THE MICHIGAN REVIEW Volume 11 , Number 22
March 17, 1993
The Campus Affairs Journal of the University of Michigan
Keg Party Taps Campus Politics increased coordination is in order. "Why not have everyone at MSA, the admin" F R O M THE STUDENTS istration and the people at SLS sit perspective, MSA is a joke." down to see what's wrong?" says Pavao The Keg Party So says Keg Party member David does not feel, how"Broccoli" Pava , an LSA ever, that the probsophomore rurming for I lems at MSA make Michigan Student Assemfor a hopeless situbly (MSA) representative I ation. "There are in this week's MSA elecsome things it can tions. .., do. It has money to . <..' , spend," says Pavao Although the Keg Party started as a dormitory i . There is no reajoke, it is now mounting a , ~: ,: ' , . .' t, son, according to campaign to secure seats ' i:'Jt : Pava, why effecin the March 17 and 18 1::-" - ' ' ' ~, tiveness should reelections. The Keg Party Keg Party candidate David Pava quire rudeness . includes members Pava, Brian "Clump" I Pava makes this claim in reference to Clune, Taryn "Tea" Merk!, and Michelle "Corduroy" Ferrarese, all LSA freshmen, as well as John "Fish" Oleniczak, an Engineering freshman, and Michael ~ Catsup" Jefferson, a School of Art I BY EDDIE ARNER sophomore. In a succinct statement of opinion, the party states its belief that HE MICHIGAN STUDENT the current MSA setup is "messed up Assembly (MSA) ballot is and needs cleaning up." crowded this year, sportiIig four "Reform the system," says Clune. official parties as well as an unrecogKeg Party members are decidedly in nized fifth: the Weasel Party. 'The Weafavor of more openness and brevity in sels lack official recognition for the elec-MSA "For the most part, no one told us tion, which will be held March 17 and anything [about running for office]," 18, because they lacked the required states PavaoThe party's motivation is five eligible candidates as of the official thus evident in their attempt to run filing deadline. Would-be representaagainst the MSA system without the tive Samantha Dog, a golden retriever/ golden lab mix, was disqualified as a aid of that system. The Keg Party, notwithstanding its candidate, so the remaining four Wealighthearted name, has legitimate sels are running as independents. planks on issues affecting students. The Weasel slate of candidates is Members feel that the U-M should composed of Chris Bzdok (LSA), Chad abolish the Statement of Student Rights Stielstra (Engineering), Michael Rubin (Business), Chris Peirce (LSA), and and Responsibilities along with the Diag Use Policy. "To a certain extent the write-in Samantha Dog (LSA). The Code and the Diag Policy are policies of Weasels will be guaranteed at least one fear. If [the administration] knew us, seat in the assembly, because Rubin is they would know that we're not that running unopposed. According to Chad Stielstra, the crazy to need a code," says Pavao On the issue of funding for Student Weasels "have had numerous dealings with MSA as members of different stuLegal Services (SLS), Pava feels that BY MATT WILK
l
I
rl"
,,1:\
ii
'
recent rude remarks purportedly made to members of the Keg Party by Tobias Zimmerman, a current MSA representative. "In fact, " remarks Clune, "our first order of business is to go to the Budget Priorities Committee to get funding for a Toby Zimmerman fan club." The Keg Party, whose name was chosen over other provocative names in~luding the It's My Party and the Birthday Party, is often home to unbridled silliness. The party filed three party-name challenges with the MSA election court, which charged that the other parties in the election were misrepresenting themselves through the use of their party monikers. '!be charges were later defeated.
Weasels Sneak
T
3
ChaUenglng Relativism
Emesto GarcIa looks at what it means to be -open-minded.-
The fun continues in other aspects of their platform. "This is incredibly fun for us . MSA needs to be happy. We officially advocate happiness," states Pava o In its quest for happiness, the Keg Party would like to see a playground with adult-sized equipment installed at the U-M. The Keg Party has been formally endorsed by Gargolye, a campus humor magazine. The Keg Party slogan is '1f [the Gargoyle has) chosen us sittin' on keggin' beanie wearin' bubble blowin' candy throwin' folks for MSA, shouldn't you? We're the Keg Party. We're Folks Like You." It seems that honesty, no matter how brutal, is the most notable trademark of the Keg Party.
m
Race
into-'~MSA
Weasels see MSA as a useful body which dent groups and honor societies seekcurrently fails in its mission due to ing funding and office space." The ideological bickering, misdirected efhassles and uncooperative-attitude they forts , and a grossly-:i¢lated sense ofits encountered in these endeavors own influence. The Weaprompted the members i ~ - sels feel that both the of the Weasel Party to Conservative Coalition run. Chris Bzdok adand the Progressive mits that "it was Party are guilty of these Samantha chewing up errors. a number of articles on Additionally, the MSA" which convinced Weasels think that MSA the Weasels that she wanted to run as well. .r ti '~ J' . " should work with, not The We.,el, ,ub. ' ~ . l~ r' _ .~ 's:",,-:, • . against, student groups " . . .; in addressing student scribe to no specific ideology and lack a platconcerns . The party form. They seek the Weasel Party Candidate draws this belief from votes of students who Samantha Dog examples ofMSA being are discontented with MSA's lacklusdismissed by the U-M administration ter performance. 'Their attitude is sumas unrepresentative of students due to marized in Chris Bzdok's observation low MSA voter turnouts. that "MSA reps should be servants of The Weasels' call for MSA to reform the students and stop behaving as its practices and narrow its focus ; is though they are the anointed few ." being echoed by both the Keg Party and In general,' the Weasel Party wants , the Michigan Party. 'Representatives MSA to develop better :communication ; from theseltlU'ee;groupe, if.elected, could ·. with students and administrators; The form&pOw~rfulcoalitionon MSAMt;
Suite One 4 From
5
Majorism Satire . . . ,
Bashing Dean Baker for purportedly homophobic remarks is simply ignorant.
Charies Rousseaux's modest proposal: Affirmative action in education.
I
j
L·. •. . . .. .
.
6 !:e::a~:
8 Music
~S · :'.l
! ' ..;
Drew Peters takes a ' , .critical look at Pure Guava , . and lulabox. · .
Aaron Steelman sets ' RonatO Reagan's record . straight. · !
