Public i Contact

   
when Dorothy Day—devout Catholic, cofounder
of the Catholic Worker movement,
and, notably, a U of I dropout—
described herself as an anarchist. Indeed,
the terms anarchist and anarchy conjure
images of disorder, chaos and bomb
throwers. This perception however is for
the most part a distorted notion of anarchist
thought, and has nothing to do with the anarchism of
Dorothy Day.
Surely, to talk about a likeness between Christianity and
anarchism is to risk being thought absurd and oxymoronic.
Some would argue that to use the label “anarchist” is to
encourage misapprehension, even hostility. But the same case
could just as cogently be made in accepting the label “Christian.”
For, after all, to be a Christian is to be a right-wing conservative,
right? So, while acknowledging the dangerous territory
of both these terms, I wish to show the essential congruity
between these two lines of thought—if we properly
understand them, of course. Hence this essay.
Anarchism is a term notoriously hard to pin down, as, by
definition, it resists a concrete definition. In its most basic
sense it means no rulers or no domination. Anarchists tend to
be suspicious of any clear blueprint for exactly what anarchy
would look like. There is certainly some value in pointing to
actions that look like a desirable way to live, but anarchism is
not static—it is dynamic, an orientation, acknowledging certain
principles, freedom being foremost, that must be maintained
at all times.
Currently, the most interesting group moving along this
line is the Zapatista movement in Chiapas, Mexico. Although
they have not identified themselves with anarchism explicitly,
I don’t think it would be unfair to describe them as at least
anarchistic. They are anti-political, in that they are not seeking
to run for office. Unlike their Latin American revolutionary
counterparts, they are not attempting to take over state
power. Instead, they are engaging in a social revolution,
desiring to simply live autonomously as they see fit, outside
of the pernicious confines of the “new world order” of free
market globalization. Marcos, who the media tend to identify
as their leader, neglecting his title Subcomandante, describes
the Zapatista worldview in his typically lyrical way: “I am as
I am and you are as you are; we are building a world where I
can be, without having to cease being me, where you can be,
without having to stop being you, and where neither I nor you
force another to be like me or you,’ when Zapatistas say, ‘a
world where many worlds fit’, we are saying, more or less,
‘everyone does his own thing.’” (October 26, 1999)
Inevitably the question arises: if everyone does their own
thing, won’t everyone just kill each other? This is a serious
issue, and human nature appears to be such that it’s pivotally
relevant to the topic at hand. While I don’t think the legitimacy
of anarchism lives or dies on this issue alone, it would be
foolish to deny the human impulse towards both good and
evil. But it is anarchists, surprisingly I think, who have the
most realistic take on this, as they understand that the more
power is decentralized, the less likely the temptation towards
evil. As Lord Acton famously remarked, “Power tends to corrupt;
absolute power corrupts absolutely.”
When asked about her anarchism, Dorothy Day would
often intone the work of Peter Kropotkin, the 19th century
Russian biologist, whose book Mutual Aid provided a scientific
basis for anarchism. Contra Darwin, he found through
empirical study a decided trend not towards competition, but
towards cooperation amongst animal and human species
when faced with survival. Implicit here is the true nature of
anarchy—personal responsibility—over and against anarchy
pejoratively understood to be what each individual is going to
do without regard to anyone else. In other words, when Marcos
says “everyone does his own thing,” he is not describing
an atomized existence free of others, but a society where people
live in solidarity with one another, responsible to everyone,
without looking to that most violent and impersonal
institution, the state.
Of course, any serious proponent of anarchism wouldn’t
argue that once the state was eliminated that everything
would become perfect and utopian. But there have been,
before the invention of the modern nationstate,
societies that have lived quite happy,
peaceful lives without a central coercive
apparatus. Some of these are elucidated in
Harold Barclay’s interesting study People
Without Government: An Anthropology of
Anarchy. Within the 20th century perhaps
the most notable
experiment in
anarchism was in
Spain during the
thirties. Although
the movement was
u l t i m a t e l y
quashed by Franco
and the fascists, it
remains in many
ways the largest
anarchist accomplishment to date. While I
have serious reservations about that accomplishment—
going too far into politics as
well as their use of violence—it does
remain a sign of hope for those of us today
working towards an alternative practice of
social life.
Part and parcel of any movement
towards the kind of society I am describing
is the acknowledgment and development of
a spiritual life. Even a thinker such as Noam
Chomsky, not noted for his religious faith,
has discussed this in an appeal towards a
libertarian socialist (i.e. anarchist) society,
in saying that he believes not only will a
spiritual change help bring about this new
order, but that this new order would actually contribute to
such a revolution. We live in such an alienated, narcissistic
culture that this is no easy task. But I do think the central
urgency of the day is, as Dorothy Day put it, how to bring
about a revolution of the heart.
