A Michigan State student has pled guilty to a misdemeanour charge of harassment for posting an offensive flyer in his dorm. David Powder was offended by the Shaw Hall Black Caucus, which limits membership to black students: he didn't like the double standard and felt the organization was racist. So he made his point by creating a flyer that turned the tables. On January 11, residents of Shaw Hall discovered a flyer inviting all students to a meeting of the "White Caucus." The flyer, which parodied a Black Caucus flyer, depicted a naked pregnant woman and listed the phone numbers of Black Caucus board members as contacts.

It wasn't long before the Shaw Hall director, Tracy Bobertz, found out who posted the flyer. Did she contact Powder about it? Did she attempt to discuss the matter with him? Did she try to help the ruffled students in Shaw Hall resolve their differences quietly and amicably? Of course not. Racial insensitivity--even when it falls within the bounds of free speech--calls for more stringent measures. She met with university officials and then filed a police report.

Powder was arrested (in his dorm room, by MSU police) and spent a night in jail before entering his initial plea of not guilty. He only avoided more serious felony charges of ethnic harassment because the flyer did not target specific individuals or threaten violence. Facing jail time and fines, he told the MSU student paper, The State, that the flyer was meant as political satire, adding the usual painful caveats: "Most of my friends are people of color or people of ethnic minority," he said. "Being arrested really isn't a bad thing, it's just part of the process. Just because you're charged doesn't mean you're guilty. ... People are going to assume I'm guilty and people are going to say I'm a racist. ... I want people to understand just because I'm being charged doesn't mean I'm guilty and also not a racist." Henry Silverman, president of the Lansing ACLU, backed Powder's claim: "He wrote the flier as a political parody and sees it as a political statement and, in that sense, we have looked at this issue."

But fighting the campus thought police can be wearing, particularly when it has decided to treat you as a danger to society. Powder fought back at first, but eventually pled guilty in order to get the ordeal over with. Now he has a criminal record for his trouble. He also has to write letters of apology to each of the students whose numbers were given as contacts. The prosecutor is recommending six months probation. Powder, who turned down ACLU representation in order to get the unpleasant episode over with, is contrite: "I was commenting on the belief that Black Caucus is a racist organization," he said. "I was not using much foresight at the time. In retrospect, I can see how they might be offended."

This is what happens when the untenable ethical double standards of the multicultural campus--where some students have the right not to be offended while others do not; where it's racist to point out that the growing separatism of campus minority groups is itself racist; where white men are fair game for vindictive diversity zealots--meet local law enforcement. Powder overstepped when he included black students' phone numbers on the flyer. But at the same time, if the situation had been reversed, the reaction would have been far different. In fact, that was Powder's point.

UPDATE: John Rosenberg has more. Don't miss his parallel discussion of a Texas Tech student who has created a "United White Persons College Fund"--in an attempt to get sued.

Powder certainly overstepped when he published the actual phone numbers of actual Black Caucus members, but there seems little else on his flyer to justify this scandalous arrest and conviction. Political satire is a constitutionally protected form of expression, even in its most offensive guises (Hustler v. Falwell, etc.), and Powder should have stood his ground and pled "not guilty" to these trumped-up charges of harassment. I find particularly disturbing his "contrite" explanation that "I was commenting on the belief that Black Caucus is a racist organization." Accepting that he deserves punishment not just for his actions but for his statements and for his very beliefs, Powder internalizes the McCarthyite logic of political correctness and becomes its willing victim. In doing so, he sets an ominous precedent for other white males on campus: he is now living proof that certain things cannot be said; that certain beliefs cannot be held; that certain groups cannot be ridiculed; and that white males do not have the same freedom of speech and freedom of conscience afforded to minorities and women.

Does the modern university have any sense of proportion? Over at Harvard they are having trouble seeing the gross and offensive in pornography. At MSU they call the cops because of a standard satire on campus segregation.

Even the Harvard statue, bad as it is, is not a police matter. It should be handled by the University. Even if he were guilty, at the worst, the student at MSU should be reprimanded.

Perhaps common sense, not collegiality, should be a requirement for tenure.

If he was my kid, I blush to admit, I'd get a lawyer and sue, sue, sue. He was arrested?! Were this woman and the campus police insane?

MSU -- my undergrad alma mater -- is a very interesting place. There are a large number of minority students, primarily from Michigan's urban areas. There are also a large number of non-minority students from Michigan's primarily agricultural western and northern areas (MSU was initially called "Michigan Agricultural College"). I think the demographics do tend to cause some tension. During my freshman year in 1988-1989, black students occupied the administration building for something or other.

