Flog: SMC Commencement 2005

from Shane Smith

Shane Smith's Notes on the Disturbance

During the ceremony, I heard constant yelling and noises from whistles, making it difficult to hear the Governor during most of his speech and at times making it inaudible. (Seven links to videos of it appear below.)

Link 1. Coverage by KCAL Channel 9 June 15. Once link is open to the KCAL page, underneath the Governor's picture, you may click on the link below the title word "Video". http://www.cbs2.com/topstories/topstories_story_166081847.html The disturbance came mainly from two groups of students and activists in the bleacher, and their infringement on the rights of the graduates to hear the Governor was encouraged by several faculty on stage who stood up turning their backs to the Governor and holding up posters that faced the audience.

Link 2. News video from inside the ceremony along with other news video.
Windows - http://www.popupusa.com/Arnold_SMC.wmv
QuickTime http://www.popupusa.com/Arnold_SMC.mov

From the vantage point on the stage behind the Governor, it was easy to see nearly all graduates applauding the Governor's words. Faculty leaders who doubt that, could call for a non-partisan polling of the faculty and graduates who were there. I recognized some of the students causing the disturbance, and they have been associated with and likely members of the Associated Student club called Progressive Alliance. Progressive Alliance members announced publicly, weeks before the ceremony, that they would make their disagreements with the Governor known inside the ceremony. An editor from The Corsair newspaper was there inside the ceremony where he can be seen yelling repeatedly at the Governor during the Governor's speech. The Corsair is put out by an Associated Student club called The Corsair Club.

Link 3. News video from inside the ceremony. Takes a minute to load. http://popupusa.com/ben/Fair_and_Balanced.mpg

Links 4, 5, and 6. FOX News coverage by Bill O'Reilly in his "The O'Reilly Factor." http://popupusa.com/arnold-movies/Oreily-3.mov
http://popupusa.com/arnold-movies/Oreily-2.mov
http://popupusa.com/arnold-movies/Oreily-1.mov

Link 7. Video of the Governor's speech made by SMC staff is available in the Media Center for checkout."

from Guido L. Davis Del Piccolo

Sent: Monday, June 13, 2005 11:39 AM

Colleagues:   Given that many individuals replied only to me, here are the results from the previous message:

It looks like we will have a combination of all acts of protest against tomorrow’s commencement speaker.  Some faculty will be outside the ceremony joining in protest with one of the two planned demonstrations.  Others have voiced support for “Option 2” (leaving the stage when Mr. Schwarzenegger takes the podium and returning to the stage to congratulate our graduates.)  Still others favor turning our chairs around when he takes the podium.  And finally others favor loud booing and chanting during his address.

Obviously, I’m not reporting on the messages I received in support of Mr. Schwarzenegger’s appearance (both via email and telephone).  That was not the point, nor the intended audience, of the original message.  Following the event, however, I intend to share with the larger campus community the responses I have received.  We all need to be aware of the overriding professional and personal climate present on this campus.

from Guido L. Davis Del Piccolo

Professor Chandler:  I feel obligated to respond to this message on my own behalf as well as on behalf of many of the graduating students who are not privy to your email message below.

Regarding "Free Speech":  It is fundamentally disingenuous to position a commencement address in the context of "free speech" or a "free exchange of ideas".  No commencement address (to my knowledge) has included a debate format, a question/answer format, or a rebuttal address format.  (Undoubtedly, many of those protesting Mr. Schwarzenegger's address would welcome his presence at any of the above formats.)  Thus, we must not equate a protest of Mr. Schwarzenegger's address with "a denial of free speech."  Moreover, no one can honestly say that Mr. Schwarzenegger's free speech rights have been or will be violated as long as he is the governor.  Power simply does not work that way.  (Just access ANY media source and you will find his ideas readily available.)

Regarding "Minority Rights":  I wish you were correct in your statement that the rights of minorities based on race, gender, sexual preference, and ethnicity are valued.  Sadly, however, you are mistaken (as your own dig at Progressive Alliance & MEChA points out).  Moreover, as I understand it, the protests were not about "political opinions" as you state, but rather political actions and policies.  I am quite certain that a commencement speaker of "conservative political opinion" (such as yourself) would not have been the target of protest.  It is the actions, not the opinion, that are the target of protest precisely because it is ACTIONS that impact people and communities.

