vol_24_no_2

THE MICHIGAN REVIEW THE MICHIGAN REVIEW

Page

The Campus Affairs Journal at the University of Michigan

September 27, 2005

Volume XXIV, Number 2

September 27, 2005

MR

Welcome Back

The Michigan Review enters its 24th year on campus

In this issue: Review vs. Independent...Page 4 BAMN and Terrorism...Page 5

MR on MSA...Page 3 Letter from Editor...Page 2 Columnists...Page 6 Editors’ Roundtable...Page 9

the michigan review

Page 2

Serpent’s Tooth

■ Serpent’s Tooth It is expected that in the coming weeks, By Any Means Necessary (BAMN) will formally be changing their name to BAMNIT, standing for: By Any Means Necessary, Including Terrorism.

Two weeks ago, President Bush visited the heart of New Orleans to help plan the recovery, meet with affected families, and witness the damage first-hand. In other news, the White House lost & found department is reporting a pair of President Bush’s running shoes missing.

Top five things New Orleans residents can do with their FEMA issued $2000 debit card: 5) buy some clean clothing for yourself and your children 4) rent a hotel room for a month 3) buy food for yourself, your children and your pets 2) buy portable water 1) buy an $800 Louis Vuitton hand-

The Michigan Review

bag Sen. Joseph Biden (D-Del) says he promises to vote not to confirm John Roberts as chief justice of the United States. According to his physician, he has been experiencing horrible bouts of loneliness.

Louisiana authorities charged the owners of a New Orleans area nursing home with negligent homicide after 34 patients perished in the facility in the wake of Hurricane Katrina.

In response, Country Kitchen Buffet has recently announced expected losses for the upcoming quarter.

A federal district court judge declared Michigan’s law aimed at banning a procedure that opponents call partial-birth abortion unconstitutional.

To follow precedent, Michigan lawmakers are expected to challenge the constitutionality of laws against homicide later this week.

The FBI has recently started a porn squad. Some titles of particular interest to the Bureau include: Debbie Does Dubya, Dick “Don’t be so hard” Cheney, and Christian Conservatives gone wild in Baghdad. Some of the performers targeted by the FBI include: James “Double D” Dickson Karl “Not so rough” Sowislo Ron Jeremy Linden Students were recently asked for their input on the prospective language requirements change. The students came down resoundingly in favor of the change, noting the usefulness of knowing such diverse phrases as: “Yo quiero una cerveza.”

“Je veux une bière.”

“Ich will ein Bier.”

“Voglio una birra.”

And “Я хочу пиво.”

■ Letter From the Editor:

T

his campus, and the world outside of it, are both far different places than they were when I arrived three short years ago. It is my goal this year to run a publication which reflects those changes.

It takes but one look around the campus to see that our student body, long noted for the (fabled) “tradition of liberalism and activism,” has quieted down. Whether the war sapped everyone of their energies or the election is to blame, what is certain is that the days of engaging liberals in shouting matches on the diag, or of hosting affirmative action bake sales intended to do nothing more but get under the skin of the campus Left, are over.

We see the end of those “bad, old days” as an opportunity. We seek to help convert what was once the campus shouting match into a real, effective campus dialogue. College is the one time in our lives where we can be uncomfortable, yet with minimum discomfort. By that I mean, in our time on campus, all of us will be confronted with opinions we find disagreeable if not reprehensible. But, just as we’re all forced to confront people and viewpoints with which we take issue, we are able to do so in an environment which offers all of the intellectual resources with which we can make our debates worthy, and valuable of our time. This is a time to teach and learn, to speak and to listen, and, hopefully, have a good time and come out with a valuable degree in

October 4, 2005

the process. Use your time wisely.

In short, I encourage us all to take value in the discomfort of dissenting opinions. And I’m taking my own advice – this year, the Michigan Review will collaborate with the Michigan Independent, our liberal counterpart, in a series of face-offs on the pressing issues of this campus and this nation.

Sometimes, we will carry the day; other times they will; but more often than not, both sides will come out with either factual knowledge or a conceptual framework we hardly knew existed beforehand.

We at the Michigan Review hope to truly take our role as the “intellectual capital of conservatism” on campus, and we make it our mission to train the next generation of conservative opinion shapers and journalists, not so much what to think, but how, how to engage and analyze the issues of our time, how to make and support an argument, and how best to achieve a dialogue with the opposition.

The future begins here, folks.

The Campus Affairs Journal of the University of Michigan James David Dickson Editor in Chief Paul Teske Publisher Sekou Benson Managing Editor Nick Cheolas Content Editor Michael O’Brien Content Editor Assistant Editor: Tomiyo Turner Staff: Brian Biglin, Karen Boore, Rebecca Christy, Tom Church, Stephen Crabtree, Blake Emerson, Aaron Kaplan, Jacob Lee, Jeremy Linden, Brian McNally, Alexandra Miller, Amanda Nichols, Danielle Putnam, Yevgeny Shrago, Chris Stieber Editor Emeritus: Michael J. Phillips The Michigan Review is the independent, student-run journal of conservative and libertarian opinion at the University of Michigan. We neither solicit nor accept monetary donations from the University. Contributions to The Michigan Review are tax-deductible under section 501 (c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Service Code. The Michigan Review is not affiliated with any political party or any university political group.

Unsigned editorials represent the opinion of the editorial board. Ergo, they are unequivocally correct and just. Signed articles, letters, and cartoons represent the opinions of the author, and not necessarily those of The Review. The Serpent’s Tooth shall represent the opinion of individual, anonymous contributors to The Review, and should not necessarily be taken as representative of The Review’s editorial stance. The opinions expressed in this publication do not necessarily those of the advertisers, or of the University of Michigan. We welcome letters, articles, and comments about the journal.

Please address all advertising, subscription inquiries, and donations to “Publisher,” c/o The Michigan Review:

Editorial and Business Offices: The Michigan Review 911 N. University Avenue, Suite One Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1265 mrev @ umich.edu www.michiganreview.com Copyright © 2005, The Michigan Review, Inc. All rights reserved. The Michigan Review is a member of the Collegiate Network.

James David Dickson Editor-in-Chief, The Michigan Review 2005-2006

mrev@umich.edu

Page 3

the michigan review Campus Affairs

MSA Gets Ludicrous

October 4, 2005

Will Rapper ‘Ludacris’ and other CHANGE initiatives spur diversity?

By Blake Emerson, ‘09 & Tomiyo Turner, ‘08 s Michigan students return, students may begin to see and experience Michigan Students Assembly’s (MSA) focus on cultural awareness. MSA’s principle aim for the 2005-2006 school year is extending communication and relationships across racial barriers.

To do so, MSA members have created a program called Creating a Healthy and New Generation of Equality (CHANGE) in order to challenge students’ way’s of forming social relationships on campus. Jesse Levine, president of MSA, wants students to take an active role in combating racial discrimination on campus, whether blatant or subtle. MSA projects have and will continue to center around bringing diverse groups of people together through social activities. During welcome week MSA, in conjunction with other student groups, sponsored several dialogues on race and racial stereotypes.

These included opportunities to share personal experiences with diversity. They also had speakers discuss race and the importance of being open minded. These welcome week events provided an opportunity for incoming freshmen to make friends with individuals they may have never otherwise befriended. Still in the works are more community service activities, dialogues with community leaders about personal experiences, and giveaways around campus such as free food and t-shirts to promote the events.

While the goals of the CHANGE program are undoubtedly well-intentioned, there exist many im-

A

portant questions of which students should take note.

The total cost for CHANGE is expected to be somewhere between $3,000 and $5,000. While that number is relatively small compared to MSA’s overall budget, it still begs the question of whether students are willing to pick up the tab for such experimental programs.

Even though MSA’s expenses continue to be challenged by fiscally conservative individuals, MSA is starting to look towards alternate sources of funding besides student fees, including alumni. This year, Levine plans to lay the foundation for future MSA funding and has the goal of raising $25,000 this year. A recent of example of MSA’s fund-raising includes $40,000 for Hurricane Katrina victims. Other proposed fund raising projects from MSA include bringing popular speakers, sales for Airbus (the MSA sponsored shuttle to the airport), and hosting concerts on campus.

Another banner activity which has been of extreme priority is bringing a well known hip-hop artist to campus. It seems now that rapper Ludacris is tentatively slotted for an early November appearance at Hill Auditorium for $117,000, with MSA paying for 40 percent of the amount according to Levine. Levine explains that the reason for the interest in hip-hop specifically is to foster the integration of Ludacris fans – which extend across all racial barriers – to come together to celebrate an “art.”

Ludacris seems to encourage the spirit of diversity as well, however, in the form of geographical di-

versity. “I’ve got ho’s in different area codes” eloquently informs Ludacris in his hit song “Area Codes.” Messages in other songs include being proud of driving drunk, and the notion of preferring subordinate women. This message seems quite ironic, given the University’s longtime pro-female stance. Granted, these types of lyrics are somewhat common in this age of in-your-face hip hop, but one must wonder if picking hip-hop artists with questionable views will advance MSA’s lofty goals.