'><"'<~~" -' ''''_Y'''~ '''' ·'_'_ '"''' '"'. _''U>''' ''''_,,,,,,,,,,,,,,'<.'I'»(,,,,,,,,,....,.,..~_-.._",-,~ ..._ __
... ';"iil'i r
Il!;'IM
.1it:$I$
.,.~,=~
THE MICInGAN REVIEW
2
March 17, 1993
, \,
THE ~ lICHIG.\\ RE\ IE\\
~,
o SERPENT'S TOOTH We at the Review would like to extend a lukewarm welcome to Between the Lines, Ann Arbor's newest gay monthly magazine. Special thanks to Mark Weinstein, editor of Between the Lines , who noted in the premier issue that the paper's existence " ... will be a long, bumpy ride. Together let's make it a fabulous ride." What are we supposed to read between those lines, Mark? We wonder whether the rest of the paper's text will be as easy to penetrate. From the Detroit News : "'The Associated Press got hold of a White House memo revealing the somewhat cynical
Faux Pas of the Year
N~l\E \,
r: ,t!JjDe
•
~'<.,:',lo l " ~fI,j~., rV~ .,-,.,."._ ...
ways Clinton's staff evaluates events the president could attend. Of are· quest from Rep. Hamilton Fish, RNY, that the president meet a group of students from Poughkeepsie, the memo said, 'Fish is a moderate Republican, and we may have a shot at getting his vote for the economic plan. Is it possible to get these students in for a photo?' When the AP called a spokesman for Fish, he said, 'Holy mackerel!' Really." Does anybody else find it odd to hear the Neville Brothers sing (on television), "'!be touch, the feel of cotton, the fabric of our lives"? Perhaps the adver· tising geniuses who came up with this commercial will soon face a boycott by
The Campus Affairs Journal of the University of Michigan 'We are the Establishment"
the vanguard ofthf victims' revolution for their blatant ~. \ensitivity. In another Between the Lines article, author Bethaniel mused, "I thought it would be simpler when my color taste changed to mostly black. But now I worry about wearing faded black with new black. " How anal. Whoops! How insensitive! 'The Review's Washington bureau reports that Al Gore was unable to attend an important conference on the Hill due to the record- breaking blizzard which recently swept the East coast. His presentation on global warming has been rescheduled for July.
o ROVING PHOTOGRAPHER
by AndyWu
What is your excuse for not voting in this week's MSA elections?
1)1.1' V~J
''l!,;''
d ~~·:
Spades TournamentH
1" s,,"~..,.• ,.! " ,=1T\~fC~C'J.fct"' i " C, 1) .
*~
1M
I
~!! ~ __ .... ~''' .......... •
, I
em"Y~ ta. j ]JY}
•
.,' ' -
,~ t,M ~,.... ,\
~ ""
ASSISTANT EDITOR: Ryan Boeskool MUSIC EDITOR: Drew Peters LITERARY EDITOR: Adam Garagiola GRAPHICS EDITOR: WiH Ryan EDITORIAL STAFF: Matt Anderson, Eddie Amer, Eric Barmack, Mchele Brogley, Jason carmi,Andrea Cousino, Kim Conley, Steve Dudek, Joe Epstein, Frank Grabowski, Corey Hi", Aaron Kanter, Gene Krass, Eric larson, Erin M:ElipI, Crusty Muncher, Tom Paska, Jay Rarros, Jarres Roberts, Charles Rousseaux. TS Tayla', Perry~, Martin Vloet, Gloria Vu!cano, Jeff Weinmann, Mchelle Wtelek, Martin Wdk, Matt WiIk, Tony Woodlief, An<tj Wu MTS COORDINATOR: James Elek SYSTEMS ANALYST: '-'tch Rohde ADVERTISING DIRECTOR: Jonathan Lajiness CIRCULATION DIRECTOR: Aaron Steelman FUNDRAISING DIRECTOR: Erica De Santis BUSINESS STAFF: Jacob Bourne, Arnold Chang, Peter Daugavietis, Tori Dirorrualdo, ArT?f East, Chris Fruendt, John Gustalson, Jerry Kowal, BarTY Stern, Chet brim EDITOR-AT-lARGE: Adam DeVore PUBLISHER EMERITA: Karen S. Brinkman . EXECUTIVE EDITORS EMERITI: Joe Coletti, Jell Muir EDITORS EMERITI: Brian Jendryka, John J. tJiIIer The Mehigan Review is an independert, weekly studentrun journal at the UrWersi!y Mchigan. We neither soIic~ nor accept rronetary donations Irom tile University 01 t.'ichigan. Con\ribIJIons 10 the Afchigan Review are taxdedUdibie under Line 501(c)(3) 01 the Internal Revenue Code. The Reviewis na affiliated wilh al'fJ political party.
a
Unsigned edHorials represent the opinion 01 the editorial Ixlard Signed articles and cartoons represert the opinions 01 the author and not necessarily those 01 the Review. The opinions presented in this publication are not necessarily those the a<Nertisers or the UrWersiIy t.tchWJan. We welcorm letters and articles and encourage cOITfllents atoo the journal and issues discussed In (.
,..
_~~,,111!1 .
~~c~<ItM:. ~ lfl!.klt t"'JiII ('
~-, --- '--'--
~~
4 pm '" II>< • .,."
....... "' . _,
~~".tr~).,
t"
EDITOR-IN-CHIEF: Tony Ghecea PUBLISHER: Andrew Bockelman EXECUTIVE EDITORS: Jay D. McNeiR,Tracy Robinson, Stacey Wall<er CONTRIBUTING EDITORS: Erik Berg, Nate Jamison. Beth Martin, Brian Schefke
1
a
i
II Ii i 11'
11;
'. Aposter recen1Iy obeeMd on the door ;.)1
A'8UbuhI, west Quadrangle's "mlitlculturar Ioonge.
PAID ADVERTISEMENT
E::~8tc:-e
Brenton
r Shornikov, LSA Exchange Student: "fm leaving the country in two months and I don't want to be subject to a KGB investigation. I do not want any difficulties with martial law.
""\J\ ',',) \j,\'
Shannon Jaczynski, LSA Freshman: «Basically, fm not registered. And even if I were, I wouldn't know enough to vote correctly. "
a
a
Please address aU subscripOOn inquiries to: Circulation Director cJo the Mehigan Review. AI advertising inquiries should be di'eded to: Advertising Director cJo the Mchigan Review. EDITORIAL AND BUSINESS OFFICES: SUITE ONE 911 N. UNIVERSITY AVENUE ANN ARBOR, MI 48109-1265
TEL (313)662-1909
House '& d ~ Toger
FAX (313) 936-2505 Copyright C 1993, by The MIchigan Review, Inc. All rights reseMd.
Michelle .
lISA Presideot and Vice Pres. "The central conservative truth is that it is culture, not politics, that determines the success of a society. The central liberal truth is that politics can change a culture and save it from itself."