Regarding "hate-filled bigots":  Wow.  I don't even know where to start on this one.  Are you really referring to SMC students this way, or only the ones you disagree with?

Regarding who the protesters were?:  If you, or anyone else, is under the impression that the majority of those protesting in the audience were not SMC students, you are mistaken.  If fact, many (probably over half) were not only SMC students, but GRADUATING and/or TRANSFERRING SMC students.  Some, as you point out irrelevantly, were involved with various SMC student organizations, others were not.  I know first-hand of many students who made their own decision not to "walk" at graduation, but rather to do what they thought was right--which was to protest against the commencement speaker's actions and policies. 

Regarding students' families:  It must also be pointed out that many of those graduating students in the "protesting audience" had by their side their parents, families, and friends.  And while you are absolutely correct in stating that the protestors disrespected Mr. Schwarzenegger, we must also be clear that Mr. Schwarzenegger's presence at their own or their child's commencement disrespected many of our students and their families.  Some faculty, including myself, choose to side with those students and their families.  To me, the hard work of those students and their families is much more deserving of respect than the actions and policies of Mr. Schwarzenegger.  The decision to go forward with this commencement speaker--a decision made by the SMC Board of Trustees and Administration--forced us all to make a choice:  to whom do we show respect--the governor or our students and their families?

Some of our 2005 graduates have their own children or siblings in the public schools and were so outraged with the governor’s policies that they traveled to Sacramento to make their concerns known--not an easy decision to make for low-income families.  And what do we expect when we bring this very governor to them as a role model, keynote speaker at the graduation they struggled to achieve?

Regarding an apology:  The only apologies necessary should come from the SMC Board of Trustees to the hard-working, graduates of SMC (who succeeded in spite of Mr. Schwarzenegger's policies) for the disrespect shown towards them by not rescinding the commencement address invitation.  I suppose the Board could also issue an apology for refusing to agendize the possibility of rescinding the invitation (even though all events on June 14th were absolutely predictable).

Guido L. Davis Del Piccolo

Assistant Professor, Sociology

Santa Monica College

The O'Reilly Factor and The Gropenator

[NOTE: This email was written in response to an email which has not been posted here. A transcript of the O'Reilly program referenced is included in the left column of this page.]

From: GOLDSTEIN_MARTIN
Sent: Fri 6/17/2005 8:15 PM
To: DOWNS_JIM; CHANDLER_FRAN; FACULTY_ALL
Subject: RE: The O'Reilly Factor and the Gropenator

Calling the O'Reilly Factor a news program is a bit of stretch, but he and Arnold do have something in common -- a history of sexual harassment. If they're pals, they deserve each other, and if you take comfort in their smarmy behavior, you really do deserve to have your social security and pensions trashed. Maybe you want Piedad back, too. After all, we weren't very polite to her, either. She got what she deserved, and so did Arnold -- and it's only the beginning.

Representing the "special interests" of concerned and committed educators,

Martin M. Goldstein
Communications

from Nancy Nieman

Graduation Speakers and What We Owe our Students

When I heard that Arnold Schwarzenegger would be the SMC graduation speaker, I was concerned. I realized that this was payback for “Equalization” (greatly increasing funds SMC receives from the State), but graduation speakers are supposed to set an example for our graduates. I object to Santa Monica College holding up Arnold Schwarzenegger as a role model to our graduates.

Arnold “succeeded” in life by cheating, doing drugs and bullying, and at graduation he expressed no regret. He actually bragged about the many contests he won. It is common knowledge that he took steroids and won by CHEATING, hardly an activity the faculty wants our students to copy! And do we really want young people to think that drugs lead to success?

For years Arnold sexually harassed women, including several Santa Monica College employees. How did they feel about Arnold speaking at graduation? Westside women have warned each other about his harassment for twenty-five years. I have seen his distain for women and I have met the woman whom Arnold threatened with gang rape when she was 16 years old. I wonder how she felt when she found out SMC was honoring Arnold.