Even though an undetermined sum of money will be returned back to MSA for the tickets to this concert, is the university community truly getting a favorable return on investment for not just the concert but CHANGE activities as a whole?

Because of the behemoth spending tab that MSA promises this year, expenses may quickly shoot through the roof. In preparation for this increase in expenditures, students were once again warmly welcomed back with a fee increase of $.50. In the interest of financial responsibility, we are forced to wonder if the lofty goals of this year truly advance progressive thinking about race. Does the emphasis on race as an issue advance or hinder the cause of racial equality? While improving race relations is surely a praiseworthy goal, can this be accomplished through meet and greets and Ludacris concerts? We must examine our core beliefs about whether the change in race structure can be best achieved externally or internally. MR

Student Group Shake-up

New Rules Require More; Give Additional Assistance to Student Groups

By Jeremy Linden, ‘06

S

tarting this year, the process of becoming a recognized student group – meaning, a student group with university benefits – will become more complicated relative to years past.

Previously, student groups needed only register with the Michigan Student Assembly (MSA), have a roster of at least ten active members, keep an open account with Student Organization Account Services (SOAS), and consist of at least half University of Michigan students. Now these are merely part of the process.

The office of Student Activities and Leadership (SAL) has implemented new guidelines for student groups, based on the recommendations of the Student Organization and Recognition Advisory committee (SOAR), formed in November of 2004. In an August email sent to student group leaders, SAL director Susan A. Wilson claimed that the new guidelines laid out by SOAR would provide institutional support to the many student groups on campus. “[T]he report’s primary emphasis was to develop strong institutional support for student organizations as critical components of the University,” said Wilson.

The guidelines laid out by SOAR divide student groups in to three distinct

categories: Sponsored Student Organizations, Voluntary Student Organizations, and Non-Affiliated Student Organizations. Each of the different categories has its own requirements and benefits. All student groups are considered Voluntary, until February of 2006, when all paperwork and necessary materials are submitted and student groups are re-classified.

The Sponsored Student Organization designation offers the most university benefits, but is perhaps the most restrictive. Sponsored Student Organizations are directly supervised by a college or university and must have a faculty sponsor. Legally, they are considered part of the University itself, and as such are subject to many more regulations than Voluntary Student Organizations.

However, some of the benefits allocated exclusively to Sponsored Student Organizations include the use of University trademarks, University purchasing cards, and the use of the University tax-exempt status for donations. Some of the restrictions on sponsored groups include not being allowed to engage in political or religious activity, and a lack of autonomy, given their affiliation with a public university.

Imbalance of benefits aside, the Voluntary Student Organization status seems to be the most popular group

designation, according to the student group leaders interviewed. The requirements for this status consist of submitting a constitution to SAL, attending a treasurer and planning workshop, and registering with MSA. Some of the benefits of a Voluntary Student Organization are eligibility for MSA and university funds for programming and expenses, a campus mailing address, access to the University’s annual Festifall recruitment day, the ability to use University meeting rooms free of charge, and the ability to sign up for university office space.

Although it is not required for Voluntary Student Organizations, with the backing of a faculty advisor, student groups can open up the door to still more privileges, such as renting university equipment and vehicles and accessing student address labels. But the last provisions concerning faculty advisors could put some groups at a particular disadvantage. John Kelly, the chair of the College Republicans, had this to say about finding a faculty advisor for his group, “… [Finding an advisor] is like looking for a needle in haystack.”

Mark Hindelang, Special Program Coordinator for SOAR, explained the reasoning behind the change in regulations this year. According to Hindelang, “There was a combined effort between staff, faculty, and students [to review the

policies], and concerns arose because student groups felt like they were being treated unfairly by the University, and the University felt like certain student groups were opening up the University to liability.” When asked to elaborate, Hindelang stated that in the past, student organizations had done things like sign contracts and used logos which made them appear to officially represent the University, putting the University at legal risk if any conflicts arose. Hindelang addressed the concerns about finding faculty advisors by stating that the only reason voluntary student organizations would want to have an advisor is for “strictly advisory” purposes, and, that if Voluntary Student Organizations do not have an advisor, they will not be at a significant disadvantage in accomplishing their goals. Hindelange also stated, “We will absolutely help student organizations find an advisor if they can not find one; we will try and contact a school or a unit to find an advisor, and SOAR will function in that role until we do find one.” He said that a faculty advisor could also be a staff member of the University, not necessarily faculty, which opens a much larger field of potential advisors for student groups representing minority interests. MR

Page 4 The Michigan

the michigan review

Review

Editorials

The Michigan Review is the independent, student-run journal of conservative and libertarian opinion at the University of Michigan. Unsigned editorials represent the opinion of the Editorial Board. Ergo, they are unequivocally correct and just. Signed articles, letters, and cartoons represent the opinions of the author, and not necessarily those of the Review.

You can contact the Editorial Board at: mrev@umich.edu

■ From Suite One:

J

Interpret, But With Restraint

October 4, 2005

from

Interpret the Constitution, Not Call Balls & Strikes

T

he Constitution needs interpretation. It is impossible to govern this nation without it. Some people, such as Chief Justice nominee John Roberts, hold the belief that it is the Supreme Court’s job is to simply call the “balls and strikes” when a case comes across the plate. Following that philosophy is naïve and closes off too many possible rulings which should never be discarded so casually.

The U.S Constitution is filled with vague clauses and broad implications. For example, what does it mean that “Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion?” Can the Ten Commandments be placed on a state courthouse’s front lawn? What does it mean that “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed?” Can a student carry an assault rifle into math class with him?

What is “equal protection?” What is “due process?” Not one of these questions has a clear answer in the text of the Constitution. That is why it is so vital for justices to bring their full interpretational skills to bear on each phrase for each discrete case.

To do so is not “judicial activism” in the sense that has been demonized by the religious far-right. If “activism” is defined as action taken to overturn a democratically made law then, yes, the entire Supreme Court is activist. Having it any other way would render America defenseless against what the Founding Fathers called the “tyranny of the majority.”

Without an “activist” Court, there would still be legally mandated segregation in schools (Brown v. Board of Education). There would not be the broad freedom of the press you are enjoying as you read this article now (New York Times v. Sullivan).

Without an “activist court” our professors would still be taking loyalty oaths pledging that they are not communists (Keyishian v. Board of Regents).

It’s also important to note that “conservative judges” are “activists” as well.

The belief that all “activist” rulings fall on the liberal side of the fence is hardly true.

The Rehnquist Court overturned acts of Congress at a rate which was twice as fast as the liberal Warren Court.

Conservative judges take active roles all the time. In the Terri Schiavo cases, it was Republican judges that ruled Congress had grossly overstepped its bounds.

Many people believe that if you have a problem with a law you shouldn’t go to the courts to change it, you should pass an amendment. However that course of action is very often infeasible if not impossible.

It seems to be regularly the case that those who need protection most are those who are unable to receive it. This is because the people in power have a vested interest in not passing legislation that takes away some of their influence, even if doing so is what is best for the underrepresented minority.

In the United States it takes two-thirds of a vote in Congress and the approval of three-quarters of the individual states for an amendment to be added to the Constitution. This system is unworkable when it comes to eliminating an injustice which needs immediate addressing and concerns less than two-thirds of the Congressional representatives.

An example of the amendment process not being sufficient was the Equal Rights Amendment which states that “equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.” The amendment never passed. If a proposed amendment which makes this much sense cannot make it through the full process of adoption, imagine the difficulty for any other brand of injustice which needs to be addressed. Here is a quick fact: There have been over 11,000 amendments proposed. Only twenty-seven have been adopted.

Fortunately, the Courts have the ability to interpret the Constitution. We place faith in our judges’ ability to discern exactly which direction the spirit of the Constitution is pointing us. It is their job to explore and decide what the nation’s current situation is and how the Constitution fits into today’s world.

So next time the religious far-right starts screaming about “activist judges,” take a moment to be grateful. Be glad that we have judges who have the courage and the intelligence to take on the challenge of interpreting the vague guiding principles of our Constitution, and have the ability to translate them into the laws that we can all clearly follow.

udicial activism is a fear of both conservatives and liberals. Conservatives, loathe to allow the prospect that an unelected, lifetime appointee can fundamentally alter our legal system with a few strokes of the pen, have even resorted to amending several state constitutions so as to disallow renegade interpretations of it. The November 2004 election, in which 11 states, including Michigan, passed Constitutional prohibitions on gay marriage, so that judges could not re-write their way of life, is proof of this. By the same token, liberals, fearful that many of the supposed “gains” of the second half of the century – particularly, Roe v. Wade, which codified a “woman’s right to choose” into law – would be reversed by an activist conservative judge, have sworn to make the confirmation hearing for Chief Justice nominee John Roberts a tough one, and will likely expend the same or greater energy if Bush’s second nominee is even more conservative.

No one, it seems, wants judges writing law from the bench.

