Misguided mindset
No, the Speak Up, Speak Out committee has not had Dennis Lennox II as a panelist.
But the Topinabee senior's discrimination complaint blows a trivial fact out of proportion.
Lennox claims he wasn't invited to participate in the Speak Up, Speak Out forums because of his conservative political perspective. His exclusion was inappropriate, the complaint continues, because the committee "hand-picked" the panels' political representation.
Of course, the panels haven't been devoid of a conservative voice. College Republicans has been on past panels and is on the upcoming election panel.
The problem with Lennox's complaint is that it extends beyond himself and Campus Conservatives. Lennox's exclusion supposedly is indicative of broader political bias, but this charge loses its force when conservative voices have been a part of political panels.
However, Lennox claims conservative panelists have been "token" conservatives - a term to which the College Republicans likely would not take too kindly.
Limiting student political panelists to representatives from the College Democrats and College Republicans was, in this case, a practical matter. There is a sundry of political groups, each with its own agenda. The panel cannot include them all, and the College Democrats and College Republicans are the two best-known groups.
If Lennox wishes to speak against the selection of particular conservative voices, then that isn't as much a cry of political bias as it is a cry of an unfair representation process. This is not ideological discrimination because the general perspective still is presented. Campus Conservatives has no more a basis for complaint than does Students for Barack Obama.
Moreover, not all Speak Up, Speak Out forums are purely political. Diversity of opinion is not only diversity of political persuasion.
In the alternative energy forum in spring, the panel included members with expertise in science as well as those whose focus was public policy. Similarly, a fall forum on education included a specialist in charter schools as well as an English professor who spoke about literacy.
In neither of these cases was political perspective a litmus test for being a panelist.
Lennox's complaint ignores the relevant, non-political dimensions that comprise diversity of opinion. By trying to paint all panelists as liberal or conservative, he overlooks nearly everything they bring to the discussion.
As committee chairwoman Merlyn Mowrey said in a Central Michigan Life article Friday, the discussion isn't dominated by panelists. Audience members are invited to participate.
An active audience can accentuate panelists' discussion. If Lennox wishes to make heard his brand of conservatism, that is where he can do so.
