Perception is a tricky thing. Every one of us goes through life viewing and understanding the world from our own unique perspective. Although we cannot help the way we perceive people and events, we do have control over how we react to them, and how our actions shape the perceptions of others. I would not attempt to question whether or not Nate Gulley or Tobi Hill-Meyer perceive racism to exist in the ASUO Senate, as that experience is theirs alone (“Racism is too prevalent in ASUO Student Senate,” ODE April 12, 2007); what I will do is ask these critics to own their accusations and the consequences thereof.
The major problem with the accusations of racism against ASUO Senators this year is that they have not been publicly defended to any reasonable standard. Senator Gulley was satisfied to simply make the accusation without any factual or analytical backing, allowing the mere accusation to hang over the majority of elected student representatives. That Gulley feels no need to explain himself, his statements, or how he perceives racism in the boardroom, shows that the Senator is satisfied to simply feel as if racism exists without any thought to how his accusations affect people around him.
Hill-Meyer gives a few examples of what she perceives as racism in the Senate, however they either apply to senates past, or are easily repudiated – they exist merely as rumors or hearsay. The suggestion that senators have the habit of “snickering when a student speaks with an accent” does not jive with what I have seen on the Senate this year, where students of every background and every skill level of English have come before the Senate and been treated fairly and honestly. Hill-Meyer’s second example of racism in the Senate is a statement that she claims someone made: “MEChA is taking over the Senate.” But this, too, can just as easily be understood in more rational terms. MEChA is without question the most influential student group in the ASUO this year, and its members hold a number of important positions on and off the senate, including ASUO Vice President, PFC Chair, Rules Committee Chair, Programs Administrator, University Affairs Coordinator, Multicultural Advocate and Gender and Sexual Diversity Advocate. The fact that no other student group holds anywhere near that kind of power easily explains how a statement like the one Hill-Meyer points to is a comment on the political situation, rather than a statement of racism.
The real problem with this situation is that it has become emotionalized to such a point that discussion is rapidly becoming impossible. Hill-Meyer misses the point entirely when she writes, “When Senator Gulley accuses other senators of racist behavior, it’s important that those claims be investigated. Instead, he is literally on trial for making such claims before anyone has even asked him what motivated them.”
It is the responsibility of Senator Gulley, or anyone making such a serious accusation, to justify their claims rather than allowing an unjustified suspicion to hang over student representatives. It is especially hard to take such unsupported accusations seriously when they reflect several years’ worth of criticism, yet only emerge at the onset of an election season. A governing body that comes together with the express purpose of making collective decisions must deal with these issues in an open and calm manner, or they risk its ability to work together for all students. With a cloud of unsupported blanket accusations hanging over the majority of the Senate, there is little hope for the honest dialog needed to govern effectively. It is hard to see how such a situation fosters the fair, open and equal environment – an environment that every student wants to realize.
Ted Niedermeyer is the editor-in-chief of the Oregon Commentator