At the outset of confirmation hearings for Judge Roberts, Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA) registered a common concern regarding judicial activism, admonishing the nominee that he did not believe the courts should serve as the “taskmaster of the law,” lording over the shoulders of lowly lawmakers and correcting their mistakes from on high. Specter’s concern, similar to that of many conservatives – and in the wake of Rehnquist’s death and O’Connor’s retirement, which left two Supreme Court seats vacant, one expressed by liberals and libertarians as well – is that a Supreme Court justice, enjoying a lifetime appointment, will steer the country in a radical direction, and ‘we the people’ will be powerless to stop him. This fear drove nearly 60% of eligible Americans to ban gay marriage in eleven states; after all, nothing can be said to be unconstitutional if it appears in the text of the Constitution. While fear of the so-called “tyranny of the majority” is well-founded, recent legal history seems to justify the parallel fear, of the “tyranny of the minority” – nine justices ruling over all of America and micromanaging its legal system.

That it falls to federal judges to interpret the sometimes hazy, unclear language of the Constitution is true as a matter of both fact and necessity. As Mr. Werder said, “the Constitution needs interpretation.” But the rationale behind that argument is lacking. It is not the job of Supreme Court justices to “govern” the nation, but to assure that its governance is within the dictates of the Constitution.

To argue that the ambiguities of the Constitution allows judges such interpretational leeway, to the point where they could be considered to be re-writing laws, is to subscribe to a view of the Constitution that ignores the resource that is history .

Yes, the Constitution must be interpreted; the document, as it was written in 1789, and amended nearly thirty times since, is, itself, insufficient to determine some of the legal questions of the 21st century. But because the Constitution need be interpreted does not mean that there are not better, and worse, ways to interpret it.

Perhaps the best way to evaluate the Constitution is with reference to the historical circumstances in which it was [created.] Laws are not passed and the Constitution is not amended in a vacuum. America’s system of government is notable for its accountability and the availability of information. Judges – just as historians have, just as Justice Scalia almost always does – could, and should, consult history when interpreting the Constitution. To argue that Supreme Court justices do not have enough information with which to reasonably interpret the Constitution – that they are helpless against interpreting the Constitution as according to their own beliefs, or according to the political climate, is false. Congressional debates should provide an adequate source of the thinking of the people who amended the Constitution. What did they intend an amendment to mean? What did they believe it would accomplish? What did the people voting on the amendment believe they were voting for, or against?

This process, of course, involves interpretation. Of course, to call between Special Thanks to Professor Anna Kirkland for her help and advice regarding this article “balls” and “strikes” also requires interpretation, but such interpretation, just as with consulting history to determine the meaning of a piece of legislation, must occur with- Ryan Werder is Editor-in Chief of The Michigan Independent in a framework which only allows so much leeway, and not a little bit of restraint from the interpreter. MR --James David Dickson, for the Editors

the michigan review Campus Affairs

Page 5

By Alexandra Miller, ‘09

L

University Responds to Katrina

ess than eight months after the world witnessed the disaster of the tsunami that killed hundreds of thousands in Southeast Asia, the words “natural disaster” hit home with the onslaught of Katrina, a class four hurricane. In the wake of the most devastating natural disaster to impact the United States in years, people across the globe are rallying to provide for the citizens affected by Katrina.

Over 90 nations have found ways to contribute to the rebuilding and relief effort of the Gulf Coast including Bangladesh and Thailand, two countries affected by monsoons and the tsunami last Christmas. Germany has provided the US with high-speed pumps to reduce floodwaters in New Orleans, a city below sea-level.

President Bush has also accepted a Dutch offer of leveebuilding experts to construct additional levees to protect what remains above water in the affected areas. As aid continues to pour in day after day, Bush is proposing $200 billion to reconstruct New Orleans and other areas affected by this disaster. The proposed spending has President Bush turning to a genre of programs reminiscent of FDR’s New Deal, a series of public works programs used to resurrect the United States out of the Great Depression.

Now with the government taking on one of the largest fiscal endeavors in recent US history, much of Bush’s second term agenda is at risk for being pushed to

the wayside until the situation in the Gulf Coast is remedied. “The effect is going to indefinitely defer things he’s wanted to do, like Social Security (restructuring),” said William Niskanen, chairman of the CATO Institute, a libertarian think tank. President Bush’s seemingly limitless spending has conservatives shifting their feet and calling for limits to be set. . The Energy Department recently announced that oil reserves numbering approximately 11 million barrels of crude oil, one-third the number donated to alleviate the broken gas lines, were sold to provide revenue for the relief fund.

Here at the University, student groups were quick to respond with collections and drives for monetary aid as well as books, toiletries, and clothes. During the week of September 5, Alpha Phi Alpha fraternity collected money and clothing for the local chapters of the American Red Cross and Salvation Army. In genuine Wolverine spirits, U of M students have found unique ways in which to help. University of Michigan-based student volunteers contributed to the NOLA (New Orleans, LA) Hurricane Fund, a New Orleans based student initiative to raise money for the victims of Katrina, by selling shirts on the Diag reading “Ohio State Sucks, but Hurricanes Blow.” During the Notre Dame football game, a group of students erected a dunk tank reading, “Dunk the Irish for Hurricane Relief.” Additionally, members of the American Red Cross Foundation collected aid outside of the stadium.

The University administration has also stepped forward to provide relief to Michigan students affected by the hurricane. The Student Relief Fund has been set up to provide housing, books, and tuition to the 51 undergraduate students from the universities in the New Orleans region that have transferred to the university, as well as the 82 U of M students that hail from those areas. Other forms of aid and relief are also being made available to any student personally affected by this disaster. In an open letter to the student body, President Mary Sue Coleman of the University reminded students that University Counseling Services are always open to assist students in coming to terms with the events of this past August. Also, the U-M Survival Flight has volunteered to provide assistance to Children’s Hospital in New Orleans which has needed transportation to move its patients since being forced to close. In addition, the School of Social Work hosted a silent auction with all proceeds being sent to New Orleans to aid in the reconstruction and relief.

Global, national and even the University of Michigan’s involvement in the relief effort for hurricane Katrina have contributed greatly in alleviating the situation, but massive amounts of aid are still required. To find more information about how you can help contact local chapters of the American Red Cross (734) 9715300 or www.redcross.org or the Salvation Army (734) 668-8353 or www.salvationarmy.org. MR

has some University of Michigan students as members, its status as a student group has always been highly controversial, because it is not clear exactly how many students are involved, or what percentage of its membership are students at the University. Luke Massie, for instance, a vocal member of the organization back in the late 1990’s was repeatedly interviewed by a local media source as a voice for BAMN although he had no association with the University, as a student or otherwise.

Student-run or not, BAMN has had a less than tranquil history on and around the University of Michigan Campus. In 1998 LSA senior Jessica Curtin of BAMN faced charges of rioting and malicious destruction of property after a protest in Ann Arbor. Fellow member Luke Massie was confronted with charges of misdemeanor property destruction at the same protest. In January 2001, during a march to advocate for affirmative action, members of the Black Student Union (BSU) made clear they did not support the means in which BAMN creates awareness of the issue. Members of BSU showed up to express their lack of support for the group during a BAMN rally for Martin Luther King Day on the steps of the Harlan Hatcher Graduate Library.

A local publication covering the rally quoted Donna Stern, a paralegal for BAMN. “They (BSU) don’t want mass militant action. It takes people getting on the streets to win. (BSU is) against mass action which is how civil rights was won in the first place,” Stern said.

That said, perhaps there is cause for concern regarding BAMN, when one examines its beginnings. BAMN was created as an assemblage under the militant group the Revolutionary Workers League. The goal of this group is to advocate a socialist agenda through main stream issues such as women’s rights and affirmative action. The Revolutionary Workers League then creates front organizations, with different names, to disguise their true identity. These groups not only include BAMN but also the National Women’s Rights Organizing Committee (NWROC). Once RWL members infiltrate an organization, their begin to manipulate its structure to

meet their own doctrine.

In 2001 the Oakland (California) Teacher’s Union was a target for the BAMN organization. Members tried to fire the union’s bargaining team in the process of contract talks, during a key negotiation period. BAMN members then slowly infiltrated the union and were able to begin influencing the Union’s financial decisions. The result of BAMN’s tampering in the Teacher’s Union is that part of its budget went to the March 8, 2001 Sproul Plaza rally, which ended in a riot and the looting of local stores. Paul Hogarth described his personal experience with BAMN to The East Bay Express, when BAMN members began infiltrating a student organization at Berkley he was involved with. “Before you knew it, they had taken over the organization, and the two founding members had gotten so disgusted by it that they dropped out. [The organization] starts passing these resolutions about the revolutionary workers movement… Not only do they discourage progressive students from being involved in issues, but they take apolitical, moderate students and turn them against affirmative action.”