A vote for a pop-up party is a vote for the radicals.
Sarah Crane, LSA Freshman:
"1 have no idea when they are." MSA ElectIons
Vote cc
rods, or rbunda.
Christian Isquierdo, LSA Freshman: "My excuse is that um ... fm illiterate. Yeah, so I won't be able to read the ballots. "
m
. . ~,_' ........., ".~ ", . . . . . . . " " • • " ', • • , . " ' ' '• •
'''''~ ".~ .~
-Daniel Patrick Moynihan
••" . _ _ , •• ~''''''·,..,.'w.....
,
.'H ....._ _ _ _ __
lIIiI, ~~ ...,~~""Iffl'
March 17,1993
THE MICHIGAN REVIEW
3
o EsSAY "
A Challenge 10 the Open-Minded BY ERNESTO V. GARCIA
prescribe a proper and effective cure.
penness used to be the virtue that permitted us to seek the good by using reason. It now means accepting everything and denying reason's power ... To deny the possibility of learning good and bad is to suppress true openness." Taken from the introduction to Allan Bloom's well-known social and political commentary, The Closing of the American Mind, this quote bespeaks our society's cloudy understanding of its "greatest virtue" - the virtue of tolerance. The necessity of this virtue is unquestioned; our culture's lack of it is even more evident. But in a society where meanings have become obscured and distorted, we would do well to take a step back and to ask ourselves honestly: What exactly do we mean when we speak of "true tolerance"? We have all come to fully recognize acts of intolerance. 'The czarist pogroms, the Nazi Holocaust, the Inquisition, the atrocities of Stalin, and the crusades of medieval Christianity - all are testimonies to blind prejudice and hatred, both secular and religious. To consider a present-day parallel, we need go no further than the persecution experienced oy homosexuals, where the source of intolerance, tragically, has stemmed too often from many in the so-called "professing Christian community". In the hands of certain individuals, the gospel oflove has become the gospel of the double-standard. Hypocrisyand intolerance of this sort cannot be ignored or whitewashed; it is a sin for which people must repent. But in our effort to rid ourselves of these deep-rooted, narrow-minded attitudes and behaviors, our original question again confronts us: What constitutes true openness? What is tolerant and what is intolerant? And, more specifically, how should we then act? Ai3 John Locke pointedly wrote in his famous essay, A Letter Coneerning Toleration, "This narrowness of spirit on all sides has undoubtedly been the principal occasion of our miseries and confusions. But whatever have been the occasions, it is now high time to seek for a thoroUlJh cure." Before we can proceed with this project, we ~t must diagnose the true condition of the moral malaise of intolerance. Only after accomplishing this task can we hope to
The Diagnosis
"0
Ernesto Garcia is a junior in honors philosophy and English and a member of Christians in Action and the executive committee for InterVarsity Chris-
tian Felk>w8hip.
We live in a society which, in general, is undergoing unprecedented exposure to many different belief systems and values of right and wrong. For example, at the first World's Parliament of Religions, held in Chicago in 1893, as East historically met West, religious leaders such as the Hindu Swami Vivekananda presented thoughtful, articulate responses to Christian exclusivism and urged the embracing of religious pluralism. Such pluralism, however, has not been limited to religious matters. In the areas of social, political, ethical, and moraljudgments, recognized differences of opinion among cultures now abound. In the face of this diversity, we have, as it were, rightly thrown off the shackles of prejudice and superstition that had rendered us ineffectual in dealing with differing opinions. Our virtue is found in our open-armed acceptance of alternative ways of thinking, in our lack of harsh value judgments. In both thought and practice, this pervasive relativism has exerted much influence on society. A Critical Assessment
Descriptive relativism simply recognizes the great diversity among peoples and cultures. In ethics, for example, descriptive relativism attempts to describe accurately the different ethical values, principles, and practices of different peoples or cultures ... Unfortunately, however, many people - including many cultural anthropologists and sociologists - go well beyond mere descriptive relativism to embrace a form of normative relativism. Observations describing the relative differences of beliefs have now become prescriptive, or normative standards of how we ought to assess beliefs. That is, in an attempt to be open-minded, we have become convinced of the necessary relativity of all truth. But these fundamental assumptions of relativism are simply wrong. Since Plato, it has been repeatedly demonstrated that it is difficult, if not impossible, to give an adequate account of relativism without engaging in self- _ refutation. Relativism suffers fr.oIfr'alack oflogical coherence. Put simply, to
suring them both by a standard, saying that one of them conforms to that standard more nearly than the other ... You are, in fact, comparing them both with some Real Morality, admitting that there is really such a thing as Right, independent of what people think. In the application oflogical as well as practical considerations, it is clear that beliefs - whether concerning abortion, or pornography, or racism - cannot all be equally right. Epistemic vs. Ethical Concerns
We thus arrive at our second, and even greater, intellectual stumbling block. Our acceptance of relativism has made us forget that our rational evaluation of the truth or falsity of a person's belief and our relating to that person are two independent issues. The long, tragic history of intolerance has taught us to fear absolutism. We are painfully aware of past cruel and deplorable treatment of people of differing faiths, lifestyles, or convictions. Consequently, we embrace relativism's open acceptance of different belief systems; we have come to view claims of absolute right and wrong as simply unacceptable. To do otherwise, we believe, would be intolerant. But this reasoning betrays a deep confusion of the difference between epistemological and ethical concerns. That is, it confuses epistemological concems - "What is 'truth' in this particular issue?" - with ethical concerns "How shou(dI actin light of this 'truth?" Despite relativistic claims to the contrary, the rational manner in which I view the truth or falsity of a certain belief and the ethical manner in which I treat one who holds that belief are two independent matters. To understand this distinction is to make profound progress towards true tolerance. What does this mean in practical terms? A ciuTent;pressing controversy - the sensitive issu~ of homosexuality - can shed needed light on the matter. Can,.for ex¢ple~ a C~stian,4l good conscience, cieclare homosexuality a'sin and biblically immoral? One letter in the Michigan Daily ["Don't Judge Homosexuals," Scott Kler, December 9, 1992] went so far as to label a woman who tried to do this as just another example of "an anigant and p~tentious keeper of the. CMstian faith.'" Emotive l~age a~ia~,' Kler errs in cpnfusing tM riztioiU;rl) ~pis~~ evalu';.1( \ ,Sse CHALLENGE, iPage 8 .; , ( i ..
[M]oral disagreement with par· Iar acts proVl·d es a b hcu soIute IY no license for· intolerance.