In movies, Arnold plays himself: the Super Bully! Just because he bullies “bad guys”, does not make him a “hero”. The message in his movies is: beat up on those you do not like. Troubled children, teenage gang members and youthful shooters in our schools feel they are going after “bad guys”, just like Arnold. Anyone who glorifies the bully in movies is very low on my list of role models for graduates.

The day before graduation, the governor called for an expensive special election. The Governor had been running ads about how the legislature was spendthrift, and now he planned to spend $80,000,000 on a special election to give himself much more power. $80,000,000 would buy a lot of books for our children, and a whole lot more!

Californians need to think seriously about this extravagant special election when the same propositions could be voted on at no extra expense only seven months later. Wouldn’t you prefer to spend that money on students? What is the real motive for this election?

Some people say the College has control over the faculty’s freedom of speech and that the College should have maintained decorum at graduation. As an academician, I cannot condone the repression of freedom of speech. Repression for propriety’s sake is shameful. Most of the public understands that Arnold is a highly controversial public figure and that we have individual freedom of expression in the United States and at Santa Monica College. There was no moral or legal basis for limiting this freedom of expression. If there had been a legal basis, the law enforcement officers and muscle-bound bodyguards, who threatened to take my poster away, would have.

The faculty protest at graduation was nothing new. Academic freedom has been around since the Middle Ages. Some say our protest will lead to students protesting in the classroom. They do it all the time. They wear the most obnoxious T-shirts! What difference would it make if they put it on a sign? As long as they do not obstruct another student’s view or make it difficult to hear, they are within their rights.

Some say Santa Monica College was damaged by the protests. On the contrary, SMC was compared to UC Berkeley! Many have thanked me for raising my poster. I received only one reprimand.

What damages a college are authorities who try to restrict freedom of speech, cowardice to stand up to bullies. As far as the dignity of the College is concerned, that was exactly what we were upholding by saying: “Some of us object!” The dignity of the College rests always with those who dare to speak the truth to our students.

That Arnold will take revenge, I have no doubt. Bullies always do. But ONLY HE is responsible for his actions. Anyone who apologizes out of fear of reprisal is a coward.

I was told my actions were “self-centered.” On the contrary, I risked losing a lot of old friends, and I had no assurance of support from anyone.

Teaching at SMC has taught me that students only succeed when they know the truth about themselves and the world around them. They are confused when adults obfuscate for political purposes or worry more about reputation than the students’ welfare or for any reason do not tell the truth. The truth is:

Arnold is a terrible role model, and I am ashamed that Santa Monica College
would tell students otherwise by inviting him to speak at graduation.

Nancy Dale Nieman, Ph.D.
Modern Languages

from David Finkel

I have watched the email commencement parade go by and would like to add the following comments. While I support the right to public protest by anyone [students, faculty, the public...that is an essential part of democracy] I do not agree with those who claimed that when all the smoke died down, democracy prevailed at the June commencement. And I do not agree with those who claimed that the student, faculty and public protests took away from the graduates the benefit of the commencement. If the commencement was democratic, and if the commencement was held for the benefit of the graduates, why weren't the graduates the ones who chose their own commencement speaker, rather than the administration? I propose that the Faculty recommend to the Board of Trustees that SMC policy be changed to authorize the graduating classes to select their own commencement speakers. I hope that the students would support such a recommendation. If the Faculty and the students speak up, and the Board of Trustees adopts such a policy, THEN we will finally be able to say that democracy prevails and future commencements will be held for the benefit of the graduating classes. And the process of such advocacy and transfer of authority will constitute evidence the best education SMC can offer of how a free society should work.
Thank you.

David Finkel
Political Science

Letter to the Editor - Fran Chandler

[NOTE: This upublished letter was in response to an article (see left column of this page) by Dan Weintraub--published in the Sacramento Bee and in the Pasadena Star News--that made it seem as if no one at the institution or in the crowd welcomed the governor. Furthermore, the article implied that the protestors were union sponsored.]

Letter to the Editor, Sacramento Bee, Re: Dan Weintraub’s Article

Dan was right; Governor Schwarzenegger does deserve better! He was treated abysmally at Santa Monica College; yet, despite this, his courage, confidence and inspiring message won the day--for him and for our graduates. However, the article wrongly gave the impression that the group disrupting the ceremony was larger than it was. In actuality, it consisted of approximately 50 people in the stands (some students and many outside activists) and a few faculty members on stage.