Created in 1976, the Revolutionary Workers League (RWL) is structured out of Detroit and holds firmly to the beliefs of Leon Trotsky, a communist revolutionary in Russia during the early 20th century. Trotsky is most well known for formulating the theory of Permanent Revolution, in which a violent revolution by the proletariat can only be successful if incorporated with a socialist revolution as well. Trotsky explains this ambition in his work Our Revolution: “The proletariat must not only conduct a revolutionary propaganda. The proletariat itself must move towards a revolution.” The RWL creates organizations such as BAMN to push its support of violence as a means of political protest, and inevitably a revolution of the working class over the government. Reasonable people can disagree about BAMN’s methods, but to register surprise that its name comes up in talks among law enforcement officials is to ignore a history and an approach to political issues that BAMN itself proclaims proudly. MR

On the Radar: BAMN, FBI Attention, and the ACLU

By Rebecca Christy, ‘08

O

October 4, 2005

n August 29th the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) released an FBI document linking a prominent civil rights organizations, BAMN (By Any Means Necessary), to potential domestic terrorist activity. The ACLU summarily accused the FBI of wrongfully exploiting the Patriot Act and spying on peaceful organizations – but most of the information presented in the document was found on easily accessible websites, as well as through local Michigan State University (MSU) Public Safety observances.

The FBI document contains information presented at a Domestic Terrorism Symposium given by the Michigan State Police Criminal Intelligence Unit on January 23, 2002. Those in attendance included two FBI agents, Michigan State Police, the United States Secret Service, Michigan Department of Corrections, and Michigan State University Public Safety. The symposium is held on a quarterly basis and its purpose was to inform local law enforcement of organizations or individuals that could constitute a domestic terrorism threat.

During the course of the symposium the organization BAMN was reported to have planned a protest for February 8-10, 2002. The intent was to inform local police about the need of possible law enforcement during the protest. An excerpt from the report indicates to what extent the group was discussed.

“Detective [name deleted] presented information on a protest from February 8- 10, 2002 in Ann Arbor, Michigan, by the group Any Means Necessary. Michigan State Police has information that in the past demonstrations by this group have been peaceful [Italics added].”

Why, then, the outcry from the ACLU? BAMN or the “Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action & Integration and Fight For Equality By Any Means Necessary” was created in 1995 and stands for maintaining affirmative action by continuing the work of the civil rights movement. BAMN’s methods, though, diverge sharply from those of the original civil rights movement, and the group has not excluded the use of violence from its creedo, “by any means necessary.” Although BAMN

the michigan review Columns

Page 6

Let’s Hug it Out

October 4, 2005

A Senior Perspective

B

eing back at school for my senior year, I have when hash bash had enough people show up to call it begun to look at everything as a last hooray. It is an event, when large scale protests were a weekly thing quite a sad feeling. Every football game is one less as a in the Diag, when student elections were actually comstudent. Every lecture is part of a countdown to the real petitive, when MSA sent Sadaam a letter telling him he world, where I do have to get up on Friwas a bad person, and when the Review actually reday mornings. One thing I have found ceived some good hate mail. Maybe I am being too very hard to do since I have been back sentimental, but campus actually used to have things is care about politics. You get to be a going on that were so absurd, you could not help but senior and it seems like you have heard be a pissed off conservative. My question is, should every argument possible regarding affirI be worried about this? mative action, the war, Bush, labor laws, Senior year seems to be, in some regards, the gay marriage, abortion, “fair” trade coffinal chance at exercising our idealism. For those fee, “killer” Coca Cola, and liberal bias of us who are not planning on working on the Hill, in education. When I reflect back at the for a non-profit, or fighting for some obscure cause passion I had for political discourse durnext year, this really is our last shot to be politically Paul outrageous. In less than a year, we probably will ing my underclassmen years, I begin to question where it all went. I mean, how Teske barely have time to keep up-to-date on everything does a person majoring in economics going on in the industry we work on, let alone what and political science wake up his senior is going on in local, state, national, and global news. year and not care about politics? Thinking about it fur- Shouldn’t we all be the ones paving the way for the unther, I realize that it is not that I do not care about poli- derclassmen, telling them every idealistic thing, consertics anymore; it is just that I have a lot more cynical and vative or liberal, that we have learned in our time here? jaded view on the issues that everyone on campus likes On second thought though, maybe this is what to talk about. happens when you get closer to graduation. Isn’t this the I think my point of view goes for a lot of time in our lives when we start to think about real things? people in my generation of Wolverines. There seems When we all start thinking about how we wish the 40 to be a general apathy from everyone, conservative or hour work week still existed, paychecks, how hellish law liberal. For those of us who have been on this campus or medical school will be, and about the fact that we will for over three years, we can look back and remember be moving across the country or world. We really do

not care about issues like GSI’s wanting transgender sex changes paid for by the University any longer. To me, it is hard to get riled up about anything related to money and the University anymore. I have started to think to myself, “MSA wants to raise fees, sure. GSI’s want a pay raise, why not? Not like I care at this point, I will be out of here in April.” Not to say this apathy for huge budgets and no constraints will carry on in the work force.

Actually, one of the most interesting changes that I have seen in some of my liberal friends who have recently joined the work force is their shift towards fiscal conservatism. Funny how getting a paycheck changes ideology. They did not care when their student funds went to groups that protest Coca-Cola when they were students, however, when they realize how much the government took from their paychecks, they begin to finally question where the money goes. When a liberal friend bitched to me about taxes, I could not help but laugh. It was as if they finally understood why I was a conservative and why I criticized MSA and the University for their ridiculous spending of student money.

I guess that when it comes down to it, senior year is about hanging on to the final leg of our journey from irresponsibility to responsibility. So, to those underclassmen out there, the duty is on you to be the idealists, because we’ll be at the bar hanging on to irresponsibility a little bit longer. MR

The Angry Greek

I

Honorable?? More like DIShonorable...

have a probation officer.

Honestly. I went to see her last week.

Naturally, you may ask, what heinous crime did I commit?

I had a drink. Literally – A drink.

I never wanted an MIP, but if I had to get one, I wanted to go down in a blaze of glory – actually drunk, perhaps after being tasered once or twice, with some nice police brutality scars to boot. You know, just to have a good story when all was said and done. But I’ve got nothing.

I’ll condense the story for you because I’m so ashamed. I was sitting in a car with my buddy. Two girls joined us in the back seat. Two bike cops rode by, stared at us, and approached the car. Two more snuck in from the back. After threatening to search the car, we were pulled out, patted down and given breathalyzers.

My buddy blew a .06, I blew a staggering .024.

And then out came the tickets.

Somewhere in America that night, people would get murdered, raped, shot, stabbed, beaten, or robbed. But somewhere in Auburn Hills, it took four cops to give me a misdemeanor for having a drink and sitting in a parking lot.

“So why’d you guys surround our car,” we asked the cops.

“Because you looked young and nervous,” one officer replied.

So last week we went to court. Inside the beautiful Rochester Hills Courthouse were about 30 young adults lining the halls of the courthouse, many with their parents.

“What is this, MIP day?” our attorney asked Nick the City Prosecutor.

Cheolas “Nope, every day is like this” he responded. The cases completely clog up the courts and the probation department, but the city makes a ton of money.

So I expected to pay my fine, take my probation, and get out. I was wrong again. I had to return last Wednesday for a “pre-sentence investigation” with my probation officer. I drove all the way to Rochester Hills (an hour drive) when gas is $2.60 a gallon, wrote the court a $90 dollar check, and answered about 7 questions. On top of that, I get to return at the end of November for my “sentencing.”

Please, save me the BS.

I mean nothing to the city of Rochester Hills. They could not care less about me or my alcohol consumption.

My point in all this ranting is not to say that I didn’t break a law, because I did, albeit a ridiculous one that is inconsistently enforced. My simple argument is this: decent citizens who threaten nobody are routinely screwed by the legal system.

Why? Well cops have to bust somebody for something, and judges have to sentence people so they can be “tough on crime” so what do you do when there are no criminals around? This court held jurisdiction over upper-class, low-crime communities, and the courthouse was PACKED. I was there for three hours just to plead guilty.

But who is going to complain?

Ever see the son or daughter of a Judge or cop get busted? Everyone knows “that kid” whose uncle was a police chief and got them out of their MIP. You can’t get screwed by the system if you run it.

Before I went through the justice system, I was a little bit ashamed of what I had done. I didn’t want to tell my parents what I had done, so I didn’t for quite a while. I have always thought the drinking age was an absolute farce, but I had indeed broken the law. (And don’t

give me that “you broke a law, so don’t complain” garbage. Slavery was once the law of the land, that doesn’t make it right.

I’m sure you’d be pretty irritated if you got arrested for destroying your radio – which is technically illegal in Detroit).

But after this experience, that all went to hell. Want to fight crime? Go work in a city with crime. Being a police officer in Auburn Hills is like driving a snow plow in Miami. Nobody feels safer because you busted me drinking in a parking lot.

So go ahead and pull every “nervous-looking” 20-year-old out of their car and breathalyze them. Then make them drive back and forth across the state three times, slap them with probation, alcohol class, community service, and a couple hundred dollars in fines.

That should teach them never to drink again, right?

Well it will certainly make the city of Rochester Hills a ton of money.

And it will certainly perpetuate anger toward the justice system, disdain for authority, and disrespect for the law. Now tell me what good that does society? MR

the michigan review News Analysis

Page 7

By Yevgeny Shrago, ‘09

T

Roberts’ Rules of Order

HE DEATH OF one man may prove to be the salvation of the Michigan Law School’s holistic admissions policy, yet will likely have no effect on the university’s already defunct undergraduate admissions policy.

