Dear everyone who stopped caring,
Remember how much we’ve been reading about Pacifica Forum for the last month (partly my fault)? I have a pop quiz for you, just to see if you were paying attention.
QUESTION:
PACIFICA FORUM IS…:
A) A Neo-Nazi Group
B) Responsible for vandalizing LGBTQA
C) A Free Speech Group
D) Against feminism, homosexuality, and ethnic equality.
E) A White Supremacist Group
F) Responsible for the anti-Semitic note
G) Loving, respectful, intelligent people
H) All of the above
As the Pacifica Forum resolution finally passed Rules Committee on Wednesday, so too did it bring quite the controversy with it–and this time, no Nazis were present. Towards the end of the evening a bomb was dropped on the Senate (an odd happening in the same night the new ASUO logo had been debated) as tensions over a point of order rose to such that Senate Vice President Nicholas Schultz called for Senate President Nick Gower to resign by shouting, “Step down! Step down!”
The controversy started when Gower did not follow the speakers list–an ordered list for members to abide by–and instead called on Senator Lindsay Reichardt, out of turn. Schultz accused Gower of abuse of power, and called to question Gower’s action. Sens. McCafferty and Gower told Schultz he was not allowed to question that specific action of the Chair (Gower). Schultz, along with ASUO President Emma Kallaway, left the meeting for approximately 40 minutes and came back with a book of Robert’s Rules of Order–the governing rules the ASUO abides by.
From here, the situation escalated into a term I’m trying to coin here lately (patent pending)–a McDisasterfuck. Schultz had figured out that Gower and McCafferty were wrong, and that if two or more Senators called to question the actions of the Chair (Gower) then they could indeed discuss it.
Earlier this week I had the great fortune of sitting down with both Vice President Robin Holmes and President Richard Lariviere. At the time these meetings were scheduled two weeks ago, there remained an array of unanswered questions in regard to the Pacifica issue, including and not limited to: much misinformation about the stances of the University, misunderstanding regarding the legal rights and causality regarding the Forum, a multitude of smear tactics and intolerance displayed by both sides, misquotation and misrepresentation of our university administration.
Since two weeks ago, much has happened. A Student Senate resolution was declined, a protest was outraged, and a hideous act of vandalism was induced. I was worried, perhaps erroneously, that these events could have clouded the judgment of our institution like they have clouded judgment of many protesters and student body (much of the student body still thinks “Pacifica Forum” is a “Neo-Nazi Group,” hence the populace of the “Anti-Pacifica” Facebook group).
I am humbled and relieved at the remarkable objectivity and forward thinking of our administration. I now know that it was unfair of me to equate the mental capacity of our university officials with the riotous aggrandized assertions of some undergraduate protests; I irrationally feared that the UO would get swept away in the deep rooted emotion of many of the students, a very alluring mentality.
I may say with confidence now that my fear has been put to rest.
This swastika was spray painted on the carpet of the LGBTQA on Sunday
There has been a candlelight vigil. There has been a march. As DPS continues to investigate the spray painting of a swastika in the office of the LGBTQA, we still have yet to find any answers. And, looking at the happenings going on in the Daily Emeraldcolumns and their comments section, many people are jumping to rather rash conclusions.
Members of the LGBTQA have already tied the swastika directly to the Pacifica Forum, as seen in today’sEmerald, “LGBTQA Co-Director Alex Esparza linked the Forum’s rhetoric to the incident and criticized the ASUO’s decision. ‘I would like to see a student government that takes a stand against acts of hate like this,’ he said as EMU staff were removing the pieces of carpet upon which the symbol was painted.”
This is a slippery slope, legally speaking, as the organizers of the Forum exercise no control over what speakers say. So even if a speaker got up and incited the crowd to immediately go break into the LGBTQA with spray paint only the speaker would be guilty of incitement.
Of course, now from the other side (quoting here from the Emerald’s comments section) there has been much discussion as to whether or not the LGBTQA, “may have painted it on their own office floor.” Again, this is a serious allegation, one of political violence as a means to an end.
