Scheduled long before the infamous “bake sale,”Wednesday night’s affirmative action forum had becomeincreasingly germane to the campus-wide concerns about the statusof diversity at SMU.
As the question and answer portion of the panel discussionprogressed, students weighed in on both sides of the issue. Butwere the student comments directed solely at affirmative action orwas deeper issue at play beneath the discursive arguments?
Comments from the SMU community were broad in coverage and deepin controversy but hardly fall under the umbrella category of anaffirmative action talk; unless we are willing to say affirmativeaction has less to do with college admissions. The discussion dealtwith race relations in our Hilltop “microcosm” or”bubble,” as students said.
Much like in the bake sale itself, which erroneously placedblack and white males at opposite ends of the price range, theaffirmative action discussion boiled down to a black and whiteissue that left everyone else somewhere in the middle. While manyimportant and essential minorities were represented at the forum,the two “groups” with the greatest showing (and themost to say) were white and black students.
Whether it’s evinced in the faulty scheme for a bake saleprotest or evident in a racial breakdown of forum participants, wesee that in the debate, blacks and whites are heard shouting aboveother racial minorities.
In no way does Ed Board want to offend or somehow devalue thediverse ethnic backgrounds, gender experiences or myriad racialidentities that make up the American milieu. However, nothingpervades the history, politics and identity of this nation like itsbeing founded under the doctrine that all men are created equal,while it simultaneously enslaved an entire race. Even after thepassing of the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments, many Americans (notjust blacks) were left in a form of second-class citizenship.Affirmative action was conceived in the spirit of the Civil Rightsmovement, and is very much, despite its present reach beyond themere two races, a black and white thing.
Whether you believe the debt of discrimination has beenadequately paid or not, you cannot deny that it was once owed. Theorigins of such a debt are far from being forgotten.
A student stood before his peers and said that the discussionhadn’t been about affirmative action but about the”pain” of the SMU community. He said he saw a communitydealing with one of the most formidable contradictions in thediscourse of our nation. Ed Board is inclined to agree.
Regardless of whatever affirmative action plan we choose toimplement as a university, SMU can, sadly, exemplify diversitywithout embracing it. We must continue to open the pathways ofdiscussion on topics of diversity, whether it’s in regards toaffirmative action or not. It is now clear that SMU interracialties need mending, even if the present community was notresponsible for breaking them.
