only car she can afford to drive. If everyone tightened their belts a bit instead of financing themselves to Mars, this country would be in vastly better shape.

Also us editors at the Review know you need a Y chromosome to properly understand the cult of cars.

Pipe Dream “Let Sleeping Asians Lie” January 28, 2011 Pipe Dream interviews the creator of Asians Sleeping in the Library .com....

Oh, [I’ve gotten] more support from the Asian community than from white people. White people have been like, “fuck you, you’re racist.” Meanwhile I’ve gotten so many “Oh I’m an Asian, this is hysterical, it’s time we start making light of a funny situation.” My suitemate is Asian, he thought it was hysterical. One of my best friends who’s Asian helped me blow it up. You have this nut job [Amy Chua] running around writing her Op-Eds for The Wall Street Journal, she was on “Colbert Report,” promoting this book about how Asian parents are the best because they push their kids too hard. I’m just making light of that.

Oh racism such the slippery slope.

We commend the creator of this blog for making light of this situation and exercising his rights to free speech and expression. Just because something may poke fun at a specific group does not make it racist. A comically themed blog is much better for society than that nut job parent whose method of child rearing is in our opinion borderline abusive. B

FEBRUARY 2011

INSTIGATIONS

A

ccording to the Telegraph UK, schools in the United Kingdom will begin offering “gay lessons” as part of a Government-backed “celebration of the gay community.” Let’s hope American liberals don’t get wind of this idea. Otherwise, “gay math,” “gay science,” and “gay geography” -- coming to a school near you! The Telegraph reports that Gay Math will include “teaching statistics through census findings about the number of homosexuals in the population, and using gay characters in scenarios for math problems.”

Gay Geography will involve “considering why homosexuals move from the countryside to cities,” while Gay Languages will use “gay characters in role play scenarios, and [teach] ‘LGBT vocabulary.’” Gay role-playing scenarios; let’s hope Phil Calderon hasn’t relocated across the pond.

I

n today’s creepy septuagenarian news, Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi is being protested in two hundred Italian cities! It’s about time someone is taking a stand against the “Naked Emperor” as hes been dubbed in the press. Caligula *cough* I mean Berlusconi is the Pervy PM who throws wild sex parties and was recently caught in a scandal with a 17 year old hooker. Sadly he also is a billionaire who owns a tremendous amount of media companies in Italy. Reactions to date by much of the Italian press have been tepid and uninterested. Maybe they just need some Viagra and Extenze; wait a minute - Berlusconi is consuming the country’s entire supply. It will be interesting to see where these never ending scandals go, and if Silvio will finally pass Tiger Woods on the whoreometer.

www.binghamtonreview.com

A

new book by New York Times journalist Jonathan Franklin reports that, during their sixty nine day underground entrapment, the Chilean miners were given marijuana to relieve stress.

(Hey, Judicial Affairs... college can be stressful too...) There were also requests for blow-up sex dolls, but those were denied “because the doctor in charge feared having to share them would lead to jealousy.”

A

19 year old Pennsylvania man attempted to hire a hit-man on Facebook. Corey Christian Adams raped a girl while she was blacked out drunk. Upon being confronted by the girl the next day, the budding genius turned to Facebook. He posted as his status “I got 500 on a girls head who wants that bread? Hit me up anyway possible.”

As if soliciting the Internet for a hit man would ever end well.

Upon being questioned by the police he continued to post, writing he “needed this girl knocked off right now.” Luckily this moron was convicted of rape and solicitation to commit murder and will be spending quite a while in jail. Proof that technology does not make men smarter.

F

inally, our dear friend Muammar Gaddafi is back in the news. Giving his first speech after the resignation of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, Gaddafi instructed the Palestinians to revolt against Israel. Gaddafi even went as far to say it is “the time for popular revolutions.” Well if this was actually true Gaddafi is in big trouble. He himself is a dictator who has held absolute power for decades. The hypocritical and insane views of fundamental Islamist leaders forever amuse. B

5

SOOT SURVEYS

Rate Our Professors

The Inside Story of the Six Year Battle for S.O.O.T. Survey Results

by Daniel Rabinowitz

W

e have all had at least one class we wish we had never taken.

That one professor with the heavy accent, subjective grading standards, or exams that test you on knowledge that you never knew existed. For a full semester you sit in class suffering, wishing you could ensure others won’t make the same mistake you made.