That one man is William Rehnquist, and the route to these divergent and seemingly counterintuitive conclusions is paved with the legal unknown that is Judge John G. Roberts.

President George Bush originally nominated Roberts as a replacement for retiring associate justice Sandra Day O’Connor, a Reagan appointee with a voting record that had many on both the right and left accusing her of inconsistency and a lack of a clear judicial philosophy. CNN senior legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin, in an interview on CNN program Paula Zahn Now, declared that “[O’Connor] single-handedly preserved affirmative action in this country.” Her retirement was seen by most social conservatives as an opportunity to radically alter the makeup of the court, from its current (perceived) liberal majority to one where God and old-fashioned evangelical morals were the law of the land.

O’Connor’s nuanced approach was quite evident in her rulings on the twin cases of Gratz v. Bollinger and Grutter v. Bollinger. The two cases respectively addressed the points-based, hard and fast system of the College of LS&A, and the more holistic approach of the law school. O’Connor, who was notorious for being in the majority of most 5-4 decisions, usually because she was the one who cast the deciding vote, held true to form here. She not only voted to uphold Grutter, she authored the decision, a 5-4 ruling. She switched sides on Gratz, striking down the undergraduate school’s point

based system as unconstitutional under the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Rehnquist voted to strike down both rulings.

Why is any of this Supreme Court minutia relevant? The bottom line is that O’Connor effectively micromanaged the admissions policies of the University of Michigan. Her retirement, and the initial nomination of Roberts to replace her as associate justice, seemed to be a harbinger of troubles to come for any remaining affirmative action policies at federally funded institutions.

Roberts is understood to be Rehnquist’s protégé. Roberts clerked for the man while Rehnquist was associate justice, and their judicial philosophies appear to be extremely similar. However, because of his short tenure on the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, there are very few cases that showcase Roberts’ actual judicial philosophies. More can be inferred from the thousands of pages of memos he wrote while working for the Reagan and Bush administrations. In several memos, Roberts refers to affirmative action, as defined during the Reagan administration, as unconstitutional. In 2001, Roberts wrote a friend of the court brief attacking a Department of Transportation affirmative action policy as unconstitutional. It certainly seems like he is the steady conservative that O’Connor was not.

Even prior to Rehnquist’s passing, Grutter was not necessarily going to be overturned. First, a similar case would have to be brought before the Supreme Court, which could take years for a plaintiff to gain standing and pass through the judicial system. In that time, Roberts could succumb to the condition afflicting many of the justices drawn from the conservative ranks and appointed by a Republican president: an in-

October 4, 2005

ability to stay reliably conservative. Despite complaints from the religious right about liberal judges hijacking the country’s morals, seven of the nine justices sitting on the court were appointed by Republican presidents. There are no guarantees.

Rehnquist’s death, however, probably guaranteed that Grutter will stand up in the near future. Roberts has been re-nominated to the position of Chief Justice of the Supreme Court as a replacement for Rehnquist, while O’Connor has agreed to stay on until a new justice has been selected. Dean of the Michigan Law School Evan Caminker in a statement to the Michigan Review, declared: “The real question about the Supreme Court’s long-term commitment to Grutter will come when Justice O’Connor is replaced, not when Justice Rehnquist is replaced.”

Another ruling directly affecting Michigan is the US District Court of Appeals for Eastern Michigan ruling in the case Doe v. University of Michigan.

This case struck down the U of M speech code prohibiting what the university deemed speech that created a hostile school environment on the grounds that it was too vague. It is unlikely that this case will be argued before the Supreme Court in the near future, but Roberts would almost certainly come down against Michigan, as evidenced by his attitudes on affirmative action and his pro-free speech philosophy.

All of the conjecture about Robert’s position and the probability that Grutter will survive is just that: conjecture. Robert’s voting record will be impossible to determine until he actually demonstrates it, and the next nominee will have an identical effect on the ruling’s and the court’s future. MR

In the Wake of Disaster

Hurricane Katrina and the Need for a Stronger Energy Policy

By Aaron Kaplan, ‘07

I

n August, President Bush signed into law the Energy Policy Act of 2005, proclaiming that it would “help every American who drives to work, every family that pays a power bill, and every small business owner hoping to expand … This bill launches an energy strategy for the 21st century.” This was not simply spin – the bill passed through Congress with wide bipartisan support as Republicans and Democrats fashioned an approach that balanced initiatives to increase production with a concerted effort to encourage energy conservation and efficiency. After ten years without a national energy policy, it appeared that American politicians had begun to work constructively, if incrementally, toward independence from foreign oil.

Then, disaster struck. Hurricane Katrina hit the Gulf Coast. The destruction of New Orleans, a vital seaport since before the American Revolution, wiped out important shipping lanes and threw the nation’s energy transport system into chaos. According to the government’s Materials Management Service, the hurricane reduced Gulf of Mexico oil production by 843,725 barrels a day as of September 14, which is equivalent to a 56.25% decrease. Katrina also damaged

oil refineries and pipelines north of New Orleans. These supply disruptions soon manifested themselves at the gas pump.

Temporarily, Atlanta drivers were forced to pay the sky-high price of $6 per gallon.

The nationwide price rose to well over $3 per gallon, and the specter of fuel shortages appeared for the first time since the oil shocks of the 1970s.

The political response was immediate. Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-WA) suggested legislation that would cap gas prices. Sen. Gordon Smith (R-OR) accused oil companies of price gouging.

Smith disputed that rising prices are being driven simply by supply and demand, stating that “the American people are being victimized more than any free market would warrant.” It is clear, and positive, that elected officials were responding to the public’s concerns. It is also clear that since the hurricane was a force of nature, no one can rationally blame the administration for the energy disruptions. That said, as Katrina has made it abundantly clear, our new, heralded national energy policy is not sufficient.

Our new energy policy builds no refineries to cope with ever-increasing demand, a problem which began in the 1970s. Our new energy policy does not

increase corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standards for new automobiles, one of the few sure-fire ways to move the country much closer to ending the United States’ dependence on Middle Eastern oil. The Energy Act’s provision on hybrid cars, which grants a tax credit to hybrid purchasers , for anywhere between $400 to $3400 (depending on the model), has been lauded as an important step toward encouraging alternative energy technology. This is true, but if hybrids get much better gas mileage and the tax credit is designed to make environmentally friendly vehicles more attractive to shoppers, why not go one step further? Why not use tax policy to make a Honda Civic Hybrid actually cheaper than a regular Civic? It has been argued since Honda and Toyota currently dominate the hybrid market, such a policy could make it harder for American automakers to compete. But this argument is misleading. The Ford Escape and Mercury Mariner hybrids certainly foreshadow a stronger attempt at this market by the Big Three – if only our energy policy encourages it.

The old arguments against an energy policy with real teeth – that oil refineries are not environmentally friendly, that stronger CAFE standards will hurt

the economy, and that encouraging hybrid technology is bad for Detroit – work relatively well when our national energy problem is outside the headlines. But in the wake of a hurricane that sharply cut back America’s oil and natural gas intake, damaged refining capacity, sent gas above $3 per gallon, and got analysts talking about oil possibly reaching $100 a barrel, is not this the time to move past politics as usual?

Until recently, the prospect of drilling for oil in parts of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) has dominated Congress’s debates on becoming an energy-independent nation. Hopefully, recent events and twenty-first century realities will lead to more far-reaching actions by the government. Sen. Pete Domenici (R-NM), chairman of the Senate Energy Committee and a major architect of the recent legislation, said recently that the hurricane was “a serious wake-up call that we have to do something both on the supply side and the conservation side” to solve the problem. As Congress returns to session this fall, representatives and senators should follow Sen. Domenici’s lead and craft a national energy policy that will effectively address the energy problems of the 21st century. MR

Page 8

By Michael O’Brien, ‘08

T

the michigan review Commentary

The Blogs of Ann Arbor

he past year has seen the emergence of one of the strangest new words in the American English lexicon: “blog.” Blogs, short for “web logs,” are, of course, online journals where individuals or groups post thoughts ranging on topics from the personal to the political. Although these forms of comment have only become most prevalent in the past six months to a year or so, there are several blogs that have been established in Ann Arbor that have served as online communities for quite some time now. Ann Arbor is a vibrant community of thought and opinion, and offers a wide variety of different kinds of personal and public thought and opinion that proves worth monitoring.

University Professor (and so-called Middle East “expert”) Juan Cole keeps a blog at his own website (www.juancole.com), that has received substantial attention and criticism in the past six months. The blog focuses mostly on issues of national politics, especially the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, areas of Cole’s particular academic interests. “Informed Comment,” as Cole calls it, contains quite a bit of acerbic attacks against the Bush administration and Cole’s own critics. The blog has been noted recently for prolonged skirmishes with National Review editor-at-large Jonah Goldberg. In this past month alone, though, Cole has gone at it with the widow of Steven Vincent. (Vincent was a freelance writer killed in Iraq after publishing an op-ed in the New York Times critical of the insurgency.) Vincent’s widow, Lisa, wrote a long, terse open letter to Cole that can be read at www. campus-watch.org, in which she tears apart Cole, writ-

ing, “You strike me as a typical professor - self-opinionated, arrogant, so sure of the rightness of your position that you won’t even begin to consider someone else’s.”