How can we formulate a proper response to this diversity? We must first recognize that the notion of relativism is no modern inventi on. In as early a text as The Theaetetus, the Platonic Socrates, an absolutist, is presented as confronting the doctrines ofProtagoras, who is wellknown for his relativistic axiom, "Man is the measure of all things." That there are differences of opinion is an established fact. What is really at issue are two fundamental principles, namely the difference between: 1) descriptive and normative relativism; and 2) epistemic and ethical considerations of tolerance. Clearing away the morass ofpejorative language and confused logic, we must evaluate the fatal weaknesses of cultural and moral relativism. 'This is a challenge to open-minded individuals to critically assess the presuppositions of their own thinking. Descriptive vs. Normative Relativism
First, we err in our notion of"relativism." From the truism of the existence of differing values, we mistakenly infer the "truth" that these differences all represent varying. but equally valid, beliefs. Ai3 philosopher Harold A. N etland notes in Dissonant Voices:
declare with conviction the belief, "There are no absolutes," is, in fact, to utter a profoundly absolutist statement - namely, that there are no absolutes. Perhaps even more fatal to relativism is the fact that, as writer Peter C. Moore has noted, "no one is really a relativist, practically speaking." If one is made to deal with the real issues, even the most thoroughgoing relativist will be hard pressed to admit that his or her beliefs are "as equally valid" as a different person's beliefs on the matters of, say, racism. Or gay rights. Or abortion. Or slavery. Or violent pornography. We believe, and rightly so, that some opinions are indeed objectively true, and some objectively false. Ai3 Cambridge professor C.S. Lewis incisively reveals:
In fact ... we all do believe that some moralities are better than others. We do believe that some of the people who tried to change the moral ideas of their own age were what we wouid call Reformers or Pioneers people who understood morality better than their neighbours did. Very well then. 'The moment you say that one set of moral ideas can be better than another, you are, in fact, mea-
«d·O«",,,~;_,«T~·<""""'~"~=.""'M'~~,","'·'"""'«<"''''''>''Y~.'''''~'''~'""'»'"~~''_'''_ _ _ ~~~I~''
~, ...-"-<,,,..:
March 17, 1993
THE MIClITGAN REVIEW
4
o FROM SUITE QNE
rr MAY NorLOO~
.'
, .
:
'
. j
,
' ~,.'
UK£ n; {3fJr'1 CO
.
.
Baker Bashing Absurd ERHAPS IT WOULD BE RASH to deem the Michigan Daily editorial page neuroti~ obsessed with ~ the J'eputation of~t ~o?le U~M ~t Deane ~ (R-Ann Arbor). Yet m a queerly Freudian spmt, the Daily has persisted not m~rely in diagnosing Baker as a "homophobe" for certain comments which he has made, but also in systematically ignoring the substance of what Baker has had to say. Back. in November, when it fell to the U-M Board of Regents to vote on the Statement of Student Rights and Responsibilities, Baker proposed numerous amendments to it, including provisions to: o eliminate ambiguities (which apparently give the U-M some censorial authority over student publications) to provide for what Baker called "true freedom of the press," specifically protecting the Daily and the Review; o provide for "u.n.lim.ited" freedom of expreasion; and stipulate that "'!he request of any student for a change of roommate will not be a cause of action under the code." Instead of praising these recommendations, the Daily plumbed an affront to homosexuals out ofBakeis iJ\lggestion that the Statement also prohibit '»edophilia, Sado-Masochism, Incest and Gross Indecency" in addition to sexual assault and rape. Opined that paper, "'This might appear to be a clever attempt to bog down a , harmful code with an embarrassing amendment. Unfortunately, this politicking was a thinly-veiled shot at gays .. . Baker's amendment represents an established . gay-bashing tactic - linking homosexuality with bestiality and other acts." AB Baker's proposed revisions nowhere mention homosexuality, it appears that the Daily, not Baker, discerned connections between "pedophilia ... [etc .]" and gays. The Daily'S attempt to chronicle Baker's alleged "long history of unabashed homophobia" is also telling. Rather than noting how Baker has sought to keep the U-M, an extension of the state, from judging the acceptability of homosexuality, the Daily would have readers believe that Baker seeks to discriminate actively against gays. But it was in the former spirit that Baker sought equal funding for a neutra.lsexuality counseling center to balance the funding of the Lesbian-Gay Male Programs Office; the Daily, however, construed his call for parallel funding as symptomatic of some anti-gay neurosis. AB Baker asked, "Shouldn't we provide more than one point of view? There should be the opportunity to get counseling from not only LGMPO but also from a different point of view." If the U-M must fund a counseling center,with, arguably, a particular bias, then the U-M should fund a complementary center - not because either is a ne~ssary or even desirable function of any extension of the state, but because a state institution should not takes sides in such matters. The censoring of an opinion is that view's censure; yet in the realm of ideas, censorious judgment is not any state institution's proper role. Neither should the state proactively condone controversial ideas with which it happens to agree. The marketplace ofideas thrives upon an economy with which the state ought not tamper. More recently, in a March 3 editorial entitled "Homophobic Regent: Ignorant Comment Lends Dignity to Bigotry," the Daily bashed Baker for criticizing one facet of the U-M's Diversityquest. At the Board of Regents' February meeting, Baker introduced for discussion a letter fr9m seven U-M employees who criticized the U-M for lending "credence and support to gayllesbian lifestyles" through various programs; including the display in South and East Quadrangle of lifesized photographs of nude homosexual couples. According to Baker, one of the letter's authors told him that if such a graphic representation of heterosexual couples were displayed, it would have to be removed immediately, according to dormitory rules. Baker's point was that if one is impermissible, the other should be as well. Even ardent supporters of the freedoms of speech and expression can agree that if such expression is to be regulated at all, then the regulations ought to be applied evenly, without giving preference to any group or faction .