From my viewpoint behind the governor, I saw the hundreds of eager faces of the proud graduates, their families and their friends. In addition, I was proud to stand with many others on stage in support of the governor. The applause throughout his speech and the standing ovation at the end proved that most people were appreciative of the governor's words and proud of him--one of our own students.

It is indeed unfortunate when such a rude rabble is able to ruin such an important event for those who worked for years to finally graduate. Unfortunately, rather than face their rudeness, these people excuse their behavior under the guise of free speech, never appreciating the irony of their attempting to deny someone else that same right.

Whether they were hate-filled bigots or simply people with an honest disagreement with the governor's educational policies makes no difference; many more effective--and less embarrassing--ways exist to make one's voice heard.

A number of letters of apology have already gone out to the governor. Below is the text of one many faculty members are sending to the governor. The letter has only been out for a few hours, and I already have over 50 signatures on it--all this on a weekend between sessions. As I am the writer of the letter, I give you permission to print any of it you wish.

Fran Chandler

from Gail Livings

Paulo Friere has been called one of the most influential thinkers about education in the late 20th century.  He is most known for his concern for the powerless as written in The Pedagogy of the Oppressed.  Friere posited five main ideas:
1. The importance of dialogue and the fact that the dialogue was two way, contained in a respectful relationship.  It meant that people worked with each other.
2. He spoke of “praxis” – action that was informed by knowledge and should be linked to values.  But it wasn’t knowledge for knowledge sake; rather, it was to empower people to use the knowledge to make an impact on their world.
3. He spoke about building hope for the oppressed. As consciousness is increased, society can be transformed.
4. Friere emphasized the importance of linking education with the real world experiences of the students.
5. Friere tried to highlight and minimize the differences between teachers and learners.

Freire states that education is a subversive force. In particular education is both subversive and real when it is liberating. "Education as the exercise of domination stimulates the credulity of students, with the ideological intent (often not perceived by educators) of indoctrinating them to adapt to the world of oppression" Whereas, "Liberating education consists in acts of cognition, not transferrals of information"  Most tellingly, "Problem posing education does not and cannot serve the interests of the oppressor. No oppressive order could permit the oppressed to begin to question: Why?" Indeed, problem posing education is a form of education which provides a method of finding meaningful problems and solutions for those receiving the education; not a way to oppress those attempting to gain education. The oppressors basically do not wish for the oppressed to think for themselves; similar to how advertisers attempt to plant ideas in the consumer's subconscious mind and give him/her notions about providing for the ease of things being done for them, pre-made. The oppressors do not want the oppressed to have the education that is based on experiential learning. A pre-made education is one which will keep the oppressed oppressed and without freedom. True education is a practice of freedom  and requires that the oppressed apprehend and intervene in reality .

Conscientizacao is a central concept to Freire's conclusions. The term is described as "learning to perceive social, political, and economic contradictions, and to take action against the oppressive elements of reality"  Freire states that some perceive conscientizacao as a danger. Conscientizacao involves knowing and naming the reality around you and interpreting that reality with critical analysis. In a sense it is a state of becoming fully conscious.

As Erich Fromm said in Escape from Freedom:
[Man] has become free from the external bonds that would prevent him from doing and thinking as he sees fit.  He would be free to act according to his own will, if he knew what he wanted, thought, and felt.  But he does not know.  He conforms to anonymous authorities and adopts a self which is not his.  The more he does this, the more powerless he feels, …

I believe the essence of "Escape from Freedom" can be found first in the chapter, "Mechanisms of Escape": "The person who gives up his individual self and becomes an automaton, identical with millions of other automatons around him, need not feel alone and anxious any more. But the price he pays, however, is high; it is the loss of his self."
And second, under the chapter, "Freedom and Democracy":
"This loss of identity then makes it still more imperative to conform, it means that one can be sure of oneself only if one lives up to the expectations of others. If we do not live up to this picture, we not only risk disapproval and increased isolation, but we risk losing the identity of our personality, which means jeopardizing sanity."
"... We must replace manipulation of men by active and intelligent co-operation, and expand the principle of government of the people, by the people, for the people, from the formal political to the economic sphere."