It's pretty frightening that someone could be criminally charged for what amounts to (at most) racial "insensitivity." That it happened in East Lansing is even more disheartening. I always thought that being able to discuss a wide variety of issues -- including racial issues -- was conducive to learning. Some would rather supress than discuss, I guess. Ugh.

I'm surprised the ACLU offered to defend him given the nature of the charge against him. It seems the university authorities have a double standard that is extreme. I can't believe he would plead guilty.

This Powder guy is a proven "powderpuff". A fascinating lesson is to be learned here. In another generation or two (at the most), the freedoms and liberties we presently enjoy as a nation will be even less defended than we see today. The "powderpuffs" being educated by our institutions today will have been sufficiently beaten to suck all of the common sense, self dignity, and self defense from them. This story is a pathetic one at the very least.

I restrict my remarks to responding to TJ Jackson's rhetorical query: Why the surprise at the ACLU taking a hand in this matter in defense of fredom of political expression? That's what the ACLU does, all in all with remarkable steadfastness and consistency. "Conservatives" have benefitted from their intervention as much as "Liberals." For instance, a number of important figures in the ACLU are on the board of Kors and Silverglates organization FIRE (Foundation for Individual Rights in Education), which, I'm sure, will also take up this horrific case.

On second thought, I shall add one more tiny comment: I hope that TJ Jackson's name is for real and not an Internet pseudonym adopted in honor of Thomas J. "Stonewall" Jackson, a pretty vile psychopath by any fair standard.

I'm profoundly disappointed that Powder passed up an opportunity to "make a difference." Instead, he seems to have looked for a quick way out of the situation he himself created, one in which he either had to make a stand and fight the good fight or round and run. Even with the ACLU behind him, his resolve failed.

My guess is that he went into this enterprise treating it as a prank, without having thought much about where it might end up. Once called on the carpet, he buckled.

I guess this just reminds me how valuable and rare a commodity true courage is, and to wonder if the absence of courage equals cowardice.

'Bat9469

Re: Norman Levitt's odd fascination with a simple moniker.
Mr. Levitt writes, "On second thought, I shall add one more tiny comment: I hope that TJ Jackson's name is for real and not and internet pseudonym adopted in honor of Thomas J. "Stonewall" Jackson, a pretty vile psychopath by any fair standard".
Why would Mr. Levitt care as to whether someone is providing a given name or pseudonym while in this impersonal forum? It would seemingly suggest a preoccupation with the idiosyncratic. Further supporting this is his "armchair psychological" prognosis of a military general, dead for 140 years. In a vain of armchair psychology established by Mr. Levitt, I would venture that he is probably an educator, one from the "rules-maker" variety, intolerant of freedom of thought so prevalent in his institutions today. His comment about TJ Jackson conveys thoughts from someone with far too much time on his hands. Here is to TJ Jackson confounding the orderly world of Mr. Levitt with the unspeakable horror of paying homage nom de plume.

I am an educator--a professor, to boot. I am also a mathematician, for whatever that's worth, which, I suppose, makes me a "rule-maker", if you consider teaching the Eilenberg-Steenrod axioms for a homology theory an instance of rule-making.

I also happen to be very attached to the idea of freedom of thought, which is why I am attached to the ACLU, and also to FIRE, the free-speech-on-campus organization I mentioned. I would be distressed, however, if anyone representing himself as a proponent of free speech and liberty of conscience used Stonewall's moniker as a pseudonym in order, one presumes, to underline his political message. Despite all the magnolia-and-moonshine rot about the Gallant Stonewall, the guy was a vicious, quarrelsome fanatic on behalf of a vile system backed by a rigid and narrow doctrinal code enforced with the utmost severity. He was also, by the way, an oathbreaker and a traitor to my country. It makes about as much sense to try to associate him with a struggle for freedom of conscience as it would to recruit Torquemada or Savanarola for the same function.

It should be understood, of course, that I mean no offense whatever to anyone who simply bears the name of TJ Jackson, even if his parents meant to honor Stonewall by bestowing it.

Mr Levit is a fundamentalist,as witnessed by his weak attempt to gain the moral upperhand with irrelevent comments on Stonewall Jackson.I would say mshunziker is absolutely accurate in is analysis.I've re-read this 3 times and have yet to see what Jackson has to do with this gutless wonder and the PC facism on display at this bastion of conformity and obedience to a dogma of intolerance and bigotry.But since Norm wants to discuss moral monsters,how about Lenin,Stalin,Mao,Castro and Pol Pot?Ah,I forget,they had good intentions.