"
flAV~ 7H/S UN[){;/<. Ct:#!RD/..-,
P o
ATHER THAN PRAISE BAKER for considering the concerns of several University personnel and encouraging the initiation of a long-<>verdue critical evaluation of Duderesque psuedo-diversity, the Daily decried him for "bringing ... to the spotlight ... a minor complaint." Rather than acknowledge that the U-M's Diversityquest might be just a tad wrongheaded or one--eided in a few of its details, the Daily has decided that' U-M-style diversity does p.ot include diversity of opinion. Indeed, the DO.ily encouraged the other regents to "recognize the unimportance of ... [the seven employees'] complaWt." The regents instead ought to recognize the superficiality of the Dailys .commentary on the aforementioned matters and the vacuity of its repeated, ad hominem attacks on Regent Deane Baker. Mt "
R
o FROM OUR READERS Homosexuality Should be Treated as an Illness 10 the Editor: I am a dedicated reader of the Review and although I hold a slightly more liberal ideology than the Review, I find it rather enlightening. I am a freshman with a degree of intelligence and desire I believe is sufficient to achieve goals I have set for myself. I also happen to be a homosexual. This letter is in regard to David Twede's article "Heinous Hypothalamus Hype" (3 March 1993 MR). I agree with Mr. '!'wede's conclusion that homosexuality is a "mental illness of sorts." I don't believe it is "normal", but I do believe that homosexuals should be treated like every other person, even those with illnesses. That is not the case; we are treated differently and often discriminated against. This is one r.e ason why many of us , including myself, are not openly gay. In addition, I am "closeted" because I believe that homosexuality, at this time, is an incurable illness. Therefore I subdue my homosexuality. I also don't believe that the answer to eliminating homosexual discrimination is through extended civil rights. The idea that racial discrimination is equal to homophobia is absurd. I believe educating our youth is the answer. Teaching our children that homosexuals are like rapists or that homosexuality is another lifestyle is not going to alleviate the problem. We must first provide evidence as a society that homosexuality is an illness
and then rationally deal with it. Until them we can only hope that society has enough dignity to allow every person to .· enjoy their Constitutional rights.
Anonymous LSA Freshman
Insensitive Language in. the Review? Oh, horror! To the Editor: It's difficult to believe that at a University as diverse as Michigan you could be so uncouth as to portray Brian Spiegal as just an Engineering Freshman. I gasped at the gaffe. What about all the womyn in Engineering? And, oh my, the term "fresh?!" These are FIRST YEAR students!! I'm so incensed at this moment that I need to calm down with my liberal friends at the coffee shop. At least they can appreciate the true struggles of existence in this thoughtless, uncaring world. Now, excuse me while I go stroke my goatee and laud the gospel according to Catharine MacKhmon.
Chris R. Willis LSAJunior
LETIERS TO THE EDITOR Suite One 911 North University Aveneue Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1265 or via MTS to "The Michigan Review" Letters should be typewritten, under 500 words and include the MJ1hor's phone nUmber.
""~--""~,-""-....,,
;""""'~"1<oi~""""::C\iA
q $
March 17,1993
THE MIClllGAN REVIEW
5
o SATIRE
Majorism Must Be Defeated' :
BY
CHARLES
RoUSSEAUX
A
TTEMP'fS BY THE UNIVERsity of Michigan to become a multicultural center of learning have failed . Of course we have all heard the promises of the Michigan Mandate, claiming that hiring more minority employees and bringing in more minority students will make this institution oflearning a more diverse, and therefore, better institution. While the U-M has increased its commitment to bringing more students into the uM because of their color, the University has neglected one vital area of encouraging diversity. The U-M has become a monolith of mono-academic, mono-major students, a hotbed of majorism (discrimination against those of a different major). Not only are students from one major not encouraged to take classes in other academic fields; in some cases they are excluded altogether. This has led to a lack ofmultimajorism in the classroom environment. There are few engineering students in history of art classes, and even fewer Spanish majors in anatomy classes. Even when such students of one major dare to take classes in an unrelated field, they are targets ofmajorism from their peers, professors, and TAs. I was victimized by majorphobic students when , as a history major, I took an organic chemistry class . When my choice of major was mentioned, I became an easy target for majorism - I was told that I was dumb to take the chemistry class and that I would not succeed simply because of my choice of majors. In some cases, students of a different major are even forbidden to enroll in the classes they wish due to blatant, institutionalized , self-perpetuating majorism - prerequisites. Many U-M students are forbidden to take the classes they wish just because their academic background has deprived them of the chance to learn from other fields. It seems inconceivable that openminded administrators should be capable of such blatant majorism, but it has happened. I was fortunate enough to overcome my encounter with majorism, but not all students are as fortunate. The solution is easy and obvious. Once students have selected their major, they should automatically receive bonus points when they enroll in classes
.
*
4l'
~
'
.
.
/;.....
.
"
Campbell starts with a negative ten m~e the U-M a more multixhajJred percent in the class. While not concluipstitution and tear down tho~€! walls sively known, it is doubtful (something of ~orismthat exist in so ~.Ji~cres along the odds of My Little PonyTJoland in so many forms. The U-~I,l~eds wiruring the Kentucky Derby) that any-to fulfill its multicultural, mul'tlIDajor one has ever received a grade lowpr Michigan Mandate. . . ., There may be those majoral bigots, r'--~' however, who claim that this will only / AM Ft2.OM fl1:tr5:J.I.CC:L) lead to greater discrimination against BIJ-r I [X)N"l REAU-Y NatJ those who take classes outside their major. Those who would argue along /liE HULTIHfUCI<j)/Yf. CRErlT these lines have not been the victim of Lt K£ crrHERS CO. majorism, and have no concept of th~ ~~ grief it brings and no right to raise ,. objections to my proposal. Michigan . must mandate " multimajorism in the classrooms of the U-M. Even now, there are students I ,, 1 being discriminated against because of ,. their chosen major. This victimization ~:' ~~.~f: of major minorities must be stopped. If ..' ~. .':. ·: ~.l~ these reasonable suggestions are adopted by the administration, classes will finally be filled with that sprinkling of academic diversity which the U-M requires if it hopes to become a multi-ruitural, multimajored institution in the twentieth century. m than a B- in his Communication lOS as well as for all other students with a class. Finally, all white males who declared major. For fields that are sider themselves Republicans should closely related to one's own major, one have a twenty-point bonus for taking should receive only five percent (for Diversity Requirement classes. example English majors taking a hisThis solution would be effective for tory class, or biology majors taking several reasons. First, it would take chemistry). away the fear that majoral-minorities Like any good affirmative action feel in such situations. An atmospheric policy, this proposed policy should have science major would feel superior in his some inGOnsistencies No student should "Foods of the WorId" class because he receive bonus academic points for takknows he can ace the class, in spite of ing sociology classes. (The last recorded his underprivileged background. In the incident of anyone failing a sociology same way, such a policy would encourclass was in 1943, when a drafted stuage those (like myself) who have been dent forgot to drop the class before he victims ofmajorism to continue to take was shipped to Guadalcanal.) classes outside of their major, in spite Anyone taking a communication class of potential discrimination. It would taught by Dr. Richard "P.C . is a myth"
in fields other than their major. For instance, art history students should receive ten percent credit for enrolling in any calculus class. 'The same goes for history majors in chemistry classes and astronomy students in Spanish classes,
I
mE:
""~I]~
I, "
{
(\
~
~\J
Charles Rousseaux is a senior in history and a staff writer for the Review.