As John Dewey put it:

The serious threat to our democracy,” he says, “is not the existence of foreign totalitarian states.  It is the existence within our own personal attitudes and within our own institutions of conditions which have given a victory to external authority, discipline, uniformity and dependence upon The Leader in foreign countries.  The battlefield is also accordingly here – within ourselves and our institutions. 
If we want to fight Fascism we must understand it.  Wishful thinking will not help us. 

Battle On, Think Always!

Apology Letter

June 27, 2005 The Honorable Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger
State Capitol
Sacramento, CA 95814

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger:

We, the following employees of Santa Monica College, formally apologize to you for the treatment you received while giving your keynote address on June 14. The disruptive behavior of loud-mouthed student hecklers in the audience and the few faculty members who turned their backs on you was unacceptable.

From your clear vantage point, we hope you saw what those of us on the stage behind you saw: Almost all graduates and most of the audience listened attentively, and they stood and applauded repeatedly throughout your speech. Their support for you and for your inspirational message to SMC graduates was shown by the applause at the end of your speech, applause that drowned out the hate-filled banter of the malcontents.

It is unfortunate that a few individuals' disagreement with your educational policies has not manifested itself in more fruitful and more place-appropriate forms of political action. Oddly enough, those who condone these egregious acts do so under the guise of free speech, failing to recognize that responsible participation in a deliberative democracy requires them to extend those same rights to others--even those with political ideologies different from their own. Preventing anyone from being heard is the worst infringement of free speech possible, and it is wrong. Furthermore, it is particularly unfortunate when such a violation occurs at an institution of higher learning, where respect for basic constitutional and human rights is the very air we breathe.

Thank you for coming to Santa Monica College to deliver the keynote address. Your words about your experience as an SMC student and how it set the stage for the leader you are today gives us pride in the work we do. Your old professor, Dick Dodge, would also have been proud of how far that extraordinary student of his has gone!

In addition, we commend you for your courage in delivering superbly your entire speech to our proud, eager graduates and their friends and families without acknowledging those who tried to turn the event into a political coup.

You honored Santa Monica College by giving so generously of your time, and we can't thank you enough for your words. In addition, we trust you will not judge Santa Monica College by the behavior of a rude few.

Sincerely,

Fran Chandler, Chair of Business and Accounting Department
Shane Smith, Math Instructor
Co-Advisors, Santa Monica College Republicans

Those who also granted permission to send this letter in their names:

Winniphred Stone, Director of Distance Education
Alan Hong, Professor of Math
Marina Parise, Reference Librarian
Anne. L. Young, Dept. of Music
Ethan Gallogly, Professor of Chemistry
Carole McCaskill, RN, MS, Health Sciences Professor
Perviz Sawoski, Chair, Theatre Arts
Peter Lippman, Business Professor
Jim Downs, Business Law Professor
Megan Granich, Math Instructor
Paul Wissman, Ph.D., Life Sciences
Anne P. Stone, Adjunct, English Dept.
Dr. Michael Schapa, Professor of Accounting and Taxation
Marilyn Adler, Heath Science Dept., Nursing Program
Ron Fitzgerald, CPA, Professor of Business
Sal Veas, Professor of Business
Joshua Coplen, Business Instructor
Kay Waud, Physics Professor
Steven A. Fink, Life Sciences
Jim Downs, Business Dept.
Dr. David Goodman
Rich Robinson, Professor of Geology
Patricia Halliday, Professor of Business
Janie Jones, Instructor, Theatre Arts
Carolyn Feruzzi, Adjunct, Counseling
Eleanor Schapa, Professor of Art and Accounting
Kenneth Buckner, Teacher, Emeritus
William O. Robertson, Emeritus Campus
Linda Babcock, Business Professor
Vicki Drake, Geography Professor
Steve Hunt, Librarian
Lynette Shishido, Professor of Business
Dr. Moya Mazorow, Professor of Mathematics
Christopher Meeks, English
Richard Mednick, Adjunct Associate
James Smith, Chair, Dept. of Music
Jim Sinclair, Business Instructor
Nick DiCamillo, Professor
Gary Strathearn, Adjunct Instructor
Marilyn Goodrich, Administrative Asst., Student Services
Elizabeth Chavez, Adjunct Kinesiology
Jean Georgie, Professor of English
Claudia Celestial, DSPS Instructor
Jonathon Hodge, Planetarium Director
Audrey Roche, Retired Chair, Business, Computing and Public Safety
Herbert McNeely, Police Officer
Christopher Michael Davis, Dept. of History
Mary Colavito, Professor of Life Sciences
Helen LeDonne, Cosmetology
Jenna Gausman, Career Counselor/Counseling Instructor
Karlyn Musante, Associate Faculty, Psychology
Michael Schwartz, Astronomy
William Konya, Professor of Mathematics