Finally, for the first time in the history of Binghamton University, students have been given that opportunity: the chance to share their opinions openly, online, through a reliable, unbiased website called mybingprofessors.com.

Mybingprofessors.com is a website dedicated to publishing the results of the Student Opinion of Teaching (SOOT) surveys.

SOOTs are conducted at the end of every semester by almost every professor on campus. They are the one opportunity students have to tell their professors how they truly feel about them. After a long, two year battle, the results of these surveys were reluctantly handed over to the Student Association last year.

For six years, high ranking members of the faculty and University administration attempted to block these survey results from the public. In order to get students access to their peers’ opinions of the faculty, the SA tried two approaches.

The first involved the Faculty Senate. If the Senate passed a resolution, the surveys would be released. From the start, it was very clear that faculty opposition was prominent with many senior professors. In May 2009, when the resolution first hit the Senate floor, it was tabled indefinitely. The Senate discharged a task force composed of six faculty members and one administrator to examine the resolution. Not until the SA lobbied for representation was a student included.

Once the task force began meeting, it became obvious that a majority of the members adamantly opposed releasing the results of the SOOT survey. Irrational arguments such as “this is going to get faculty members fired”, and “these surveys are clearly protected by Sunshine Laws,” were used on multiple occasions in an attempt to sway the committee against release. Heated arguments broke out on multiple occasions between faculty and the student representative on the committee. Only two of the six faculty supported the surveys’ release.

The second route taken by the SA was to use the New York State Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) to demand access to the survey results. Because Binghamton is a state university, all faculty members are state employees, and documents are considered public 6

BINGHAMTON REVIEW

information. The SA requested the release of the SOOTs under FOIL and was denied by the University’s attorney, who claimed “to release such evaluations would be an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy of the professor in that the evaluation is considered personnel records”.

The SA, unconvinced that SOOTs are not subject to FOIL, contacted the New York State Committee on Open Government, which “is responsible for overseeing and advising with regard to the Freedom of Information, Open Meetings and Personal Privacy Protection Laws.” Executive Director of that committee, Robert J. Freedman, issued an advisory opinion against the University, supporting the original FOIL request. He wrote: “Evaluation of faculty members’ teaching skills by student, those most familiar with the most significant aspect of the work of those public employees, in my opinion are clearly relevant to the performance of faculty

FEBRUARY 2011

members’ duties. That being so, I do not believe that disclosure may be characterized as constituting an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.”

This advisory opinion was issued on December 27, 2004, six years before the University actually released the surveys. In 2009, the SA submitted a second FOIL request. New York State law requires that a FOIL request be responded to within five business days. It took the University over 20 business days to respond. After lengthy discussions with many administrators, the University finally recognized after six years that the SOOTs were in fact subjected to FOIL, and that they needed to be released. It took the University an additional six months to finally release all of the records to the SA. Only after the SA lawyer sent a threatening letter to the university attorney did the administration finally hand them over.

While the legal battle for the SOOTs neared its end, the battle within the Faculty Senate only heated up. Once the task force was informed of the legal nature of the documents, they had no choice but to reluctantly support the release of the SOOTs. The only way the faculty could (illegally) stop the release of the SOOTs was

through a vote of the Faculty Senate. Once the task force report was presented and introduced, a passionate and lengthy debate began.

While a few members of the faculty expressed support for the release of the surveys, it looked like a majority of the Senate was opposed. In an attempt to fail the proposal, members of the faculty separated the part of the report dealing with the release of the SOOTs. Once again, the undergraduate student representative had to stand up and remind members of the faculty that they are in fact bound by law to hand them over. He explained that even though he understands that they have a lot of concerns, most of them are unfounded and that they have no choice but to vote for the release of the surveys. The legal aspect was then confirmed by the Provost, and the report was approved nearly unanimously by the Faculty Senate.

Today, nearly six years after the first FOIL request was filed, SOOTs are published publicly online at mybingprofessors.com.

After years of resistance by the administration and faculty, the students finally prevailed. The site, started in August, has had over ten thousand hits. Finally students have the opportunity to express their views about their professors to the entire campus. B

YOU’LL GET YOUR DEGREE FROM BINGHAMTON UNIVERSITY...

BUT YOUR EDUCATION FROM BINGHAMTON REVIEW. YOU’RE WELCOME. 7

TIRED OF YOUR COMMIE PROFESSORS? DO YOU THINK DIVERSITY IS A WAY TO MANAGE YOUR STOCK PORTFOLIO, NOT A UNIVERSITY?

