This week , my fellow Observers, I find myself getting my writing inspiration from the collegiate ranks. Particularly, the fraternity of Sigma Alpha Epsilon at the University of Oklahoma to be exact. For those who may have been comatose over the past few days, what has this fraternity's pledge night panty raid in a twist is a video that revealed it's members participating in a racial chant, on a chartered bus, carrying the members and their dates to an event. Hmmm.....A fraternity expressing racial views? I have to say that I'm a little less than shocked and not at all surprised. An exclusionary organization, more than likely filled to the frat house rafters with well to doers kids, accused of racism? Pardon my sarcasm, but... yeah?... What else is new? I'd be willing to wager that the "event" they were heading to was probably being held at a country club. And we all know there's never any discrimination at one of those.
Due to the video of the chant being messaged anonymously to The Oklahoma Daily and subsequently publicized in tandem with YouTube (which was probably the most damaging), university president David Boren acted quickly. He immediately suspended the two individuals identified in the video and closed down the fraternity's house on campus. He had the Greek letters removed from the face of the building and gave the residents until midnight this past Tuesday to vacate the premises. In addition to Boren's actions, the national chapter of the fraternity quickly "shuttered" the SAE house at UO and the national president, Brad Cohen, stated that he was "not only shocked and disappointed, but disgusted by the outright display of racism displayed on the video." Claiming also that SAE has "zero tolerance for racism.".
Now, I completely understand the position these two have taken on the issue, but trying to avoid getting egg on their faces by cutting these kid loose and washing their hands of them instead of addressing an existing problem may not be the best way to handle such a hot topic. Lets break down some of the statements David Boren has made over the past few racial whirlwind days of his career, shall we?
To the media he stated, "Real Sooners are not racists... Real Sooners are not bigots.". What he does not state is exactly who he considers "real Sooners". According to a large number of the student body who were protesting (which included members of varied races) this issue is an ongoing problem at UO. One saying, with fellow students in agreement, that "it's not something that's only seen within one organization." and "it's nothing new.". So will the "real' Sooners please stand up and identify yourselves. It will probably be easier that way considering all the confusion on the matter. It will also help to weed out the Sooners that are "not real."
Boren claimed to know that "not every member of the fraternity was involved." And cautioned students and the media against "making generalities toward the Greek system.". Then why wasn't the expulsion of the two students identified enough? Why did he close down the fraternity's house and claim to be done with the university's affiliation with SAE? It seems to me that it's easier for him and Brad Cohen to make their own generalities about this one fraternity by making it the repository for all the racial problems claimed to be at UO instead of trying to root it out overall. Easier because the task at hand is virtually impossible. No matter how much we try to avoid the issue, no matter how much we sugar coat the reality of it, racism exists not only at UO but is alive and well worldwide. Sticking our heads in the sand and lying to ourselves about it's eradication just makes the prejudice stronger. The proof of how we ignore the existence of it lies within the last Boren statement I'll breakdown.
To protesters, via megaphone at a rally he stated that the fraternity members involved "misused their free speech.". Really?.... Misused?.... how is this possible? How do you misuse something that fundamentally has no misuse? The cycle of denial begins with the misinterpretation of what free speech represents.
In 1906, Evelyn Beatrice Hall wrote the famous quote that summed up the life attitude of Voltaire. "I disapprove of what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it.". I feel that this quote is a strong reflection of our First Amendment provision of freedom of speech. Unlike some other amendments that have fallen under attack as of late, no one seems to be rushing to this ones defense. Maybe their afraid of what people will "say" about their actions. Defending the right to someone owning a gun is a lot less controversial that championing someone's right to be a bigot. But the fact remains that they do have that right and as ugly as we may find their philosophy, in order to keep our free speech we have to tolerate theirs. Noam Chomsky, considered by many to be the father of modern linguistics, while discussing the Nazis said, "The freedom of speech is worthless without the freedom of offensive speech.".
By no means do I personally agree with what these students were chanting, but I do acknowledge their right to say what they believe. If we are going to persecute people in a vain attempt to end or even curb racism, speech that is not acceptable should apply to everyone. "Standardize" our hate speech, so to speak. If "bad" words and "wrong" thinking are to be determined, then what's good for one should apply to all. No one should get a free pass on what society considers derogatory because they happen to be a member of the race that the statement is about. As ridiculous as that sounds, what's even more so is the constant overreactions to questionable statements because everyone is so afraid of being labeled a racist by acknowledging that prejudice exists within the statements. Another thing we tend to do is somehow believe in the fantasy that if we come up with a nicer sounding way to describe a situation, we can change or even eliminate it. That's the problem with political correctness. A lot like underwear, it changes everyday. What is acceptable today, may not be tomorrow and the sentiment of it is usually stained. If someone could keep me updated daily I would be very appreciative. Maybe a phone call in the morning before I start my day. This way I know right from the get go what the new rules are.
A good friend of mine said on the subject, "Free speech comes with consequence. If you say something that society at large does not agree with, you have to pay a price.". Now, I agree with this statement, but only so far..... and that's exactly the point. Over the years my friend and I have discussed and debated issues many times and very seldom do we agree with each other. We share those thoughts no matter how much either of us thinks the other is wrong. We can, however, agree to disagree on certain things and I feel that we both learn something about each other and different viewpoints of the subject we're debating. When we stop listening to people we don't agree with we loose the ability to learn from each other. As I stated earlier, I certainly do not feel we can learn anything from the dimwits of Sigma Alpha Epsilon, outside of the prejudice itself and the damage it causes, but punishing them over their right to state their views because the vast majority does not agree with it is closely reminiscent to how the general public reacted to the Civil Rights Movement in the 1960s. If anything, we have to be very careful of how we as a society proceed from this point. It is a very dangerous road we are on and it's historically too easy to repeat our mistakes in a different fashion.
Freedom of speech in this day and age has become relevant to the subject matter and it shouldn't be. To my disappointment, organizations such as the Ku Klux Klan and the Nazi Party still exist but we cannot deny them the right to their voice no matter how many people disagree with it. That, my loyal reader, displays the actions and reactions of what society considers "right" thinking and it's exactly that action that the First Amendment was constructed to protect us from. If we allow ourselves or others to persecute people for what they say or believe, we have collectively given up our right to free speech overall, whether we believe we did or not. Strictly an Observation. If you'll excuse me, I have to change my underwear.
View my other articles and Like Strictly an Observer on Facebook
Follow Strictly an Observer on Twitter
Follow Strictly an Observer on Google+