I’ve been giving a lot of thought to Drew’s editorial from the last issue lately, and the more I think about it, the more I think the premise of his argument is a viable, actionable plan. If you haven’t read it, the argument revolves around a plan that would involve students–including those protesting the Pacifica Forum–into the actual Forum as debaters.
The Pacifica Forum was started in 1994 as a way to debate two sides (or three) of an issue. As the years have gone on, speakers at the Pacifica Forum have started to push the envelope of topics discussed. Here, we should make an important distinction: The Pacifica Forum has no members per se, but an open call for its organizers. Indeed, the premise of a Forum is just that–an open discussion or debate. Instead, its protesters have been acting as if the Pacifica Forum is one, solid group with a single mindset.
Contrary to what many may think, the Pacifica Forum is not all Nazis. Instead, the organizers of the Forum have invited Nazis and debated back and forth with them about certain topics–the swastika, the Sieg Heil etc. The problem lately, however, is that the two sides of the debate haven’t been far apart enough in their arguments. Instead of a debater that is far to one side and another that is far to the other, the debaters at the Pacifica Forum have been far to one side with the other somewhere in the middle.
This is where our beloved protesters come in. Although protests were initially meant to be “silent” they have strayed far and away from that premise. Effectively, the anti-Pacifica people want their voices heard. What Drew proposed–and what I think is an exceedingly good idea–is that those protesters join the debate on the other side of the table, as speakers. Instead of holding signs and shouting, or waiting for your turn to speak at the microphone, why not sit on the other end of the table as a third party, a third side to the debate about Nazism or what have you?
I find it harder and harder to find any support within myself for the anti-Pacifica protesters. The Forum itself is not perpetuating Nazism–idiots like Jimmy Marr and Anelauskas are. Why not stand up, take charge, and take back the Forum for yourselves?
Amidst this conflict, somebody told me, “The proper reaction to bad speech is not less speech. The proper reaction is more speech.”
Sens. Schultz and Tipitino have proposed yet another change to the Pacifica Forum resolution. In an e-mail sent today, Schultz said:
Dear Senate,
I have worked extensively with several of you, especially Senator Tipitino. Enclosed is a copy of an amended resolution. Demic and I intend to make the following changes to the resolution prior to sending it to Rules Committee. Please look it over and think about it before Wednesday.
To be sure, the situation is beginning to get out of hand.
[Update] Phylicia Haggerty came to our office today and told us that she did not make this phone call.
Just received a phone call from some who claimed to be Phylicia Haggerty. Here’s how it went:
OC: Hello?
PH: Hi, my name is Phylicia. I just read something on your website I didn’t appreciate. Who am I talking to?
OC: Dane
PH: Alright well that e-mail was meant to be private. I didn’t send it to you, I meant for it to be between me and the [ASUO] Senate.
OC: Well it was sent to us by someone you communicated with. At that point in time, the e-mail he sent was his property.
PH: I meant for it to be private though. I don’t appreciate that.
OC: Well, I think that it really adds to the conversation about the Pacifica Forum. It’s already a part of the public domain.
PH: I’d rather it be taken down. Do you have a boss?
OC: Nope. I am the boss.
PH: Well I think it should be taken down. I never sent any of those to you.
OC: You never stated to anyone that you didn’t wish for them to be printed. Similarly, you actually did send us the second e-mail. You clicked “reply all” instead of just “reply”. You had prior knowledge of who you sent the e-mail to.
PH: I never meant for it to be published. Are you sure there’s no one else there I can talk to?
OC: Nope.
PH: So even if I come do there… where you guys at? Room 319?
OC: Yeah, I’ll be here if you want. The post will remain up though, it’s public information.
PH: So you’re not going to take it down?
OC: Nope. It says right on our masthead that we can print anything you send to us.
PH: Ok, well you’ll be hearing from me then.
OC: Ok.