We’re looking for the next generation of Review writers and editors We want conservatives, anarchists, Republicans, students of any stripe to manage the Review.

libertarians, objectivists, independents... free-thinking write for, edit, design, and All are welcome.

General Interest Meeting Catered Dinner from Grande’s and Other Refreshments will be Provided

Thursday, Feb 17 @ 7:30 PM UUW-B05, The Newly-Renovated BR Office

FREE SPEECH

The State of Free Speech on Campus Huff Po, FIRE Call out Binghamton University

by Adam Shamah

A

recent Huffington Post piece by Greg Lukianoff, president of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), shines light on Binghamton University’s f ree speech problem. Lukianoff ranked Binghamton third on his list of the “dirty dozen,” the twelve “worst colleges for f ree speech.”

Lukianoff credits a familiar incident as the reason for this embarrassment. In 2008, the University “tried to suspend or expel Social Work graduate student Andre Massena merely for putting up posters criticizing the department, which had hired a faculty member Andre thought was responsible for injustice towards the poor as director of the Binghamton Housing Authority.

The department ordered Andre to leave the program for a year with no guarantee of return, required him to apologize, and demanded that he publicly disavow his own views.”

This obvious inf ringement on Massena’s First Amendment right to f ree speech, which, as a public university, Binghamton is bound to uphold, was reported on in the Review and addressed by FIRE in a letter to then-president Lois DeFleur. The University dropped its case and reinstated Massena. The story made national headlines, and Massena is now suing the University and social work department chair Laura Bronstein. www.binghamtonreview.com

But the Social Work department continued its disregard for constitutional rights, targeting in 2009 another student “because of his classroom expression.” The department “required him to sign away his f ree speech rights--his ‘advancement plan’ stated that he could never make fellow students or instructors feel ‘uncomfortable.’”

In response to Lukianoff, university spin doctor Gail Glover told Pipe Dream: “we do not believe it is a meaningful evaluation of what campuses as a whole are or are not doing relative to speech on campus...

The specific incidents that place Binghamton on the list occurred almost two years ago and involved one program within one of six schools. Any inference about Binghamton's commitment to f ree speech is misleading.”

Fair enough. The f ree-speech

problem has, so far, been contained in the Social Work department within the College of Community and Public Affairs. But the department ’s inf ringements have been egregious, and are more manifestations of an institutionalized culture of conformity and censorship rather than mere isolated incidents.

One student stated of the social work department: “They don’t like a lot of disagreement.

They don’t like diverse views [and are] very much about conformity.” In a letter of support for Andre Massena, another social work student, Cindy Overstreet, described how she “repeatedly encountered a tremendously disturbing pattern of fear and institutional bullying by the program against social work students.” Others wrote letters detailing incidents in which students were targeted 9

for “inf ractions” as ridiculous as “insubordination.”

As I reported in the January 2010 issue of the Review, an “‘advancement ’ process is the means through which students, including Massena, have been targeted. According to department policy, when concerns relating to a student ’s performance are raised, his or her academic advisor is to devise a ‘written plan’ which the student will be required to follow.

The student ’s progress is later evaluated by the Advancement Committee, which has the power to recommend ‘the student be suspended for a period of time or dismissed f rom the program.’

[One student ’s] assertion that Advancement Committee can ‘expel you for anything,’ appears to have merit, judging by its unchecked discretion the two FIRE cases.”

"The tradition at Binghamton, a public university, is that the full exercise of First Amendment rights is encouraged and protected," reads the student handbook. However, as FIRE points out, “one will find few campuses in this country that come without such lofty promises and appeals to f ree inquiry and expression. What matters is living up to those statements— making principled decisions in difficult situations, no matter how unpopular or highly charged the expression is that deserves protection.” If the University is committed to f ree speech, how could it let one of its departments stray so far f rom its constitutional obligations?

Though there has been speculation of behind-thescenes intervention by upper10

BINGHAMTON REVIEW

level administrators on behalf of Massena, the University has not expressed any disapproval of the department culture and policies which allowed the two incidents to arise in the first place. The department ’s chair, Laura Bronstein, still holds her position despite several abuses she personally committed during the Massena case. (After Massena appealed, Bronstein added fifty pages of new “charges” that mostly had to do with the content of Massena’s speech). If the University were serious about its proclaimed dedication to the First Amendment, it should have removed Bronstein f rom her post and conducted a stringent review of the department ’s policies.

