Remember OPIRG Forest postcards? Well, they worked!

To the Editors:

At the beginning of the semester, as part of a national campaign, Ohio PIRG collected more than 1,300 postcards to send to the National Forest Service, asking them to protect our roadless areas in the old-growth National Forests, known as the Heritage Forests. The Heritage Forests are home to one quarter of America's endangered species and also provide clean drinking water to more than 1,000 human communities.

I want students to know that their signatures are actually going somewhere, to affect positive change on a national level. Last month, President Clinton recommended to the Forest Service that they develop a plan to protect all roadless old-growth areas in our national forests, which was exactly what we were asking them to do! The Forest Service has not come to a final decision yet, but those 1300 postcards from Oberlin will certainly influence them to make the right decision about protecting against logging in our Heritage Forests.

So again, thank you to every student who signed one of those white and green postcards at enrollment or in Wilder Bowl!

--Ellen R. Montgomery, Ohio PIRG, Earth Day 2000 Co-coordinator

Students denied significant participation in WOST politics

Correction: This letter was originally but incorrectly attributed to college junior Kristen A. Keniray.

To the Editors:

The women's studies (WOST) program is currently conducting a search for a tenure track position in the program. I am writing to critique the manner in which the department has run the search and the manner in which the College structurally manages who has access to power and support in this institution. Over the last month a national search was conducted. Three candidates have been selected to continue in this process; they will be speaking this (12/5) and next week (12/12). The candidates were chosen from a larger pool by the members of the WOST search subcommittee. This subcommittee is comprised of the current chair of WOST, the prior chair and the incumbent chair.

It is in the interest of Oberlin College as a liberal, capitalist, white institution to reproduce ideologies which maintain the status quo power structures and prioritize those who have power. In the case of women's studies it is not coincidental that the three members of the search subcommittee are white liberal feminists with institutional power as the past, present and future chairs of the program in the sense that white liberal feminists generally do not pose a radical threat to the power of liberal institutions such as Oberlin College. It is furthermore not coincidental that students do not have significant access to political power in Oberlin College as a whole, and specifically within the WOST program. To maintain administrative power, Oberlin College, like many other liberal institutions, maintains strong hegemonic power structures between the 'professionalized' (administration/faculty) and the student.

Students were not permitted to participate in the narrowing of the search to the pool of three (a fact not specific to the WOST program alone), nor are we even allowed to know who was in the larger pool. In that, students generally have not had access to venues of political sway within the WOST program or the College as a whole.

More important to this critique, however, is not the political process of this search, but rather the silence of the College and the WOST program in not addressing the more fundamental silence of feminist women of color leaving the College. This familiar trend cannot simply be individualized to the 'choice' of individual professors to leave, but rather is an indication of the strain put on radical women of color professors without institutional support at Oberlin College and the undervaluing of their labor by this institution.

Instead of continuing with this search process in an uncritical manner, the College, women's studies program, and the student body should begin to promote more institutional support for radical professors and women of color, as well as student involvement in general.

--Benjamin Joffe-Walt, College sophomore

Socialists should redefine conception of human rights, society

To the Editors:

I wish to voice a qualm with the socialists who responded to the poster

claiming a Socialist KKK merger, I think we need to get a couple of points

straight. Your complaints began with a rant against someone's sense of humor and ended up complaining about most everyone who has not been anti-establishment this year: pro-WTO, fuck Mumia. I think it is time to evaluate the concept of human rights and accept that human rights are a problem. In fact, they are the key problem and we all need to get past our belief in their benefits. If you look historically, society has only suffered as it has progressed toward constitutional monarchy, republicanism, democracy and so on.

The social contract, if you accept the theory - you socialists ought to - it is understood that society was formed to get past the violent tendencies of nature. It was a very basic protection. The social contract was a repression of natural rights to gain security, not necessarily "human rights." Since then, every time people are given a few rights, they insist on more. They throw fits that are in opposition to the social structure, insisting on the individual being the most important factor. Simply, this is wrong. According to the social contract, the society is what is most important and the individual subservient to it in his own best interests.

This means that society is, of necessity, a repressive structure. But I doubt that any will argue that social structure is wholly bad (and if you do, I am happy to come by to bludgeon you to change your mind). Really, every time people decide to rise up against their structure in some fashion, they are only opening themselves up to violence. Quite frankly,

the individual is expendable on the level of society as a whole. Doing away with individuals on a social level to offer a sign of the intended support of the structure on a greater scale only supports everyone's rights under the social contract. The more rights that you give the individual, the

less stable the society is. Some of us are pro-establishment for our own well-being. I say hose them down and hit them with rubber bullets if it will disperse them and not kill them. It protects our security more than anything.