~V~i&&i
f
"'''~~~~;:;-;'' ~'4 ;~':t __~_·;;;;;;~,; ~{;;;;g~~~~IJ~ .• :~~!(&~. .v.t9t~~~~f~ .
con-
Join the Michigan Review's MIS Computer Conference To sign on to MREV:Forum type
U$source MREV:Forum" at the # prompt.
Speak your mind about current events, criticize the latest issue of the Michigan Review, suggest a Serpent's Tooth, or just see what others have to say,
l'iI
el~
~:~4.. ~ " '"
THE MICHIGAN REVIEW
6
March 17, 1993
o FEATURE EsSAY
In Defense of the 19808 BY AARON STEELMAN
T
HE AMERICAN PUBLIC has been bombarded for several years with misinformation about the 80 called "Decade of Greed" the 1980s. We have been told by the mainstream media, Democratic politicians, and various left-wing ideologues that the 80s were a period of great excess and indulgence and in which wMlthy Americans benefitted . Reaganomics purportedly resulted in an exploding debt due to tax cuts for the rich, a decline in well-paying jobs , a shrinking middle class, and a neglect of the problems of the cities . This type of reasoning is nothing more than revisionist history. The 80s were a great period for the United States, a period in which all Americans benefitted. Those who were willing to work and invest in themselves saw dramatic improvement in their lives. For the first time in years the federal government did not punish achievement
through excessive taxation or massive overregulation. The American entrepreneurial spirit that made this COWltry great was Wlbridled once again; the result was tremendous ecortomic growth. To Wlderstand why the phenomenon of 80s-bashing has occurred, one need
opposed the proposals of Reagan whenever opposition was politically viable, and thus they could not take any credit from the successes of these policies. A less-intrusive government, which the Democrats said for so long would not work, had indeed worked. This put the Democratic Party in a precarious !
Republicans' hold on the middle class.
In other words, the American public needed to be lied to. They could not be allowed to believe that they were the ones who made the real difference in their lives; rather, the federal government was the source of prosperity. Since JOB CREATION IN THE EIGHTIES Reagan and the 80s proved otherwise, Jobs created January 1982 - December 1989 the Democrats had absolutely no other choice but to denigrate the Reagan Job Number Percent 1989 Median years. (Mils.) Category Increase Earnings What is now being heralded as the worst aspect of Reaganomics is the treManagerial 7.600 33.1% $32,873 mendous federal debt that supposedly Technical 6.630 20,905 21.8 resulted from the tax cuts of the 80s Production 19.0 2.194 25,831 tax cuts that liberals declare only the Services 2.210 14,858 16.8 rich received. This claim is patently Operators 1.374 8.2 19,886 false . It is true that the top marginal Farming -0.116 13,539 ·3.7 rate was reduced from 70 percent when Reagan first took office in 1980 to 28 Total 20_3% 19.892 $23,333 percent when he left in 1989. What is not mentioned, however, is that every (Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics and Census Bureau) one of the graduated tax levels was reduced. only look to politics. In order for the position, because in order to secure the Moreover, the rich paid a greater Aaron Steelman is an LSA freshman Democrats to regain the White House allegiance of the middle class, they had.··" percentage of all tax receipts as well as and circulation director of the Review. they had to discredit the 80s. They had to make the public believe that Reagan a greater gross total of taxes in 1989 than they did in 1981, due to phenomhad it in for the average man. Doing enal economic activity. This fact is conthis, however, proved very difficult. stantly ignored by the Democrats, who Middle America was prospering and argue that it was unfair that the rich was largely unresponsive to this conwere paying a lower tate. This is comstant impugning of supply side ecopletely absurd, as the goal of taxation is nomics, but this would soon change. to raise revenue, not to implement some From day one , George Bush abantype of social engineering project. If doned many of Reagan's economic poliBill Clinton and his pals in Congress cies. Trouble soon followed - namely want to soak the rich, the best way to do the recent recession. The Democrats pounced on this opportunity to fire up it would be to keep tax rates down. their anti-Reagan message again, and At the beginning of the Reagan Revothis time it met a more receptive audilution, the top 10 percent of Americans BOOKS SCHOOL·OFFICE ART were paying 48 percent of the income ence. 'The persistent class warfare rheto20% OFF all 20% OFF all SUPPLIES ric had finally paid off; "The last twelve taxes; by 1989 this number had inComputer, Travel 30% OFF all Cross Windsor Newton years" were now the "Reagan-Bush creased to 56 percent. At the same &Dover Books Paints & Brushes Writing Instruments era," an era we had to avoid repeating time, the burden on the bottom half fell and All Maps 30% OFF all from 7.5 to 5.6 percent. The top one 20% OFF all at all costs. 15% OFF all Day Runner Bee Paper Products percent of tax filers in 1990 paid about The fact that the Bush administraDictionaries Planners & Refills tion resembled the Reagan administra26 percent of all income taxes and the 25% OFF all : : M·IIEMORABILIA ELECTRONICS top two percent paid about 34 percent. tion in party label alone was unimporArtist Pencils, 20%' OFF 20% OFF all tant. The meteoric Reagan years were Clearly the rich paid "their fair share," Pastels" Paints Sets TI & Sharp Champion and ifnotmore, during the 80s. These people to be effectively lumped with the disFRAMES Desktop Calculators Jansport Clothing mal Bush years. As Stanley Greenberg, did not benefit unfairly or cheat their 25% OFF all 20% OFF allinlant, 25% OFF all Computer political ronsultant to then~didate way out of paying taxes, leaving the Fetco GIHand Disks and Holders Toddler &Youth Bill Clinton, said: burden to the middle class. Instead, Photo Frames UI,.hl " .n Wear Selected Software they utilized the greater economic freeTo challenge the conservative dom that Reagan had given them to hegemony, Democrats need[ed] to create opportunities for themselves and define the Reagan-Bush years, to jobs for other Americans. create an imagery of Reagan-Bush If tax receipts actually increased Main Bookstore: 549 East University that supersede[d] the Carter years during the 80s then what caused the Art/Engine~ring Store and and impeache[d] the credibility of debt, and is the national debt really as Electronics Showroom: 1117 South University conservative governance for middle large as many would like us to believe? Phone : 313-662-320:1 America. The battle to define the The defense budget is often cited as Monday~Friday 9:00-6:00 Reagan-Bush years [was] a critical the main contributor to deficits. This Saturday 9:30-5:00 political arena where Democrats sOWlds good, and it fits the agenda of Sun~~y Noon to 4:QO . . 1 lw [d] the opportunity to disrupt the the Democrats, yet it simply is not true.