Considering the level of autonomy that the University has traditionally allowed its departments and faculty, it is unlikely a University-pushed shake up of the social work department will occur. However, in the meantime, if the University wants to validate its claim of dedication to the first amendment, it can begin by revising several of

its campus-wide policies that are problematic f rom a f ree-speech perspective.

Binghamton is considered

by FIRE to be a “yellow light ” school, meaning it maintains in its code of conduct “at least one ambiguous policy that too easily encourages administrative abuse and arbitrary application.”

“Green light ” schools maintain no policies that prohibit speech, while “red light ” schools maintain policies that on their face restrict speech.

Three of Binghamton’s policies earn it its “yellow light.”

The first is its harassment policy, which defines harassment as “Stalking or communicating in a manner likely to cause injury, distress, or emotional or physical discomfort and which serves no legitimate purpose.”

FIRE points out that the “most significant problem with this policy is the vagueness of the terms ‘distress’ and ‘emotional discomfort.’ Those terms could encompass almost anything f rom mere hurt feelings to severe emotional distress. To rise to the

FEBRUARY 2011

level of unprotected harassment, the behavior in question must be severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive.” In other words, repeated communication must be severely offensive to any reasonable person, not just the “victim,” to be considered harassment.

Binghamton’s policy is broad enough that it could theoretically be applied to anyone who causes another student to feel “distress.”

For example, in 2008, judicial affairs attempted to charge a student who, in a prank call to BTV, called another student a derogatory term. The prank call was considered “illegitimate” communication, and the use of the term was “distressful” to the student on BTV. Thankfully, the case did not materialize; but it goes to show that broad policies can be abused if there is an authority who wants to abuse them.

An example a harassment policy that FIRE would find acceptable is "Stalking or repeatedly communicating in a manner likely to cause physical injury or to cause a reasonable person severe emotional distress.”

Binghamton’s second yellow light policy is found in its postering policy: “Advertisements should avoid demeaning, sexist or discriminatory portrayal of individuals.” While this appears to be more of a suggestion than requirement, the language is too vague to rule out that a student could be punished for distributing “demeaning, sexist, or discriminatory” material. The University should clarify that students cannot be punished for posting advertisements that someone considers “demeaning.” www.binghamtonreview.com

If this sounds like paranoia, consider several examples of students disciplined at other schools that maintain similar advertising requirements.

In one of FIRE’s most famous cases, two students at Colorado State University were given disciplinary charges for “posting a flyer that parodied a flyer f rom the Feminist and Gender Studies program. Colorado College's ‘Feminist and Gender Studies Interns’ had distributed a flyer called ‘The Monthly Rag,’ which included a reference to ‘male castration,’ an announcement about a lecture on ‘feminist porn,’ and an explanation of ‘packing’ (pretending to have a phallus). As a parody of ‘The Monthly Rag,’ the two male students distributed a flyer called ‘The Monthly Bag’ under the pseudonym ‘Coalition of Some Dudes.’ The flyer included references to ‘tough guy wisdom,’ ‘chainsaw etiquette,’ the shooting range of a sniper rifle, and a quotation about ‘female violence and abuse’ of men f rom the website batteredmen.com.”

At Boston College, students were subject to disciplinary action after a similar incident: “Posing as an advertisement for a ‘Black Baby Petting Zoo,’ the flyer mocked white students who travel on ‘service trips’ abroad to volunteer during spring break.

Instead of traveling, the flyer purported to offer students a chance to ‘satisfy your need to cleanse your whiteness’ while remaining on campus.”

The content of these posters were clearly offensive, maybe “demeaning” or “sexist,” to some; but, as FIRE points out, “engaging in provocative political satire” is a form of protected speech, even if

its offends people.

The final yellow light policy is found in the student handbook, which states “New York State University Police, staff in the Division of Student Affairs, the University Ombudsman and the Affirmative Action Office assist in addressing bias-related activities that do not rise to the level of a crime....[which] may be addressed through the State University of New York's Discrimination Complaint Procedure or the Rules of Student Conduct.”

The mention of the Rules of Student Conduct seems to imply that students can be punished for “bias incidents that do not rise to the level of crime.” FIRE points out the it is acceptable to collect information on such incidents for the purposes of helping the victim, and the University “can certainly issue an institutional response condemning offensive expression on campus.” However, “mandatory attendance at a meeting or any other kind of mandatory "educational" sanction is impermissible” as a response to protected speech. The University should clarify that the purpose of this policy is to allow the University to help the victim, or to meet expression with more expression, not to punish students that have not committed a crime.