Simple, M (and what the hell is YOUR name, anyhow? I'm not hiding behind the Internet's cost-free anonymity; why are you?) Anyone who poses as an ally of intellectual freedom and freedom of conscience while idolizing Stonewall Jackson is at the least horribly confused, and not an ally worth having.

I am, 'tis true, a fundamentalist, that is to say, a First Amendment fundamentalist.

Norman Levitt
Professor of Mathematics
Rutgers University
New Brunswick

NL,

It takes a true fundamentalist to get this upset about something completely fabricated.

Why does not knowing M's identity bother you so much? It's quite irrelevant to the issue. Do you feel your "professor, to boot" status affords you more authority, but perhaps need to establish M's inferiority before invoking it?

If you want your words to carry weight you need to establish why you consider him a fanatic. Do you consider all confederates fanatics or is there something special about TJ?

We are getting far from the topic--which was the officious arrogance of a fool of a dorm administrator at MSA. But, to answer, I put my personal info in my last response so anyone who feels like it can check me out, insofar as the net allows. I admit to entertaining certain unkind thoughts about people who harumph and bellow and hurl righteous anger at the world but lack the minimal guts to identify themselves. I am doubly suspicious when someone uses a moniker (like TJ Jackson, if it is a pseudonym) that connotes a rather strongly inflected point of view, to say the least, but refuses to come clean about this in his actual postings. I invite TJ to respond, straight on: Is that a pseudonym, and does it honor the cahracter and views of Stonewall Jackson? If not, you have as much of an apology as you demand. But if so, I think your interest in the MSU matter may well be opportunistic, rather than principled.

As for the rest of the snipers: absent real names, they're awfully hard to take seriously.

Norman Levitt

THERE,THERE ITS ALL WHITE NOW.

CERTAIN STATES IN THE SOUTH WILL IN THE NEAR FURTURE BREAK FROM THE UNION. I AS A SOUTHERN BORN AND RAISED NATIVE CAN ONLY HOME IT IS SOON.

I find it quite amusing that sir N.L. seems to be occupied with the fact if TJ Jackson copied the name from sir Thomas J Jackson.
Personally I think that either TJ Jackson is the shieldname from someone that wishes to remain anonymous,or a name used in Idolisation from Michael Jacksons nephew,or it might be Michael Jacksons nephew himself.
Either way,that should not be the issue,the issue is that someone posted a comment and would like your review on it,and I think that other shall agree with me if I would say that your conclusions on TJ are irrelevant.

Ofcourse I ment to write "Others".

As a reply to the topic:I think that Powder could have found a different way of stating his insatisfactory on the "Black Caucus" matter.
Instead of that,he chose an immature,disrespectful and ignorant way of protesting.I hope he shall learn his lesson from this experience.But I must say I doubt that.

-R.I.T.L.E-

P.S. as an addition to my first reply,it could simply be his name.There are more TJ Jacksons in this world.But because of the topic and the reply he put down I assumed it may be MJ's nephew.An assumption which is also irrelevant to this topic.

Most amusing to see the professor introduce himself as "holier-than-thou you ignorant fools" authority on anything.

Sir, I am embarrassed for you.

I am an educator--a professor, to boot. I am also a mathematician, for whatever that's worth, which, I suppose, makes me a "rule-maker", if you consider teaching the Eilenberg-Steenrod axioms for a homology theory an instance of rule-making

I am a student at MSU. I lived in the hall Powder did and I worked at the front desk when this all went down. Did you just happen to forget to mention that the flyer said to be sure to come to the "White Caucus" event for "a night of orgasmic heathen sex", or was that intentionally left out? Not only that, but that part of the flyer was written in German. Obviously this student knew that what he did was wrong, and he had plenty of time to fess up. The entire campus was in an uproar over this. It was indeed ridiculous and no, he shouldn't have been arrested. But Black Caucus is not a limited membership club. I am white, I know people in the group and they do not descriminate against the very few white people who care to attend thier meetings. "The State" apparently is a newspaper that exsits on campus, funny, I have been here for three years and never have seen that particualr newspaper. There is a State News however. What happened to everyone involved in this event was frustrating and sad, but publishing incomplete material will not cure it. Get the facts straight first.