}I
,-" ,."
... " " .,.,,,---,,,,
,.,.,, -'''.~
..
.... ............. ....'c .
...._....;;.~;:.;;,....... - __ _ .. ._ ...•~_.,...!!!! .... ..,.. . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - " " '........- - - - - - - -
March 17, 1993
THE MICHIGAN REVIEW
7
" ~1'·!>
At no time during the 80s did the defense budget exceed 11 percent of the total federal budget. Whether or not one believes this was too great a percentage to reestablish stability and bring communism to its knees, that defense expenditures caused the deficits or added to them in any significant way is an untenable position. What caused the deficits of the 80s and continues to do so now is entitlement spending, which constitutes about two thirds of the total federal budget. Why were these programs not attacked? Very simply, it is politically expensive to do so, particularly for liberals who thrive on government dependence to expand their own power. If one wishes to criticize Reagan for anything he did it should be for not doing more to cut entitlement spending. The national debt does pose some long-term problems for the economy. The debt that was accumulated during the 80s, however, was not as great as many believe. If one looks at 1985, during the middle of the Reagan years, the government debt as a percentage of GDP (gross domestic product) was at about 27 percent, equaling Japan's 27 percent and only slightly larger than Germany's 22 percent. In contrast to Great Britain and Canada, which exhibited debts of 46 percent and 33 percent respectively, the numbers for the United States look much better. The threat posed by the debt is directly related to a country's ability to generate the resources to pay it off. The U.S., whose economy expanded greatly during this period, was more capable of doing so than most other countries. It is very apparent that when it comes to decreasing the budget, deficit spending cuts are far more effective than tax increases. We have seen budget proposals in 1982 and 1986 that raised taxes yet did not cut spending as promised. These proposals instead only led to greater deficits. In 1989 the deficit was at $180 billion - half of what it was for 1992. The'now-infamous taxraising 1990 budget deal was supposed to eliminate this $180 billion deficit. The deficit soared during the following years, however, because spending was allowed to run rampant. Bill Clinton's plan is a rerun of the 1990 proposal and will likely produce similar results: low growth coupled with higher deficits. Throughout the campaign we heard Bill Clinton remark that Americans are now working harder for less and that the average person's chances of finding a goodjob are dismal. He claimed this was a direct result of the policies of the 80s. To correct this, according to Clinton, we must have the courage to change and abandon supply side economics as a failed economic theory.
Clinton's rhetoric continued until election day without evoking a strong or spirited defense from the Republican campaign. The reason for this is questionable. Perhaps George Bush did not want to defend the 80s because he was ideologically opposed to what had happened during that period - he did, after all, once call Reagan's fiscal policies "voodoo economics.» Maybe he was too embarrassed to admit that abandoning supply-side was a mistake. One cannot be certain as to his reasons, but it is undeniable that if Bush wanted to stand up for the 80s he certainly could have, honestly and sincerely. Believe it or not, the 80s constituted the longest post-World War II growth period in the history of the United States. At the core of this growth was tremendous job creation, particularly from small businesses aided by government policies (or in many cases lack thereof) to expand. It has been argued that the number of jobs created in the 80s was so high because most of them were serviceoriented - Burger King, et ai. 'Ihis is a myth. The three areas where job growth increased most dramatically were in managerial, production, and technical positions. All told, by the end of the decade America saw 19 million jobs that did not exist when Reagan took office. Of these 19 million, only 2.2 million were service positions - slightly more than ten percent. The average salary for all newly created jobs was $23,333. Clearly, those who found employment were not relegated to flipping burgers or pumping gas; rather, in most cases they took a job with potential for advancement. Real income growth during the 80s paralleled the strong growth in job creation. Every portion of society's real income increased in the previous decade, not just that of the rich. If one divides the American public into income quantiles, one sees that the lowest quantile's income increased 10.7 percent; the next fifth's grew by 9.7 percent; the middle fifth's shot up 10.3 percent; the second-highest quantile's increased 11.8 percent; and the top fifth's rose by 18 percent. The top fifth did experience the greatest increase, but this is inevitable due to the nature of the modern economic system. AB exposure to higher education increases, the resulting increase in income with relation to social class is going to be disproportionate. This is a pattern which emerged in the '70s. Put simply, in order for everyone to do well economically, the hated rich are going to have to benefit as well, a fuct that Bill Clinton apparently either does not see or just does not want to admit. Reagan neglected the cities, Reagan
didn't care about the poor, Reagan dramatically cut spending on social programs. These are the types of claims that the American public has been fed. Given the results of the last election and public opinion polls, they believe them to be true. Once again, however, the facts expose these claims as total falsehoods. Reagan cared very greatly about advancing all Americans' situations, he did not believe that the way to do it was through "big-brotherism" on the part of the federal government. He did believe that government can play an active role in helping people, but that it should not be the dominant role. The 80s were not the decade of neglect. Spending on federal social programs increased throughout the decade. In total, social spending went up nearly $20 billion in real dollars, or about 18 percent. Of the major social spending categories, not one saw a decrease in funding. The mayors and members of Congress have distorted the facts in their quest to spend more money. If money could solve the cities' problems, Detroit and the other major cities would be trouble-free, but they are not. Instead they are black holes into which taxes disappear, never to be seen again. Perhaps the answer .in-
~--.,---
volves less funding and more personal responsibility, but this is a suggestion which liberals ignore. After years oflies and deception, the Democrats have effectively rewritten the 80s. They are now, in the eyes of most Americans, a period of greed and hate. Many believe that the most important task of the Republican party is either to sever or silence the fundamentalist religious wing of the party, but it is not. In order for the party, and the country, to regain prominence, it must return to the conservative economic principles that brought prosperity in the 80s. To do this, it must change the public's perception of the last decade. Bill Clinton, with his tax-and-spend plan, will inevitably fail, but his failure will not be enough. Republicans must themselves present a credible plan for economic growth, a plan similar to the one which was created and molded in the late 70s and brought to fruition in the 80s.m.
WRiTE US!
Letters to the Editor Suite One 911 North University Avenue Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1265
J
The Undergraduate Political Science Association presents
The Role of Abortion as a Political Issue A Discussion of How Abortion has Affected America's Legal and Political Sytems Keynote Speaker Cynthia Gorney, Journalist The Washington Post .! ,.
Tuesday, March 23 7:30 p.m.