But most Ann Arbor blogs tend to focus on University life and Ann Arbor in general. One of the most popular of them, Ann Arbor is Overrated (www. annarborisoverrated.com), regularly lampoons the excesses and foibles of Ann Arbor, everyone’s favorite Midwestern bastion off liberal naïveté. AAIO, as it is abbreviated, as one might guess, proves a consistent theme in its posts—that being that for as much as so many rave about this sleepy college town as a bastion of cosmopolitanism and intellectualism, it compares nowhere to what true cities have to offer. Pull up this website if you’re interested in learning about the quirkier side of life in A2.

Arbor Update (www.arborupdate.com), another more prominent Ann Arbor blog, provides an amalgamation of progressive comment on national issues, as well as news and views on the latest happenings in the Tree City. The site is maintained by several current University students, recent graduates, and several University employees. This blog is a generally good source for learning about quaint little book readings around town, and where the next “rally” for their latest progressive cause is located.

The Michigan Daily recently entered the blogosphere recently as a late entry, with the launching of four separate blogs, which are accessed through their website, www.michigandaily.com. The four blogs focus on sports (The Game), opinion (The Podium), news (The Wire),

October 4, 2005

as well as a blog run by the Daily’s editor-in-chief, Jason Pesick. The other sections are maintained by the respective editors of each section of the print version of the Daily. Whether this campus monolith can successfully establish itself in Ann Arbor’s bourgeoning blog communities remains yet to be seen, but only time will tell.

The Michigan Review has maintained its own blog for around a couple of years now, at the front of its homepage, www.michiganreview.com. The site has tended, in its existence, to be a mixture of national and on-campus critique and discussion, with many posts inviting long-winded responses in the comment section.

Also, whenever the latest issue of the print version of the Review is available online, the editor first posts it on the blog. The Review has in store a number of changes for this year, though, and readers should look forward to increased blogs by staff and editors, as well as perhaps a change in format.

There are numerous more-private blogs maintained by University students through livejournal.com, xanga.com, and myspace.com, each of which has several University of Michigan blogrings. Although these may not always prove the most coherent source of intelligent thought and debate on campus, they still are a component of the University’s vast offerings of local thought to read. Ann Arbor has many more smaller blogs than the ones listed above, but the blog community at this University is on the forefront of thought on a number of important campus issues, and are worth checking out. MR

On Democracy: What We Can Learn from Ukraine

By Tomiyo Turner, ‘08

L

ast year, when Ukranians took to the streets en masse to protest Viktor Yanukovich’s election, the “Orange Revolution” was seen as a profound step in the advancement of democracy in the former Soviet bloc. Yanukovich, the candidate favored by the Kremlin, was declared the winner in what is now seen as an unfair election. As a response to allegations of voter fraud and poisoning, Viktor Yushcenko’s supporters filled Independence Square in a protest of the election. This dramatic turn of events drew international media attention. Many American media outlets praised the Ukrainian people for engaging in a struggle to assert their rights. Today the camera crews have left, but the struggle against corruption remains. There have been many examples of the replacement of competent officials with those loyal to the administration. Yushchenko’s decisions to replace Yulia Tymoshenko and to abolish the country’s traffic police (DAI) have, and should, be questioned – such questioning is, after all, democratic. Questioning the outcome of the Orange Revolution is valuable simply in terms of its ramifications for the Ukrainian people, but there are also lessons that can be gleaned about the nature of democracy in general.

Yushchenko has, largely in an attempt to retain control of the govern-

ment and to maintain the image of efficacy, continued to consolidate power.

Tymoshenko’s role in organizing the Orange Revolution was clearly central.

Yuri Boldyrev, a prominent journalist and former member of Ukraine’s Parliament called Tymoshenko, “the real force behind Yushchenko’s rise.” Despite Tymoshenko’s prominent role, or perhaps because of it, Yushchenko took a swift and strong stance against dissenting opinions within the upper echelons of his government.

It is, of course, important for leaders to present a united front and minimize contradictory public statements, but it is very much counter to the goals of effective government and the function of the cabinet, to remove individuals with differing viewpoints. This problem is not unique to Ukraine. Even in our own government we have seen similar situations. Watching this trend in other countries may lead us to question Colin Powell’s resignation and circumstances surrounding it, especially because of his role as a dissenter.

Another problem in Ukraine is that Yushchenko has attempted to assign scapegoats, rather than providing constructive solutions. Yushchenko’s dramatic abolition of the DAI, the national traffic police, is an example of a type of bureaucratic scapegoat. Rather than addressing the issues at the source of corruption or finding new ways to combat

it, Yushchenko has merely dissolved an organization known for corruption. He looked for a target, and because the target was completely within his control, he completely eliminated it. The problem with that kind of knee-jerk policy is that it fails to achieve effective results. Rather than taking the time to adequately assess the problem and formulate a solution, Yushchenko has created a smokescreen.

This situation elicits comparison to that of Michael Brown’s resignation under pressure from FEMA. Just as the DAI have been responsible for corruption, Michael Brown was responsible for inefficiency. But, like the situation in Ukraine, the causes of these inefficiencies have not been fully explored. The sad truth is that, often, assigning blame is easier than finding actual solutions, and in the eyes of the public the two are often confused to be one in the same.

One of Yushchenko’s best tactics has been to appeal to feelings of Ukrainian nationalism. Independent Ukrainian identity had been suppressed by the former government, which often seemed to be acting on the wishes of the Kremlin. This made Yushchenko’s independent Ukrainian identity and integral part of his appeal. In fairness, without Ukrainian patriotism, the people of Ukraine would still be experiencing ineffective and corrupt government - it

would simply be more influenced by Russia. But, regardless, Yushchenko’s appeal to patriotism has allowed him to deflect criticism, as it is implied that criticism is unpatriotic. Regardless of the nation, when patriotic concerns prevent reasoned debate on important issues, the administration in power benefits, but the country as a whole does not. Of course, this issue is largely irrelevant in this country because only terrorists need to worry about limitations on freedom of speech, and no true Americans question Bush.

At the very least, the events in Ukraine should remind us of the importance of questioning the actions of government, whether or not we initially supported its leaders. It may help to consider that one of the best possible outcomes in Ukraine would be the establishment of a multi-party political system. This could only be accomplished by substantial dissent within the group of individuals responsible for Yushchenko’s rise to power.

A multi-party system would stimulate a more results – rather than image – oriented policy. Although it is easy to question the motives of enemies, but for more difficult to see the faults of those we have supported and looked to for guidance in the past, this is perhaps the most important role the people have in securing effective government in a representational system. MR

the michigan review Editors’ Roundtable

Page 9

October 4, 2005

It was announced this week that the University administration is considering a change to the LS&A language requirement, switching the requirement from fourth-semester proficiency in one language to two-semester proficiency in two languages. This issue, our editoral board considers the change, and debates whether the language requirement should be altered or not. Filling in for Sekou Benson is staff writer Brian Biglin.

James David Dickson

Globalization isn’t stopping anytime soon. That was clear at the Live Aid concerts this summer – the same sort of people who, just five or seven years ago might have opposed a G-8 summit rallied to encourage the G-8 to grant far-reaching debt relief to Africa; even Al Qaeda, which Thomas Friedman would have once referenced as the ultimate “olive branch” community, has used the tools of the Lexus – particularly, its technology – to its advantage. Everyone seems to be working within the context of globalization.

Not only is globalization a fait accompli, it’s also gaining, not losing, speed. One wonders, then, why anyone concerned with higher education in this country would tamper with anything as right-thinking as the LS&A foreign language requirement. To allow students the ability to get off easy by coming away with essentially zero foreign language skill, in the name of “providing options,” is about as intelligent as doing away with homework because students complain about it. It is the job of this University to make sure that anyone holding one of its degrees comes away with an education, and I wonder if the clamor to water down the foreign language requirement is the result of sober thinking as to what’s best for our students, or an all-too-characteristic cave-in by the administration at the cavils of students.

If anything, we should have to take more language classes, not less. Let’s hope that someone at LS&A has more than their own popularity in mind as this issue is decided.

who have the desire to continue and gain proficiency in a language will, and those who have no desire can save themselves the GPA beating and move on to fill the other 50 or so distribution credits that LSA mandates.

As to the “lowering of standards” argument, what if I replace my two semesters of language study with, say, Econ 401 and 402? What if I choose to use my two free semesters to pick up a minor? Is that “lowering the bar?” If a strict language requirement is mandatory to achieve a “high standard” of education, why not mandate calculus to make sure students are “mathematically proficient,” or mandate History to ensure “historical proficiency?”

Even if the stringent language requirement benefits “the University as a whole,” it does not necessarily benefit all its students. And the last time I checked, the U wasn’t picking up the tab for my education here.

The University has greater problems, as my fellow editor Mike O’Brien pointed out, with graduation, retention, and alumni giving rates. The language requirement is the least of those worries.

students will have the satisfaction that comes from knowing they exercised the “options” the LSA government said they were entitled to.