from Gail Livings

Welcome to the "new Normal" -- Just imagine --
A community college holds a graduation ceremony which features a politician who has done his best to dismantle education in California. Some students, faculty and staff object to his presence at this event, and attempt to have him "disinvited." They follow protocol in trying to get on the Board of Trustees meeting agenda only to be denied. Thanks to that pretense of democracy in Board decision-making, the public comment session is dominated by community, faculty and students offering a range of reasons for rescinding the invitation to the Governor. Even with the Governor's office insisting on having 48-hours prior to the event to inform the college as to whether or not he will actually attend, the Board ignores the dissention and proceeds with the intention of having the Governor as commencement speaker. This despite the clear display of acrimony that this decision has engendered among such a diverse representation of SMC and the Santa Monicacommunity.

As word of this development circulates, various organizations [labor, community, immigrant-rights, women's, among others] decide to exercise their rights of freedom of speech and assembly. In response, SMC administration and local law enforcement commence to curtail the expression of these rights. They invoke concerns for "security" and "decorum" as sufficient cause to deny the expression of those rights. Yet, as evidenced by the current debates in the U.S. Congress over the extension of the U.S.A. Patriot Act, we are living in the "new Normal" where dissent, disagreement and critique equate to disloyalty and being unpatriotic -- or worse, being a "person of special interest" worthy of indiscriminant detention. So we were not surprised by the "show of force" and close surveillance [i.e., cameras and undercover officers] by various law enforcement agencies that permeated the event. We learned that only in the specially designated "free speech zones" on campus were political messages allowed. I videotaped campus police refusing to allow a student wearing a chicken suit with a political message as well as faculty and students displaying political messages [t-shirts, buttons, and placards]from going anywhere near the library where a reception for the Governor was to be held. They were threatened with ejection from the campus and arrest if they did not comply with the orders to leave the area. They/We complied and headed to the football stadium where the graduation ceremony was to be held. All along the way we were shadowed by cops on bikes, plain clothes security talking into their lapels, and poorly disguised undercover cops. Clearly they hoped their physical intimidation tactics would prevent us from committing some nefarious deed. So imagine our surprise when the "chicken guy" was allowed to enter the stadium without being searched, questioned, or deterred. Upon further consideration I and others decided to accompany him for his own protection. Inside it became quickly apparent that he was going to be closely surveilled. No less than a SMPD detective took a post directly next to me with anywhere from 6 to 10 undercover cops close by. We exchanged video shots -- this not being the first time we had made contact in my capacity as a NLG legal observer covering numerous protests. A couple of alert faculty on the stage informed us that they had overheard cops on the radio discuss how to remove "chicken boy" from the stadium. This became a dilemma for security since he wasn't breaking any laws nor engaging in disruptive behavior. Fortunately the chicken was allowed to stay and express his right to free speech. While elsewhere in the stands, cops confiscated banners being held up by protesting students -- not outsiders as reported by some. In the end "chicken boy" made it out unscathed except for numerous fans wishing to pose with him for photos.