')
Askwith Auditorium 140 Lorch Hall SPONSORED BY LS&A STUDENT GOVERNMENT
~-
.«••••
. ::. : "'.
~.•~.:~"••••,.-•••::.~~=-:======.::
::-::-:-:.::--~::,,:"';
-~-"'-""''''Y"'''''--'----~~~"''~-
March 17, 1993
THE MICHIGAN REVIEW
8
o MUSIC "
L ulabox Avoids the Bandwagon BY
DREW PETERB
W
EEN 'S THIRD ALBUM,
Pure Guava, is possibly the screwiest album to have ever
graced the hands of Elektra, let alone any other label. The masters ofit all, Gene and Dean Ween, have compiled a potpourri of perverse tunes that will make anyone
Pure Guava Ween Elektra
, ii
I
I1
laugh. But:unlike the famed "Weird AI" Yankovic, not only are the lyrics hysterical, but the music is as well. Each song contains a special synthetic drumbeat a la Casio, while the . vocals are either sung after inhaling helium, or slowed down. In "Push th' Little Daisies," a Jackson Five on speed, one Ween plucks out a little lo~ct guitar rhythm, while the other Screams about four octaves
Drew Peters loves Spam.
higher than should be physically possible. In "Big Jilm," a song about boll weevils, the red.-neck vocals are made complete by little chirping, "weevil-like" voices in the background. But aside from all the looney tunes, a few songs stick out as having a real musical quality to them. "TIle Stallion Pt. 3" has a very catchy, pleading melody that, although heliuminduced, is very powerful. One slightly normal song on the album is a sleepy ballad - don't worry, it's the only one - called "Sarah." Overall, any song from Pure Guava has it's own personal twist, whether it be the music, melody or lyrics. And it's guaranteed to get a laugh.
Lu/abox Lulabox MeA Records
W
ITH THUNDERING, SYNthetic-sounding drums and distorted guitars, Lulabox
cranks out heavy music that is comparable to Britain's Curve. But the melodies of Lulabox lead singe~ Mary Cassidy are more controlled, more articulate, and more triumphant than other Cocteau-esque bands. "Our sound is honest, our music is honest," explains Mike Cozzi, guitarist for Lulabox, "It's not a bandwagon thing, it's what we like to do." "We never really thought specifically about our sound in the first place," adds bassistJdrummer Stephen Ferrera, "it just evolved through experimenting and playing." ' In addition to "Ride On" and "Ivory Hill," which were on the Full Bleed EP, Lulabox has added a fresh batch of powerful songs to their first full-length, self-titled album. While the first single, "I Believe," shows the pop element of Lulabox, "Prayer for Rain" displays the eerie side of Mary's dynamic vocals. "That's what we wanted to do with our music," relates Mary, "We try to make it beautiful and ugly at the same time. " On some tracks, the slight synthetiC-element to the music - especiallv the
drums - may sound offensive to some. But Stephen pulls through on the programming. "Steve programs the drums just like he would play them," Mike explains , Adds Steve, "I did play live on about half of the songs, though." As for touring, Mary says, "We're going home , back to London, to start rehearsing. We'll do a tour at the end of April. We waiting, because we want to do it right." "When we tour," adds Steve, "we are going to bring out another guitarist, and a bassist or drummer depending on which instrument I decide to play." 89Xers beware! Mary is currently listening to the likes of Suede and Disposable Heroes ofHiphoprisy. Why not alternagods Pearl Jam? "'Ihe guy's (Eddie Vedder's) voice gets on my nerves. They are a great band, but I can only tolerate about four songs, then I have to turn it off His personality also comes off a bit contrived."
m
Challenge
The Michigan Party -------.,CRAIG GREENBERG , P R ' E SID EN T
BRIAN KIGHT VICE PRESIDENT Winter 1993 Candidates LS&A TANYA CLAY SCOTT FERBER STEPHANIE LOGAN JULIE NEENAN NICOLE NESBERG ~ARKRABINOWITZ
En&ineerin& HENRY LOH LORI PARK Rackham JOHN BLOW
PAuL SCUBLINSKY
KEITH KELLER
.
Nursm&
, f~~ (fH{)MPSON I. ;
' SNR&E " "~ '; i AllAM GLASS Medicine TRACY WASIUNGTON
':BiJB.IE YANG i " " ' ,, " . ,
IE¥J l2 • • .t2 i..L • •E
Continued from page 3
ation of truth-daims with the ethical responsibility of tolerance. Ai?, a rational person, I can assess the
claims of absolute truth as found in the Bible. I can recognize the Bible as Godinspired, unchanging truth. Furthermore, as a Chris1ian I believe that God's intended order, as recorded in Genesis 3:26, was for a commitment to one lifelong, opposit.e--f:Jex maniage partner. In light of this knowledge, it is only logically consistent for me to view homosexualityor, for that matter, adultery or premarital sex, as wrong. To deny this would require me to be a hypocrite, to devalue my deeply- held convictions in the truth of the Bible. As a moral creature I am ethically bound to treat homosexuality or any other sin, as no worse in God's sight than any other act of immorality. But moral disagreement with particular , acts provides absolutely no license for intolerance - whether exhibited in candescendingjudgmenta1 ~ttitudes or the harl>oring of double staDdard.s against the person who commits the act.
True Tolerance
lfodiiyL ", ':. :~,,-' -.".".~.,-,,--
..-,- ...
~ ~-,, ""-'
..-.---------.-----,
trasts the relativistic, modern idea of "tolerance" with the traditional, human reasoning which has guided mankind throughout the centuries:
The opening quote by Allan Bloom is instructive - "to deny the possibility of learning good and bad is to suppress true opennes8. ~ Elsewhere Bloom con'
<>
"n _ . ~,"_."" """"""
,_
-..,.,.:..-;;_ .=~
..
It was always known that there were many and conflicting opinions about the good, and nations embodying each of them. Herodotus was at least aware as we are of the rich diversity of cultures. But he took that observation to be an invitation to investigate all of them to see what was good and bad about each and to find out what he could learn about good and bad from tlu!:m. We should welcome diversity of opinions, but the effort to discover truth via dialogue with others will necessarily involve the rejection of certain ideas. If we refuse to admit this, we will be trapped into the acceptance of every practice and belief as equally justified - from the injustice of the Salem witcl1 trials to the racism of a David Duke. True tolerance is not a catch-all phrase declaring every belief as equally valid or moral. Rather, true tolerance is the sincere willingness to understand and to communicate, if not necessarily to be in moral agreement 'Vith, differing beliefs and truth-clailns in an increasingly pluralistic society. Mt
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
..;;-~ "'