We are encouraged by the changes Vice President for Student Affairs Brian Rose has made over the past two years to the student code of conduct. If he is willing to make the final three changes needed to make Binghamton a “green light ” school, it will go a long way to make up for the Social Work disasters. B 11

Former Foes: Your Google Search Results Just Got A Lot Dirtier

Binghamton Review’s Digital Archives Are Online http://issuu.com/binghamtonreview

Currently Hosting 1991-Present, 1987-1991 Coming Soon

BLACK HISTORY

Cheapened Accomplishments Black History Month in Perspective

by Megan Donahue

“We should emphasize not Negro History, but the Negro in history. What we need is not a history of selected races or nations, but the history of the world void of national bias, race hate, and religious prejudice.”

-Carter Woodson on founding Negro History Week, 1926 It’s that time of year, February, where the country will once again celebrate Black History Month. Black History Month actually started out as Black History Week. The idea was organized into a reality in 1926 by Harvard-educated historian Dr. Carter G. Woodson. Originally entitled Negro History Week, the event took place during the second week of February. The date was chosen to coincide with the birthdays of Frederick Douglass and Abraham Lincoln because these two men had greatly influenced black history.

Eventually the Negro History Week evolved into the National Afro-American History month in 1976, and that remains the official title of the observance.

Fair enough, I suppose. I’m just not sure that relegating Black history to the shortest month of the year is proper.

But given that there is no “Indigenous People’s History Month” at all, and no “Scotchwww.binghamtonreview.com

Irish-On-My-Grandmother’sSide History Month,” I’m not sure that it matters anyway, unless of course you happen to be Sioux or Scotch-Irish.

Which brings us to whether or not we should have Afro-American History Month. According to a recent 60-Minutes interview with Morgan Freeman, the answer is “no.” “Your’re going to relegate my history to a month?” ask Freeman. “I don’t want a Black History Month. Black history is American history.” Freeman goes on to note that there are no white or Jewish history months.

When asked how else we could end the racial divide he quipped “Stop talking about it. I’m going to stop calling you a white man, and I’m going to ask you to stop calling me a black man.

I know you as Mike Wallace...

You know me as Morgan...You wouldn’t say ‘Well, I know this white guy named Mike.’ “You know what I’m saying?” Yes, Morgan, we do.

For all its good intentions, it seems that having a Black History Month draws attention to race as something different from all other differences.

It is unlike having different traditions, a different language, being of a different gender, religion, or sexual orientation.

Black History Month reinforces the belief that being black in

America is an insurmountable obstacle and therefore must be recognized separately from others: an apple amongst oranges. And as we all know we mustn’t mix apples and oranges. Is that the intent of Black History Month? Of course not, but when a social event is designed to call attention to and to isolate, for our inspection and reflection, a subset of our society (based on of all things skin color), it reinforces the idea that the subset is somehow lesser and separate from the whole.

What about the remainder of the year? Do we then subdivide the calendar as necessary to ensure everyone has there moment? Would we as a nation countenance the idea of a white history month? Try to envision David Duke or Senator Robert Byrd making this proposal. It simply comes across as racist and would be shouted down faster than Michael Moore can say “Bush Lied.” Or how about the January-as-Jewish-HistoryMonth proposal that’s currently making its way through Congress? That proposal has two problems: if the UN had its way it would immediately have to be followed by two months of Palestinian History; secondly, it begs the question how much support would Reverend Pat Robertson garner for Christian 13

History Month? That would get as many congressional supporters as Brokeback Mountain would have viewers in a Salt Lake City Cinemaplex on date night.

Also, black history is cheapened by this annual observance, making it appear that African-Americans are great only when compared to other African-Americans.

Morgan Freeman isn’t an excellent black actor. Morgan Freeman is an excellent actor.

Neil deGrasse Tyson isn’t a brilliant black astrophysicist.

Neil deGrasse Tyson is a brilliant astrophysicist. In both cases these Americans happen to be of African lineage, but they each stand at the top of their professions because of their accomplishments, not because of their color.

Would we describe Caucasians as great and include their skin color as an adjective? for example, would we ever describe Babe Ruth as a great WHITE baseball player? No... we would simply say he was a great ballplayer. Or would we describe Ted Kennedy as a great WHITE Senator from Massachusetts? No. We would simply say he was a big fat loser who got whooped by Judge Alito during the Supreme Court confirmation hearings. (Since we are on the topic a little ‘dish’ here: last year Kennedy confused freshman Senator Barack Obama with Osama Bin Laden calling the new Senator ‘Osama’ Obama. I tend to think it was a Freudian slip, but I’ll cut him some slack and assume it was the alcohol talking.)