With cuts in state funding, we are scrambling to maintain the status quo that has made Michigan so great for so long, including standards. Our prestige is not only about maintaining our funding, but about guarding our standards. The fact is we are among a handful of good schools that still maintain a relatively stringent foreign language requirement.

For most languages, four semesters of study should provide you a foundation in terms of knowing grammar and being able to read and speak that language when applicable. Imagine how long you could use, if you could even try to use, one year’s worth of knowledge of a language.

Students have plenty of options as it is. At this university you can take Spanish, German, Japanese, Sign Language, or even Latin—all which, in their own way, can be a true asset after graduation. These are your options, and LSA simply wants its students to spend enough time in a given field to become

Nick Cheolas Before I began my language study, I thought the requirement should be scrapped. After I finished my language study, I still think the requirement should be scrapped - or at least reduced.

I’m not against the idea of “exposing” students to a foreign language, but the current 4 semester language requirement totals 1/8 of a student’s college course load. In the end, I would argue that a) those 4 semesters do nor result in actual “proficiency” of a language, and b) most students who complete the language requirement fail to actually utilize their skills after graduation.

If the goal is to attain proficiency in a foreign language, make the requirement 6 semesters or more. If it is to gain exposure to other languages, make the requirement 2 semesters. Students

Brian Biglin It’s hard to see any real benefits that might come out of allowing LSA students to take two semesters of two different languages to meet the foreign language requirement, other than the fact that some

proficient in one. Foreign language proficiency is crucial in the scope of the liberal arts. And the liberal arts are what LSA is based upon, like it or leave it.

Having the power to choose, and the flexibility to do whatever you feel like, does not serve this university and this society very well. When two people

can graduate with the same degree from the same school but one person knows no significant amount of either of the foreign languages he studied, and the other has comprehensive and usable knowledge of one particular language, then that is the day that LSA is no longer true to its purpose.

Michael O’Brien

It is entirely true that the language requirement, as currently constructed, locks students into more languages than they might otherwise me exposed to. In most cases, students are locked into languages they took in high school, and seek simply to get the requirement “out of the way,” instead of seeking cultural enrichment of any sort (the main purpose stated by the University for having a language requirement to begin with).

Consider a student on the prelaw or pre-med track. He or she might have taken a requisite three years of Spanish or French in high school. Say that they then test out of one or two semesters of their chosen language. Under the fourth-semester system, students opt to do the grunt work, and undergo the GPA-thrashing their 231 class has to offer. Should the two two-semester option be available, that same student might opt to take maybe two semesters of Latin, which is arguably more relevant in their impending profession--but something in which they don’t necessarily need to be proficient.

Changing the requirement is about options, and having them available to students here is not at all a bad thing.

It would not be an affront to prestige; indeed, having students with exposure to more languages than the few core studies taught in high school seems to bolster our reputation more than it would hurt. And in terms of practical considerations, any student starting over trying to venture out and starting a new language from scratch faces having a class in their schedule for twice their time here. If a student is pursuing a double-major, as well, a four-semester requirement only makes things more difficult. The new option, however, would allow students to be more efficient, and double up on languages in one single semester.

If this University wants worldclass students, and to still remain sensitive to the practical considerations of students, it needs to change the requirement.

MR

the michigan review

Page 10

October 4, 2005

Election Update

A Guide to this November’s Most Overlooked Contests

By Stephen M. Crabtree

W

ith just under two months remaining until voters go to the polls, the three high-profile elections of 2005 already seem to be decided. The three most high-profile races going on this fall are those for the mayor of New York City, and the governorships of Virginia and New Jersey.

After a bitter and, at times, bruising primary season, the Democrats of New York City have a candidate for the city’s mayoral election. After a primary too close to call, there was to be a run-off election between Bronx borough president Freddy Ferrer and U.S. Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY 9). However, Rep. Weiner recognized Ferrer’s 39.95% popular vote – just 0.05% shy of the necessary 40% to avoid a run-off – would only grow in a second race, and conceded. Ferrer, then, is set to battle incumbent mayor Michael Bloomberg, who is running on both the Republican and Independent tickets. In the latest Newsday – New York poll, Bloomberg held a commanding 12% lead. While much could still change in the coming weeks, it is most probable that Bloomberg will win re-election. Given his very public support of those displaced by Hurricane Katrina, it’s plausible that his margin of victory may be even higher.

In the Old Dominion state, it looks that Democrat Lt. Governor Tim Kaine will be denied his bid for

a promotion. Republican State Attorney General Jerry Kilgore has been running ahead of Kaine in nearly every poll since the primaries last spring. While it is true that the most recent Rasmussen Reports poll shows him in a statistical tie of 43% versus 40%, this is more likely to be statistical noise than a swell in support for Kaine.

Virginia has been drifting steadily from the leaningto safe-Republican column in recent years, and unless Gov. Warner provides Kaine with a crucial boost, the Governor’s mansion will return to Republican hands on November 8th.

New Jersey, however, is quite the opposite.

While the Republicans have been trying to solidify behind former Senatorial candidate Doug Forrester, they have been unable to crack either the popularity or the financial advantage of Democratic Sen. Jon Corzine.

Even Republican-funded polls show Corzine maintaining a double-digit lead. Whether this will prove to be a benefit or a detriment to the New Jersey Democratic Party, though, remains to be seen. With his predictable victory, Corzine will resign from the U.S. Senate, and this departure will set up a vicious Democratic battle in the primary. On the Republican side, by contrast, there already appears to be unification behind state Sen. Tom Kean, Jr., son of the popular former governor. Perhaps the U.S. Senate seat will be thrown into Republican

hands, as was expected to happen in 2000.

Looking ahead to other Senate races in 2006, one should watch how strenuously the numerous redstate Democrats fight against the confirmation of Judge John Roberts as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and against the nominee to replace Sandra Day O’Conner.

While potentially vulnerable Senators Ben Nelson (DNE), Robert Byrd (D-WV), and Kent Conrad (D-ND) are still without announced opponents, the Republican Party does have a key competitor lined up for each race.

Opposition to Pres. Bush’s nominees would likely provide the impetus for each to throw their hat into the ring, in hopes of defeating the incumbents on the issue, just as then-former Rep. John Thune was able to use the label of “obstructionist” to defeat Sen. Tom Daschle in South Dakota in 2004.

While Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA) is still lagging in the polls, the re-elect numbers remain high for Sen. Lincoln Chafee (R-RI), the only other blue-state Republican running for re-election to the Senate in 2006. And since open-Democrat races in Maryland and Minnesota remain in the toss-up category, it appears the Democrats will suffer another net loss of Senate seats next year. MR

A Lesson on the Tragedy of Terrorism

By Chris Stieber, ‘08

I

n early August, I traveled to Israel to participate in a two-week course in counter-terrorism, part of a yearlong fellowship with the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies (FDD), a nonpartisan think tank based in Washington, D.C. Pursuing a graduate-level study in terrorism and the threat it poses to democracies everywhere, I was able to experience the absolute best in counterterrorism, how it is practiced and perfected.

But what exactly did I do? And, more importantly, what did I learn?

The foremost lesson I learned was simple, yet powerful: terrorism is never justifiable. Never. As an American, I had heard this aphorism time and again, each time saying to myself: “Yeah, yeah, of course. Everyone believes that. Why even bring it up?” Unfortunately, this is not the case. FDD escorted our group deep into the West Bank to the outskirts of Ramallah, and to the Israeli settlement of Beit-El. We met with a victim of terrorism, Yoel Tzur, whose wife and 12-year old son were shot point-blank by terrorists while they were at a stoplight.

It seems American newspapers report similar attacks almost every day, and this can have a desensitizing effect on its audience. Often, an average American will shrug off the incident as just more useless casualties in a war where “both sides

are guilty.” Meeting with this man, utterly deflated by the murder of his loved ones, drove home the effects of the horrific evil perpetrated by terrorists, both in Israel and around the globe.

Another important lesson I learned was that one man’s terrorist is not another man’s freedom fighter. Even in the American mainstream press, reporters will draw moral equivalency between acts against military personnel and attacks on innocent civilians. Earlier this summer, NBC’s Brian Williams stated, “…the first several U.S. presidents were certainly revolutionaries and might have been called ‘terrorists’ by the British crown, after all.” Sadly, this distorted view of true terrorism is too common in America today. A definition I heard from Boaz Ganor, director of The International Policy Institute for Counter-Terrorism, is much more accurate and circumspect: “Terrorism is the deliberate use, or threat to use, violence against civilians or against civilian targets in order to attain political goals.” Unless we are able to agree on a definition like Dr. Ganor’s, we will never be able to fully confront and defeat terrorism. Furthermore, America needs to be forthright in defining her greatest en-

emy: radical Islamism.

