Editor’s note: Letters to the Editor and open letters reflect the opinions, concerns and views of University of Wisconsin-Madison students and community, may or may not be accurate and do not reflect the editorial views or opinions of The Daily Cardinal
Content warning: a quote that included a slur is reproduced verbatim below.
On March 25th, in a special session, the Associated Students of Madison voted to pass the “Resolution to Ensure UW Investments Comply with Wisconsin Anti-Discrimination Law.” I was one of the votes against. That situation was hardly new to me: I’ve been elected or appointed to five major decision-making student government bodies at three different universities. During that time, I have frequently voted differently from other members. I pride myself in carefully considering the legislation proposed, including its general context, and I am not afraid to voice my concerns.
Yet, this time was different. Shortly before the March 18 meeting, we learned that another Student Council member had sent a discord chat reading “It’s a complicated thing. [T]he proportion of zios [sic] rises as the speakers list goes on, so me and roman [sic] are honestly considering not extending past the set 45 minutes.”
Despite two lengthy student council meetings and over three weeks, as of the time of writing, neither the chair, vice chair, or ASM leadership as a whole has addressed this discord chat. The discord chat is concerning not only for the slur (coined by KKK Grand Wizard David Duke[1]), but also the thought of limiting free speech. Experience in student government has taught me that when students bring up concerns, particularly en masse, it is essential to listen more, not less. To do otherwise is a failing in leadership, and to suggest otherwise in the manner done on the discord chat seems potentially discriminatory. And perhaps ASM Student Council leadership was too shocked to refute the statement; as someone who steadfastly believes the best in people, that is my hope. But there comes a point where silence suggests condonation, if not outright complicity.
During the March 18 meeting itself, a number of students expressed concerns over the impact to campus climate that this legislation would have. Such legislation, they argued, would give the student body carte blanche to engage in antisemitic activity. Their fears are hardly unfounded; antisemitic chalkings on or near campus have occurred as recently as May 2024[2],[3] and September 2022[4]. Students mentioned other concerns, including feeling the need to hide their Star of David necklaces while on campus to avoid harassment.
As I noted above, my experience in student government has taught me that more listening is necessary when students raise concerns. I took careful notes March 18 with the intention to reach out to open forum speakers; but these plans were dashed shortly after 7pm on March 20, when the ASM Chair informed Student Council members that there would be an emergency meeting on March 25. With so little time, reaching out to dozens of students and learning more about their concerns was no longer feasible. It is unclear how much outreach ASM leadership did to inform the student body and press about the emergency meeting. I did not notice anything on the ASM Instagram, press releases, or even website until around 8pm March 24. This seems to me to be the opposite of how it should have been.
A word on divestment itself: as an economist, I am skeptical myself of the efficacy of divestment[5]. When it comes to climate change, an area I’ve been involved in since 2010, I’ve always thought that divestment from fossil fuels should take a backstage to other, more tangible projects. Fossil fuel infrastructure is becoming a poor investment anyways[6]. But I understand the moral concerns of harm towards others spoken by dozens of students between two Student Council meetings. While most of the companies named in the legislation are large corporations that also provide many important services to society—most UW-Madison students use Google and Microsoft products daily, I am certain—many of these companies do also provide various products to the defense industry. No one wants to see anyone killed with their money, no matter how few cents that is or the fact that these funds must be paid back. Legislation encouraging the university to engage in socially responsible investing does not have to be at odds with concerns regarding campus climate; legislation could have been created, and in fact was proposed but rejected by the chair, that would have met nearly all open forum speakers’ concerns. The legislation that was passed was immediately rejected by the university in a statement concluding, “resolutions that call for actions that would violate the law do not warrant further engagement.”[7]
With the 33rd ASM session on the horizon, Student Council representatives must choose their leaders wisely. The newly elected representatives should seek to increase engagement with the student body, not limit it. Students must be able to feel like their voices are heard by their government and not stifled.
[1] https://www.commentary.org/articles/david-christopher-kaufman/zio-is-new-n-word/
[3] https://news.wisc.edu/investigations-initiated-for-two-student-organizations/
[4] https://news.wisc.edu/content/uploads/2022/09/09-16-22-Response-to-Religious-Leaders.pdf
[5] https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/insights/why-divestment-doesnt-hurt-dirty-companies
[7] https://news.wisc.edu/uw-madison-reaction-to-student-government-divestment-resolution/