What difference did all this activity make?? Time will be the judge as they say, but I want all those dissenting people inside and outside the stadium to know that for many it amounted to "shock and awe." Some of those observers would clarify that they found it "shocking and awful" while others of us would characterize it as "shockingly awesome!" And that little tingle in your gut when you were at your most "shockingly awesome" -- that's the sense of EMPOWERMENT that comes with taking a stand and speaking truth to power. I am enormously proud to have shared this historic event with my "comrades in arms" -- a war metaphor that unfortunately in warranted in academe of late. But as pointed out by others we cannot let this momentum succumb to business as usual. It is vital that the coalition-building and alliances forged by this battle be maintained for those conflicts to come. Remember what democracy should look like, and how precious it is right now.

"Saoirse, Ceart agus Siochain,"*
Gail Livings
Social Sciences

* Gaelic for “Freedom, Justice and Peace”

From Frank Dawson

From: DAWSON_FRANK
Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2005 3:09 PM
To: BROOKINS_GREGORY; FACULTY_ALL
Subject: RE: Final Thoughts - Commencement '05

Thank you Greg. I agree completely. Anyone who attended graduation experienced a very broad demonstration of opinions and attitudes. This was certainly democracy in action. Far from being disruptive, from my view, those on stage who decided to express dissatifaction carried out their protests in a manner that was thoughtfully considerate to the graduates, their families and the occasion.

I walked the crowd with a few of my colleagues, talking to proud and happy families and taking photos with students until we were forced to leave the stadium. There was certainly not a mood of disgust or dissatisfaction among these folks, and that is who the day was for. Yes, graduation was a mixed bag. Some loved it, others hated it. As a group, I feel very strongly that we have nothing to apologize for. It's over. Welcome to America.

Frank Dawson

Communication Department

from Gregory Brookins

From: BROOKINS_GREGORY
Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2005 1:47 PM
To: FACULTY_ALL
Subject: Final Thoughts - Commencement '05

Dear Colleagues,

Just when you thought it was safe to read your e-mail again…I have one last e-mail on the Commencement ceremony.  First, I’d like to start by apologizing to those of you, who feel you are being spammed when “Faculty All” is used.  I normally don’t participate in these e-mails for that very reason.  However, after reading last week’s e-mails I felt I needed time to clearly respond with facts that were either overlooked by or unknown to those who attended and those who were not present at the ceremonies.

1)      From some of the e-mails, it sounded as though apologies were being offered to the Governor on behalf of the faculty because of the disruption caused on stage.  From my vantage point at the rear of the stage, jeers of the Governor started BEFORE his address in the AUDIENCE as his name was mentioned (maybe 3-4 times).  I did not hear jeering on stage.  As the Governor was announced, about 25% of the stage stood in support of the Governor, the remainder was silent.  I was on the same row as the onstage protesters. Each of the protesters was SILENT and did not in any way hinder anyone’s ability to hear the Governor’s address.

2)      The Academic Senate Resolution – This resolution was not drafted as a political response but was limited specifically to how various decisions made during this Governor’s tenure have adversely affected students, faculty, and the community college system.  One purpose of the resolution was to give the Senate’s opinion on the Keynote Speaker without diverting attention from the students during the graduation ceremony itself.

In closing, I have mixed feelings regarding the event.  Commencement Day is a day for the students.  While the circumstances were not ideal, I think democracy “worked” that day.  Some protested before the ceremony, some wore buttons supporting the Governor, some protested silently and others protested vocally while some cheered loudly in support of the Governor.  And, in the end – It’s All Good!!!  Everyone had the opportunity to express themselves in the manner they thought best fit this unique occasion.

Respectfully,

Greg Brookins
Business Dept.

from Josh Kanin

From: KANIN_JOSH
Sent: Tue 6/14/2005 2:06 PM
To: JAVELOSA_DAVID; FITZGERALD_RON; FACULTY_ALL
Subject: RE: Schwarzenegger and Commencement

Permit me to throw in my own "two-cents" worth into the ongoing e-dialogues in coming to the defense of our students' rights. Governor Schwarzenegger's commencement speech has been foisted upon our campus community (including our students), knowing that many of us are opposed to his community college education policies. Mr. Fitzgerald's plea to allow our students to savor their graduation day without "outrage" is, in my view, somewhat naive and unrealistic. Whether students work hard or not, they are always given their graduation ceremony, but they are not always given a graduation that requires them to listen to a commencement speech delivered by the most powerful foe of education in the state of California - a governor who many contend has shown nothing but contempt for the future of higher education in this state.