As a side note, if you insist on touting Mumia's constitutional rights and the necessity of human rights, you must support the KKK's constitutional rights to their individual beliefs. On the other hand, your refusal to accept the KKK's rights under our present constitutional interpretations,

is a repressive denial of human rights by your own definition. Perhaps a redefinition of your conception of human rights and repression is needed.

As for the makers of the posters, I was terribly amused and still believe that anonymous posters are not cowardly, but more effective. I don't believe the socialists put an author's name on theirs either.

--Jay Paul Gates, College 5th-year

Safe spaces vital for increase in retention, progress

To the Editors:

Attacks on the idea of safe space seem to be a more and more frequent occurrence at Oberlin these days. The latest one, Yakup Mete Sener's letter to the editor last week, prompted some thoughts on my part, and I'll try to articulate them to you. Oberlin College continually refers to a moment in its history that sets it apart from other colleges in the U.S. You've seen it in "Follow the Morning Star," you've read it in almost every admissions publication to prospective students, even faculty job postings refer to this moment: Oberlin College is the first college in the United States to accept African Americans and women as members of its student body.

This is not the only historical instance of progressivism at Oberlin. Oberlin was one of the only colleges to recruit Japanese American students from the concentration camps during World War Two, and it was the only college at which a Japanese American was elected President of the Student Council during this period. Why is it that the first two instances are constantly remembered, but this last example is often forgotten? This example exists outside of the white/black racial binary, and the histories of people of color who fall outside of that racial binary are often ignored and forgotten. I think this case underscores the need for ethnic studies at Oberlin. Could there be a connection to our communal historical amnesia and the constant questioning of AAA's legitimacy, and the legitimacy of Asian Pacific American struggles at Oberlin?

What do these legacies mean for us today, on the cusp of a new millennium? Among this year's entering class in the College of Arts and Sciences, a dismal 16 percent were students of color. Compare this to the larger U.S.society, where whites will soon be less than 50 percent of the overall population. In addition, Oberlin has moved from a need-blind to a need-aware, and currently, to a need-sensitive (that term makes about as much sense as "fresh frozen") admissions policy. Working class and poor students' access to an Oberlin education is decreasing, while the number of luxury cars owned by students has skyrocketed.

These trends aren't just reflected in our student body. Take a look at the administration - not a single dean who isn't white. And our faculty? Have you ever been to a General Faculty meeting? It's like an Oldsmobile commercial...The Good Olds Guys...Old White Men. So who's calling the shots at Oberlin? Who's got the power? Who's at the center? And our community is a diverse one? It is no secret that low levels of recruitment and retention of students, especially students of color, is a major problem in our community, a trend that most would agree needs to be reversed. So why is it that at this moment, student of color safe spaces are under attack? Why is it that the validity of students of colors' right to self-determination, and our support networks are being delegitimized? It is vital for all of us to recognize that safe spaces are vital for students of color to survive and succeed at Oberlin. They are part of the solution to our recruitment and retention dilemma - not part of the problem.

Our college motto is "Learning and Labor." It seems that this motto is increasingly seen as two separate modes of action. It seems that some students are expected to do the labor, so that others can learn. Why does Asian American Alliance exist? Why are APA students at Oberlin? To make this a more "diverse" community for the wealthy white students this school seems to be gearing itself toward? Are we here to add some vibrant yellow and earthy brown to the "Lovely White"?

We need to recognize that all of us, as a community, benefit from safe spaces, whether they be organized around race, class, gender, sexuality, ability, or any other form of marginalization, or any combination of marginalizations. Safe spaces are vital to producing an environment that is more conducive for all of us to engage in both learning and labor, to critically examine our privileges as well as our oppressions. To do otherwise would be to turn our back on our historic legacy. It would forsake all that makes Oberlin unique and special among liberal arts colleges in the U.S. Mr. Sener mentions the possibility of a safe space for wealthy straight white males - the United States is a safe space for wealthy straight white males - global finance capitalism is a safe space for wealthy straight white males. To reproduce this kind of thinking at Oberlin is to sacrifice its distinctive history of social progressivism.

--Manu Vimalassery, Double-degree 5th-year