On this campus, race is a very sensitive subject. Complaints shut down bake sales because those who are offended try to muffle free speech. Affirmative action discussions start out calmly and end up heatedly. Questioning the viability and legality of Special Interest Seats in our own Student Senate is viewed as an attack on the campus’ entire minority population. Racial divisiveness like this springs primarily from one source: the attempts of our campus – students and administrators alike – to differentiate everyone based on race. The more we differentiate, the more animosity there is. One glaring example of this divide is the aforementioned Special Interest seats. The issue has been set aside since the amendment regarding the seats failed in February. The time has come to renew this battle to cast aside the racial bigotry that underpins these seats.
It has always been curiously puzzling that academia is one of the few places in society where certain races receive guaranteed benefits at the expense of others. There are no racial representation guarantees present in the U.S. Supreme Court, either house of Congress, the Presidency, local government, state government, etc. To do so would be seen as ridiculous. However, it continues at universities nationwide, and SMU is no different. Representation at SMU was once all about what school (Dedman, Meadows, Cox, etc.) you were in. We can actually reasonably assume that people with similar majors have similar interests because they have chosen to dedicate themselves to a given field of study. Race-based representation directly implies that minorities all have the same interests. Implication of such an idea is beyond ludicrous. Besides, I can’t choose my race. Don’t penalize me for something I have no control over.
Some would make the argument that these seats in some way make up for any racial discrimination, perceived or otherwise, that minorities face daily in society. To this, I would say that SMU is not responsible for making up for society in any way. I would challenge anyone to explain to me how minorities have faced any sort of discrimination once they set foot on this campus. I would go so far as to say that minorities on this campus quite often enjoy an elevated status. Does everyone realize that SMU employs a Director of Institutional Access and Equity? Her job focuses on that oft-used, watered down “diversity” term, which all too often only means affirmative action.
One could make a convincing legal case against these racist seats. I would start with Article 2, Section 4 of the Student Body Constitution, which states that “the SMU Student Senate shall not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, veteran status, religion, age, disability, or sexual orientation.” In case you’re wondering, discrimination is defined as “Treatment or consideration based on class or category rather than individual merit; partiality or prejudice” (dictionary.com). This is exactly what we are doing when we say that Asian-Americans, African-Americans, Hispanics, and International students get an extra seat. We are discriminating. I am pretty sure the University would never, publicly or privately, claim that it supports discrimination. Yet this policy continues to exist, and no one does anything about it. After much deliberation, the best Student Senate could come up with was an amendment to allow everyone to run for the Special Interest Seats, but keep voting rights for the seats limited to minorities. One prominent minority even noted that such an amendment is really useless for all practical purposes.
Therefore, the answer does not lie with Student Senate; the answer to this problem lies with the students. According to the Student Body Constitution, a petition containing signatures from five percent of full-time and part-time students can initiate a referendum on these seats. It would take place during the next general election. It is time students rallied together to make their university race-neutral. I would be the first to sign such a petition. Let’s move past race. Martin Luther King Jr. advocated a color-blind society. Somewhere along the line, his message got twisted in favor of special interests. It’s time to do away with the silliness of preferential treatment.
Reed Hanson is a junior electrical engineering major. He may be contacted at [email protected].