Whether SMC graduates this year are "outraged" or not by the governor's commencement address cannot be pre-determined, nor can their attitudes and behavior be "legislated." Some of us have expressed a strong view that the governor's participation in this year's commencement festivities should be accepted, that his commencement speech should be respected and heard (without bias), and that his oration should not be protested while it is being delivered. As faculty, we are, of course, divided on this issue. Nevertheless, we have no qualms about vociferously expressing our divergent views within SMC's e-mail system.  Students do not have access to the same e-mail communications network that is available to us, so they have no way of publicly expressing their views to their teachers and administrators except through vocal means during appropriate, instructor-sanctioned classroom discussion forums, or in other campus outlets where they feel it is acceptable to voice their protest and express dissenting viewpoints. Students do not have to like what has been forced on them for a commencement speaker. Nor do they feel the need to register approval of that choice just because it may, for some in positions of authority over them, be more polite and politically advantageous to do so.

Let's not forget that, in the case of some of our students whose parents were in college during the turbulent 60s and early 70s, they may have been taught by former (and current) politically countercultural parents that activism and social protest are vital to engage in, and that it is not against the law to do so, at least not yet. Those students who are "outraged" not only have the right to express their views on controversial issues, but they also may have learned that they have a responsibility as free citizens of a democracy to register their disapproval of a commencement speaker who has been chosen by their college's administration to speak to them. After all, hasn't the institution of the university always been the last bastion of free speech in this country, and shouldn't it remain so? Whether student protest is being expressed on a commencement day that many feel is not the proper occasion for such protest, it will undoubtedly be forthcoming. despite what is considered to be politically correct by their college's administration.

One would hope that those who choose to exercise their right of free speech and engage in peaceful protest not only at SMC, but in our nation-at-large, will not have their views trivialized or discredited. Furthermore, one can only hope that student and faculty protestors (and American citizens in general) will not be branded as "unpatriotic" by the political right-wing simply because they have exercised their right to express dissenting views that may go against the political status-quo.

I fully support whatever positions our students adopt with regard to this controversial issue. Moreover, I applaud those students, faculty, and other members of our campus community who have the courage to voice strong criticism and disapproval of what they may view as "autocratic" administrative mandates that are not always in the best interests of all campus constituencies.

In these politically reactionary and troubled times, let's try not to forget the immortal words of Voltaire, which, as we all know, laid the theoretical groundwork for a democracy in America: "I [may not] agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it." 

Shouldn't that apply to all members of our campus community, including our students?

Josh Kanin

Professor of Cinema

Department of Communication   

RE: Governor speaking at Graduation

-----Original Message-----
From: DOSSETT_GORDON
Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2005 11:26 AM
To: DELPICCOLO_GUIDO; FACULTY_ALL
Subject: RE: Schwarzenegger and Commencement

To me our graduation ceremony is not the best time, place or audience for a display of protest for several reasons:

1) To graduates and their families the graduation ceremony is a celebration.

2) Graduates and their families will see any protest as a politicization of that celebration, undercutting the criticism we would intend for the governor’s policies. Arnold Schwarzenegger --whatever we think of his policies-- is certainly skilled at communication with the public: He easily could emerge as the champion of students and parents in attendance.

3) If our intended purpose is to change the governor’s mind and actions, a public protest at graduation seems unlikely to succeed. Wouldn’t a better strategy be to renew efforts to meet with and persuade the governor and his advisors?

4) A public protest could galvanize the governor’s opposition—both against community colleges in general and Santa Monica College in particular.

What I've just written applies for the ceremony itself; I can understand a rationale for a protest outside the stadium beforehand, and I may well join many of my colleagues there before the procession begins. (I haven't decided; I think such a protest, too, raises some of the problems I've outlined above.)

We need to pick our battles. We have many allies in the local community, the legislature,—and in the public at large, up and down the state. We need to work with them to effect changes in the governor’s actions and to make the case for what we need to better educate our students. A protest at the graduation ceremony is short-sighted and will work against what we are trying to accomplish.

Gordon Dossett

Past President, Academic Senate

Professor of English