I feel threatened, don’t you agree? I’m worried about my safety on campus, seeing as she knows where I am.
Here is Phylicia Haggerty’s reply to ASUO Sen. Tyler Griffin’s previous email:
“Tyler,
I appreciate you writing me back. To clarify a few things 1) I am not ignorant and 2) I never said ASUO members have never been discriminated against. I did say that most of you are probably not taking this situation seriously because based on who the Pacifica forum is gearing hatred towards most of you would not classify. I think it was very unprofessional for you to say and I quote “how dare me” and that I should be ashamed of what I said. I think it is truly sad that some of the ASUO members have to thought twice about an issue that is blatantly wrong. I think it is ironic that from what I said in my e-mail that you would have the audacity to claim that you are scared of me. It is too bad that this issue probably will not be resolved until someone gets hurt. I do apologize for saying that nothing has been done about this issue because I know most of you do understand and that you are trying to find a solution. I will not be contacting you on any other circumstances and I do appreciate your time because I know you are very busy. I did contact Student Affairs and I have falsely accused ASUO Senate members in that the policy decision making is not left up to you completely in that the President makes final decisions. Thank you again for your time.
Phylicia Haggerty”
At this point in time, since Griffin hasn’t responded to Haggerty (or hasn’t forwarded us his response) we might as well take a swing at this one. Let’s start with her first e-mail, one which is astoundingly hilarious in its authors minute grasp of rational thought, or a basic concept of the U.S. Constitution.
Today we were forwarded an e-mail correspondence between Phylicia Haggerty, a University of Oregon student, and ASUO Senator Tyler Griffin. I warn you, its contents are disturbing, for it shows the true nature of the misguidance many students have about the Pacifica Forum situation. I have my own opinions about the contents of this e-mail, but I dare not write them here, lest I take away from the incredibly intelligent, well-spoken and well-informed e-mail response Sen. Griffin replied to Haggerty with.
I hope Griffin doesn’t mind that I’ve posted this here, but I believe that such attacks on the members of the ASUO, who have been a highly deliberative body on the subject to this point, should not be subject to such ignorant attacks from members of our student body. I hope students can better inform themselves by better understanding the depth and consideration all members of the ASUO have taken on this point. All I can say is that I openly applaud Griffin for his expressed opinions within his reply. Good for you, Tyler.
From Phylicia Haggerty to Sen. Tyler Griffin:
To The Members of Our Student Senate,
I am a senior at the University of Oregon and I am very concerned for my safety. I am not understanding why the Pacifica Forum situation has not been resolved. I am getting ready to graduate in June with two degrees from this institution, which up until a week ago I was very proud to be a duck.
I have written a letter to Student affairs along with the president of this institution because I feel as though you all are clearly not responsible to make the right decision. I wish you could all sit back and take this situation personally, but you cant because your not the one being hated against. I know what you all look like and as far as I am concerned I believe there is only one person who looks like they would be hated against by this forum so I would not expect you to take this personally. I have already called the Oregonian and if you do not think this news will get out of the University of Oregon spot light you have another thing coming. If this hate group were a bunch of students of color you would have resolved this already.
Freedom of speech? Really is that all you can back your decision on. I bet that students will use their freedom of speech to take this higher than all of you. The first amendment is only applicable when it does no harm to others. Trust me, I have studied plenty of Supreme Court cases. I am very saddened that this has happened and nothing has been done about it. Being a person of color on this campus is already difficult and then to have a hate group promoting students to hate us is even worse. I hope this e-mail finds you well, but I am very frustrated and hurt that I do not feel safe to walk to class, and the fact that nothing has been done about it is beyond unbelievable. If you do not think that the diversity on this campus will decrease due to this decision you need to think again.
That is of course you probably have no concern to keep this “diverse” campus “diverse”. I urge you to sleep on your decision and attempt to take it personally before next weeks meeting. Thank you for your time.
