This University has a major problem with racism that the Diversity Plan will eventually address on this campus. The timeline of completion is not satisfactory, and not completed yet. In the words of the great Franz Fanon, “We will accept concessions, but we will never compromise our principles.” In wake of the passage of the Diversity Plan by the University Senate, students know well that we as a University have a long way to go to make real improvements that represent the world’s markets needs. I want to emphasis that this is OUR UO, so we deserve these improvements (four student demands) at a minimum IMMEDIATELY. In many ways this university promotes a culture of whiteness, as does the community. Athletes, students and community members are unfairly marginalized and may be in a helpless situation when our University is perpetuating much of the racism that is often blamed on the community environment.
African-American athletes have earned this school major dollars; that is a FACT. Yet there is no opportunity for those athletes to learn about their history in a Black Studies department. They are forced into a contract that makes them represent this University in a patriotic way, yet we cannot force our teachers to comply to cultural competency. In the infamous words of John Mosley, “We are not into being thought police” (Eugene Weekly, May 25), that is completely hypocritical. Students have nothing but a controlled thought by this University and are being policed all the time. There are many student representatives who are the token students of this University who do the majority of the recruiting and maintaining of the school. Athletes and multicultural advocates are the flag wavers of this University. Athletes have earned more money for this school and are the most-valued entertainment and publicity for this University, yet these students are not students first and athletes second. These students who are forced into these patriotic occupations deserve major compensation for their work.
The absolute truth of this University is that it does not respect its current students by lulygaging on a comprehensive plan to create more racial diversity that is 50 years LATE. Instead, it chooses to respond to irrational cries of “reverse discrimination”; these have no real argument and foundation. Please can someone explain this discrimination to me, as they argue conservatives are marginalized, similar to the Blacks’ struggle, often quoting Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. He never advocated for White paternalism, and this is actually is one symptom of uneducated folks misappropriating Human Rights activists’ words for selfishness, not altruism as MLK Jr. did. “Reverse discrimination” is nothing more than a fabrication and manipulation of racist media. The destructiveness of this is it turning the VICTIM into the CRIMINAL and the CRIMINAL into the VICTIM. Anyone who claims “reverse discrimination” is a participant in the white power structure and has NO foundation to the claim. I urge students to research both claims of “reverse discrimination” and “racial discrimination”: Which one has a moral and unselfish agenda? Little to no disputing of this claim is an example of how little diversity is in this academic environment. A diverse one would more quickly disregard claims that have no real truth to them, such as reverse discrimination. As a flagship university it is our responsibility to move forward with the goals of Affirmative Action, and the Brown v. Board of Education ruling, which have not yet accomplished what their
original aims were. University President Dave Frohnmayer: Forget about opposition, they are dead WRONG; it’s your job, not the students’.
Ty Schwoeffermann is a University student