I think it is utterly detestable that you censored David Horowitz’s ad, “”Ten Reasons Why Reparations for Slavery are a Bad Idea — and Racist Too.””
When did editors of college papers become the ultimate arbiters of the decision on what political opinions are valid to print? The Guardian has no qualms printing ad hominem assaults on President Bush for free, but when Horowitz asks to pay to print his legitimate viewpoints, which may enrage some on the left, the editorial staff censors it. Nor does the Guardian have any problem with picking and choosing which political advertisements to print. What is this but blatant censorship?
Additionally, this is an assault on free speech rights entitled to all Americans by the Constitution. Simply because an ad may express opinions considered to be very politically incorrect, that does not invalidate its right to be heard. I sincerely hope you will reconsider your decision and print the ad.
Republicans at UCSD
Concerning the April 9 article titled “”UCSD Admits More Underrepresented Students,”” the California State-wide Affirmative Action Coalition disagrees.
With regards to affirmative action, the article is constructed to portray so-called minorities as benefactors of the American system, which stands in opposition to the logic behind affirmative action. Defining students of color as “”students of ethnic backgrounds”” hides the reality that white people have ethnic backgrounds. The expressions “”given advantages”” and “”awards”” distort the reality of affirmative action, which is a program to counteract the systems of advantages set up to privilege white males.
Statements such as “”Students are becoming better prepared for a UCSD education,”” other than being completely incoherent logistically, offer no substance or reality to the issue of underrepresented student acceptance at UCSD. The rise of underrepresented student admission is in correlation with increased applications overall. The reasons that enrollments of so-called minorities have continually decreased are many, with an emphasis on the quality campus life. Students who come to UCSD are overwhelmed by the lack of community support for them. Student communities are small and over-worked on campus and students don’t see themselves represented in faculty or staff.
With regards to life on campus, the article quoted Assistant Vice Chancellor Richard Backer stating, “”We get so many applications because we are a great university… that provides a first-rate … social experience.”” If the measure of this university was based on the social experience lived by students of color, then the first-rate status rests within the comfort-zone of white-norm politics. This campus is extremely apathetic to the racial oppression that affects people of color in every way. Either it’s nobody sitting next to you in lecture, ignorant professors, or Ralph Nader attributing the lack of so-called minority turn-out to a lack of personal drive. Just ask Ward Connerly or Peter Preuss, and I’m sure they would agree with Nader that there are no signs posted saying “”No Black People Allowed”” or “”Hispanics [ahem!] Not Welcome.”” But the signs don’t need to be posted; their message is broadcast loud and clear.
So it seems UCSD is the “”best-kept secret in Southern California,”” when you attribute the lack of public knowledge on the workings of racism to the construction of UCSD as a public body. And if the current trajectory of UCSD is now the backbone of goals such as “”[making] the quality of campus life as strong as possible,”” then I have some encouraging statistics for prospective white students that might shed some light on the reality of the statistical propaganda churned out by UCSD admissions. If you look at UCSD’s past ten-year history you may see something “”to be alarmed about,”” as first-year Native American enrollment has decreased by 46 percent and African-Americans haven’t hit 3 percent of UCSD’s first-year population since 1990, dropping 67 percent.
Maybe you would argue with Assistant Vice Chancellor Backer, whose logic would suggest UCSD isn’t academically enriched enough to draw in more people of color, but I would argue that UCSD isn’t quite the utopia of racial equality that this institution would have you believe.
— Stephen Klass
On behalf of the Office of Admissions and Relations with Schools, I offer my sincerest thanks to all of you who enthusiastically gave your time and energy to help with our spring admission programs, projects and events. Again this year, UCSD’s number of applications soared to a record height. As soon as the students received their admission packets, our office launched into a number of “”yield”” activities to ensure that they visited the UCSD campus and that they made the right choice of university.
Not only do we have a goal to admit the top students in California to UCSD, we also work hard to achieve a diverse campus. Your dedication to helping us enroll those admitted students from traditionally underrepresented ethnic groups means so much to us.
You participated in the largest and most successful Admit Day in UCSD history as you greeted, directed, led, chatted with and answered the questions of approximately 13,000 visitors, despite the pouring rain. You generously shared your “”UCSD experience”” (and residence hall rooms!) with our Admit Day “”overnight”” visitors. UCSD’s first Scholars’ Day event was a great success, thanks to your participation and hosting of these high-achieving students.
Nearly 1,700 admitted freshmen received telephone calls from you, as you answered their questions and encouraged their enrollment for the fall. You led campus tours for thousands of students and their families. You received rave reviews from students and parents alike as you served on student panels and spoke before audiences at admission receptions and presentations.
Our partnership with you is invaluable. Together we can make a difference on this campus because we know that UCSD is its students.
— Mae W. Brown
Director, Office of Admissions and Relations with Schools