Now, from Griffin back to Haggerty:
Phylicia,
I am sorry you feel hurt, and unsafe, and think that we are morally bankrupt people for not voting for this resolution, but..
You make me feel unsafe. And, yes at this time, because of this email you sent, I feel ashamed to be a duck. Knowing that my peers at this university are so ignorant and naïve to make such accusations of our ASUO Senators, elected by student body.
And, how dare you say we on the body have not been discriminated against! You should truly be ashamed for saying this. You trivialize the nature hate, as you are using the same rhetoric that you wish to silence.
I would encourage you to think, in more depth, what are the possible implications of your extremely false accusations.
Feel free to contact me at any point.
Senator Tyler Griffin (seat six)
EMU Board
Rules Committee Chair.
Yesterday our blog received its highest one-day traffic count ever. The site received 1,880 views yesterday, mostly due in part to two wonderous events that, by themselves, are merely disasters.
Of course, I’m talking about the neverending debacle that is the Pacifica Forum coupled with Daily Emerald sports writer Jonathan Marx ’s decision to run a story accusing beloved campus figure Jeremiah Masoli of stealing.
So, on behalf of the Oregon Commentator, here is staffer Pete Lesiak to present the “Golden Clusterfuck Award” to Marx and the PF respectively.
This is a guest piece submitted to the Oregon Commentator by a student. Unfortunately, by the time we received it we did not have space for it. We have instead chose to post it to our blog as the content is time sensitive. Be advised that the student is not a member of the Oregon Commentator and their views do not represent the editorial position of the Oregon Commentator.
*Note: I am not representing the interest of either opposing faction in terms of this issue: the Pacifica Forum, or its protestors. I represent the legal system applicable to all persons of this country as defined by the institution of the UO’s Code of Conduct, the Oregon State Constitution and the Federal Constitution. I am a realist; I hope I can convince readers to be realists with me.
There seems to be a general misunderstanding by the Pacifica Forum protesters about the causality and validity of their protest. The Pacifica Forum has become notorious for housing uncommon, extremist ideological perspectives that few of us share or respect. Speakers at Pacifica have denounced Judaism, preached hate, and lashed out at community members: they have been specifically praised and acknowledged by neo-Nazi organizations and the NSM (though it is important to point out that the Anti-Hate Task Force, the group leading the protest against PF, has been praised and acknowledged by neo-Communist organizations). But, in order to objectively and dispassionately review the behavior of the Pacifica Forum, as is necessary for legal dispute like banning them from government property, it is important to translate and apply our laws to this organization, not just attack them on morality and personal emotion before litigation is announced. Unfortunately for many protesters, our laws protect this organization.
As you may be aware of, since last week’s Senate meeting, the debate over the Forum has turned to a matter of “student safety”. Several people spoke at the Senate meeting about how they felt threatened by members of the Forum’s choice of words, specifically with comments regarding rape etc. Even ASUO President Emma Kallaway has received an e-mail with pictures of her taken by Pacifica members with her comments written below.
Now, although our detractors would beg to differ, the Commentator prides itself on giving fair judgment to situations, especially ones that are sensitive to civil rights. Since the efforts of protesters last week to turn the issue towards student safety, the Commentator has been feverishly trying to uncover examples from students who feel they have been violently attacked–indeed, if such an event had happened, that would call for a serious discussion on the Forum effecting student safety.
Unfortunately, as you can read in Ross’ article, there have been no explicit threats or acts of violence by members of the Pacifica Forum to our student body. Rather, I should say, that if there has been explicit threats, we have not been able to find evidence of it. We have contacted both DPS and the EPD and neither of them have any reports filed about a member of the Pacifica Forum making an explicit threat of violence. Further, those making the claims of violence or threats from the Pacifica Forum have been unwilling to provide evidence or documentation of these events.
Here is video of last Friday’s Pacifica Forum protest. The camera work and audio is a little off but the ability to see the ruckus is still there. If you look closely you can see the OC news team in action, enjoying the anarchy.