Maybe more important than whether or not we should have 14

BINGHAMTON REVIEW

a Black History Month (given that it already exists), is the question of whether or not it cheapens the achievements made by Americans who happen to be black, as well as that of whether or not it also opens the observance to being co-opted by interests other than those of the black community. I’ll bet dollars to donuts that as I am writing this article some white liberal senator from New York is also writing a screed on what a tireless friend she is to the black community, and then she’ll go on to say that if her political foe is also saying the same thing, well then, it’s just cheap political theatre, and she’ll finish up with how one of her best friends is black, and that she simply adores ‘FittyCent. But to her credit she will be the only politician tripping over themself to establish their credentials with the black community.

In the coming weeks of February, banks, automobile manufactures, sports drink makers, airlines, restaurants, insurance companies, and a myriad of other U.S. corporations and institutions will use this observance to their full political benefit. For the entire month of February, suddenly everyone becomes an expert on the writings of MLK and Malcolm X, Van Peeble’s Blaxploitation films, and the theory economics of slavery in the antebellum South. That knowledge and fervor will last exactly 28 days (except on a leap year) and is exactly skin deep. Will GM sell a few more cars or McDonald’s sell a few more burgers because of what I am sure is their heartfelt

contributions to raising awareness of African-American achievements? Probably not, unless that includes a free Coke, but it just might provide some cover during the next lawsuit brought by the EEOC. It has come to the point where professionals such as Princeton historian Nell Painter no longer make appearances during the month of February. Painter has become disillusioned by the torrent of speaking invitations that flood her office every February that suddenly drop off come March 1st. Says Painter “An industry has grown up around [Black History Month] which is really quite fascinating.

Like Kwanzaa, it became a corporate holiday, a way for corporations and museums and the U.S. Postal Service to declare they’re multiculturally bona fide.” Likewise, John Price, the Dallas County Commissioner for District 3 stated with disgust “I’m not going to be, as the kids say, ‘pimped’ during the month of February” only to become “invisible” by month’s end.

Given all this, should we stop celebrating National AfricanAmerican History Month? No. I don’t think so. We don’t stop celebrating Christmas just because the ACLU sues anybody who appears to be enjoying their holiday. We just keep hoping that someday they’ll stop taking political advantage of the situation. I think the same goes for Black History Month. We’ll be fine if only we stop taking advantage of the situation and just try to understand. B This article is reprinted from the February 2006 issue of the Review FEBRUARY 2011

Write for Binghamton Review,

Win $$$

Annoucing the Binghamton Review Writing Contest Submit an article for the March issue of the Review, and be entered to win one of three gift cards up to $75 at a store of your choice. Articles should fit the Review’s typical style.

Only new writers are eligible. All submissions become property of the Review.

Deadline 2/28/11. Email submissions to editor@binghamtonreview.com www.binghamtonreview.com

15

binghamton craigslist > housing > apts/housing for rent

email this posting to a friend

Stating a discriminatory preference in a housing post is illegal - please flag discriminatory posts as prohibited.

Avoid scams and fraud by dealing locally! Beware any arrangement involving Western Union, Moneygram, wire transfer, or a landlord/owner who is out of the country or cannot meet you in person. More info

$0 / Budgetless, charterless, useless, clueless, student group seeks new home; swiss bank account; (sympathetic) press coverage Date: 2011-02-10, 6:41PM EST Reply to: see below

Innocent, persecuted student group is seeking a new home after being unceremoniously dechartered and removed from our old office. NYPIRG has a vibrant, 37 year history of doing absolutely nothing of value. If fact, we have absolutely nothing of value to offer as compensation for rent. We are, however, willing to barter and give anyone with a pulse an “internship.” Furthermore we need a secure storage space for our plethora of “classified” documents, as we will be truly lost without them. We can also pay in IOUs as three years ago we had a budget of over $100,000 and we plan on using voodoo to resurrect it. We do not need a great deal of space as we have almost no members who actually care, although we are very good at finding fake ones if needbe. In closing we implore a kind soul to help us, as we are just an innocent group who has done so much good. Please contact the University Union office as they are now in charge of our affairs.

Dosvedanya Comrades, NYPIRG