Not only did I learn why terrorism is an insidious foe that needs to be defeated, but I also observed how to combat terrorism here in America. What became immediately apparent in my visit was that the United States still has a long way to go in effectively fighting terrorism. We were able to examine the security fence Israel built along the border of the West Bank, which has cut down on the number of terrorist attacks by up to 90% in the past year. Electrically monitored and manned with IDF soldiers every few miles, this border is truly airtight. While we can’t expect to have such a thorough and strict effort at our borders, if our Border Patrol were merely a fraction as diligent and effective as our Israeli allies, we could drastically reduce the number of illegal aliens who enter the country annually. FDD also took us to a maximum-security prison that houses convicted terrorists, and we were allowed to interact in an open-air environment with men who were convicted of building bombs to kill Israeli women and children. It was truly shocking was to meet young men, about my age, who spoke excellent English and looked just like an av-

“Terrorism isn’t Left, or Right. It’s just wrong.”

erage American college student. In fact, one of the terrorists we met was born in Bloomington, Indiana, before moving to Palestine. Simply put, threats in America are not going to appear as “stereotypical” terrorists, but rather will look and act like the average American citizen. Proactive domestic and foreign defenses are required to make America safer, but many of our current attempts, such as beefing up airport security, are only stopgaps at best.

Defeating our enemies will take a long, focused effort on the part of all Americans. Above all, the war against radical Islamism is a war of ideas. We are facing foes who desire to destroy what Americans hold dear and true: liberty.

Today, it is often popular to question our country’s efforts, calling for a repeal of the Patriot Act or denigrating the efforts of our forces both at home and abroad.

In the wars of the past, Americans quickly rallied behind the flag, and more importantly, what it stood for, against all attackers. This time, our enemy is too cowardly to stand up directly and confront us, but that doesn’t make them any less dangerous. Terrorism isn’t Left, or Right. It’s just wrong. MR

the michigan review

Page 11

Culture

Send in the Clowns

By Amanda Nichols, ‘08

O

n September 12, author Salman Rushdie visited Borders in downtown Ann Arbor to promote his most recent novel, Shalimar the Clown. It begins in the Hollywood Hills in 1991 with the murder of former U.S. Ambassador Maximillian Ophuls on his daughter’s doorstep. However, this event functions as both a beginning and an ending. While Max’s death is the start of a journey for his illegitimate daughter India, it is also the last link in a chain of events set in motion many years ago. However, Shalimar is not a murder mystery, for the reader knows whodunit almost immediately. It was Max’s personal valet, a Kashmiri man named Shalimar the Clown. Instead of who, the question becomes why.

Thus begins the backwards-forwards-sideways narrative journey of Shalimar the Clown. The setting is constantly changing, from modern Los Angeles to Kashmir (a land surrounded by Pakistan, India, and China) to WWII-era Europe to Kashmir again and finally returning to Los Angeles. Soon it becomes obvious just how intertwined these characters are, and specifically that their connections are derived from a woman named Boonyi Kaul Noman. The reader quickly understands how all these people are connected, and Rushdie even gives hints for less perceptive audience members. In the very first pages, both Max and Shalimar think of how India’s beauty reminds them of some other, unnamed woman. The allusion here is to Boonyi, of course, but India does not

By Tom Church, ‘09

G

know this. Therefore, after her father’s murder, India’s central mission becomes finding out who Boonyi is and how she has connected these very different characters.

The complex character web of Shalimar parallels the growing multiculturalism and globalization that simultaneously occur while Boonyi dances, or Shalimar walks his tightrope, or Max covertly escapes France during the Nazi Occupation. Ostensibly, the global events occur in the background because what is important seems to be the complex relationships between characters. However, these occurrences drive and determine the character’s relationships. After participating in La Résistance, Max becomes a shaper of the global postwar economy and a prominent diplomat; he is sent as the Ambassador to India because of this influence. While there, he meets Boonyi, and both his and Shalimar’s lives are forever changed. Multiculturalism affects Shalimar in a very different way. He joins Islamic terrorist organizations and works to eradicate Western influences from Kashmir and, effectively, to tear apart the world Max has helped construct. This physical destruction is an allusion to the destruction Max will meet at the hands of Shalimar later in life, and it symbolizes the nature of the men’s relationship.

The characters constructed in Shalimar the Clown are rich, complex, and intriguing, but at times it feels that they are languishing in a dawdling plot and setting. The story starts out slowly, with “portents” of Max’s death seen months before it actually occurs

October 4, 2005

in detail. Shalimar’s narrative section is filled with his involvement in the jihad, or holy war. While this section is significant, it could have had more impact on the rest of the narrative if condensed. However, the novel as a whole is powerful in identifying the effects of a global society, and its smaller characters redeem even the slowest plot moments.

An Indian-born British citizen, Rushdie is perhaps most famous for his 1988 novel The Satanic Verses, which mocked the prophet Muhammad and thereby incited a furor in the Muslim world, particularly in Iran from Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. In 1989, Khomeini issued a call for Rushdie’s execution and placed a $3 million bounty on his head. While copies of Verses and effigies of Rushdie were burned around the world, the author himself withdrew into hiding. However, since the Iranian government’s 1998 disavowal of the death threats, Rushdie has come out of his isolation, much to the delight of his loyal readers. In Ann Arbor last Monday, he entertained an attentive audience by reading parts of Shalimar, following up with a brief discussion period, and, by request, commenting on his favorite authors. While he praised fellow Brit Zadie Smith’s newest novel, On Beauty, he had much harsher words for Dan Brown’s The Da Vinci Code, calling it “the worst novel ever written.”

A tale of globalization and tradition, of lives intersecting and fracturing, Salman Rushdie’s eighth novel Shalimar the Clown is available in stores now. MR

Friedman Hearkens Back to 1492

lobalization: The word conjures up mixed opinions and fierce debate on the right and left. In the past decade and a half countless media reports of job losses due to outsourcing have made international trade and services highly visible to the American public. American public policy towards globalization has been slow, marred by disagreements of what it means for America. In recent years New York Time Foreign Affairs columnist Thomas Friedman has made himself the go-to guy on globalization, largely defining it in that paper his book The Lexus and the Olive Tree.

In his newest book The World is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-first Century, (Farmer, Straus, and Giroux, 2005, 496 pages, $27.50) Friedman argues that globalization and its effects have “flattened” the world so that everyone, small and large, can compete on a global scale.

According to Friedman, the new world is full of threats to American economic dominance - threats with current public policy have not yet addressed. Friedman lays out these threats and proposes initiatives to continue American dominance.

Among the fall of the Berlin Wall, Friedman includes the introduction of the internet browser, outsourcing, and offshoring as key forces that flattened the world and opened up the playing field.

Seemingly overnight the competition

from international producers forced companies in the United States to alter their business practices. A socially modern but economically classic liberal, Friedman understands the real benefit outsourcing and offshoring gives to American businesses. Outsourcing and offshoring make parts of production more efficient, allowing companies on both ends to hire more people in high-skilled jobs. He extols both methods as necessary business practices, too often slowed down by the explicit job losses and the implicit jobs gained.

American companies have to look abroad for many manufacturing and service jobs in order to stay competitive. Globalization, as Friedman writes, has brought about a new playing field, with new rules, and billions of new workers. The flat world is diminishing the comparative advantage that America once had, and the government is doing nothing to gain the advantage back.

Soon however, Friedman loses the focus of his objective analysis and starts to sound like the doomsayers

that predicted the Japanese takeover of the American economy in the eighties.

Friedman warns Americans about the infrastructure India and China are building with their abundance of engineers. He maintains that those countries will soon pass America if fewer college students major in science related fields. He proposes his own political ideology to work with globalization: the conspicuously named “Compassionate Flatist” movement.

Compassionate flatists advocate social programs that work with people to encourage cushions like social security and wage insurance while hard decisions are made to enhance natural competitiveness. Friedman also proposes social activism between environmentalists, progressives, and global corporations to address corporate moral responsibilities.

Oddly enough, Friedman’s suggested agenda contradicts his advice on the preceding pages: Stick to the free trade. Friedman readily acknowledges that America is powerful because of its culture of inventiveness, private prop-

erty protection, and absence of business barriers. It is America’s infrastructure that keeps it a powerhouse. As Richard Foster, an economist with McKinsey & Company, says in the book, “No capital market in the world does [it] better and more efficiently than the American one.”

The amount of engineers in China and India is only a threat if they have an efficient system to work in – which they currently do not. Friedman’s insistence on forcing global corporations to change their behavior is naïve at best. Corporations will change when consumers demand more biodiversity and eco-friendly products.

The World is Flat is an impeccable guide of how globalization has progressed and how American businesses have adapted for survival. Friedman writes clearly about the less visible benefits of globalization in American society.

He asks the questions necessary to inform the reader of what still needs to be addressed. Unfortunately, his proposals to stop the sky from falling, as he would have you believe, end up face down.

Charlie Munger, the vice-chairman of Omaha-based Berkshire Hathaway, proclaims that the best way to arrive at good judgment is to seek out instances of bad judgment, and then avoid them like the plague. Take Friedman’s analysis of globalization up until 2005 as fact, and then heed Charlie Munger’s counsel. MR

Page 12

MR the michigan review

October 4, 2005

24 years of getting it right...

Mass meeting 10/4/05 Email:

mrev@umich.edu for details