'Dialogue' at USM actually one-sided

Universities are charged with the task of teaching students the basic democratic values of American civilization. That is why public universities in all 50 states practice what they teach: They have democratic governance systems.

Public universities in all 50 states have faculty senates, staff councils and student government associations. Each of these bodies in turn regularly converses with the administration. In American education it is standard procedure to practice the very premise on which we build our national reputation: open democratic traditions.

Imagine how bizarre it must be, then, to realize that rather than speak with the Faculty Senate, as administrations in public universities do in all 50 states, this administration has chosen instead to create yet another bureaucratic institution: The President's University Council.

The members of this council are all chosen by the administration, by the very deans this president himself hired, most of whom do not have tenure. What sort of dialogue can emerge when only one of the two sides in this conversation, the administration, gets to pick the people with whom it will converse?

We have elected bodies willing and able to speak to the administration, just as does every other public university in the nation. With regard to the Faculty Senate in particular, this university president has refused to communicate.

It would appear that at USM the free and open exchange of ideas can occur only in an environment that the administration can control — an environment, in short, where the exchange of ideas is neither free nor open.

The fact that the administration of an American university would so boldly challenge and subvert the every premise of our society is nothing short of amazing.

Jonathan Barron
Hattiesburg