Enter Christianity. Anarchists have not only resisted the
nation-state; they have, more broadly, stood in opposition to
anything that dominates: patriarchy, capitalism, consumering,
technology and, of course, Christianity. The Spanish
anarchists, noted above, for example, were steadfastly anti-
Christian. How then, can I, as a Christian, legitimately call
myself an anarchist? This will take some unpacking, though
unfortunately space limits a full articulation.
Jesus was a subversive in first century Palestine who stood
against power and domination in both its Roman and Jewish
guises. Again and again throughout the four Gospels, Jesus
challenges institutionalized authority. Even before adulthood,
echoing the story of Moses, he was saved by his parents’ disobedience
to the ruler Herod’s decree that all children under
the age of two be slaughtered. Herod’s political move reflected
his fear of a competitor. There was no such split then
between religion and politics. They were both intertwined.
Jesus’ followers, both during his life and after, called him
“Lord” and “Son of God,” thereby expressing directly political
sentiments—for, after all, these titles were given exclusively
to Caesar.
Jesus’ attitude towards power is especially clear in the
story of his 40-day retreat where satan tempts him. He makes
Jesus an offer: in exchange for worshipping satan, he can
have all the power over the world. Much, I’m sure, could be
done with that power—universal equality, justice, etc…—but
Jesus rejects it. The option to lord over others, even if it’s
seemingly benevolent, is to enter the realm of evil.
In contrast to the Romans, Jesus offers his own example as
the path to true servanthood: “You know that among the Gentiles
[i.e. the Romans] those whom they recognize as their
rulers lord it over them. But it is not so among you; but whoever
wishes to become great among you must be your servant,
and whoever wishes to be first among you must be slave
of all.” Throughout the Gospels, Jesus subverts top-down
authority and shows another way: the bottom-up and noncoercive
way of the cross.
Perhaps the most important feature of Jesus’ ministry was
that he rejected violence. The pacifism of Jesus’ life and teachings
find a consonance with anarchy. In fact,
those so-called anarchists that use violence
and coercion are a contradiction in terms. As
already stated, anarchy is a rejection of domination.
To use violence to create a society
without domination is a non sequitur. If we
as Christians cannot support war, this at least
implicitly subverts
the work of the
state, which is war.
As Randolph
Bourne noted
almost one hundred
years ago, “war is
the health of the
state.” If the state
were actually to
live out Jesus’
teachings—”love
your enemies, bless them that curse you, do
good to those that hate you”—it would
quickly wither away.
The problem with Christianity is that when
measured up to the radical life of Jesus it
should largely be considered a failure.
Some commentators have observed though,
that the church has not been so much Christian
as constantinian. For the first three centuries
the church lived out a rather faithful
vision of Christ. The constantinian arrangement
refers, however, to the emperor Constantine’s
legalization of Christianity in the
4th century. The result was an amalgam of
power and the Christian faith. To be a citizen
of the empire and a Christian became one and the same.
Out went radical, counter-cultural Christianity and in came
an imperial, violent Christianity.
Within this rather sad history of the constantinian church of
the past 1700 years there has remained a current of faithful revolutionary
Christians. And it is in these groups that there is to
be found hope for a renewed, anarchical Christianity. Examples
include: the Beguines, Waldensians, Desert Fathers and
Mothers, Quakers, Diggers, Anabaptists and within the 20th
century, the anarchist, pacifist movement, the Catholic Worker.
As noted above, most anarchists are as equally opposed
to the state as they are of the church. As a Christian myself, I
can sympathize—the dominant path of Christianity has been
in collusion with oppression. The groups cited above do
point out a path that is important to highlight, however. They
too resist Bakunin’s notion of God as tyrant in the sky.
Instead, they view God as, above all, Love. Being inherently
non-coercive, love is willing to suffer, to persevere until we
turn towards God. The cross is that sign par excellence for
Christians. If God then won’t trespass on our gift of freedom,
how could we possibly justify doing what God refuses
to do to one another?
It has been my goal in this essay to show that Christians
should take seriously what anarchists have complained about
in our religion, and that the both of us, perhaps rather surprisingly,
share a similar orientation. Given the political options
of our era, the Christian should choose anarchism, for it’s the
only one that rejects the state and its coercion altogether,
unlike the socialists, greens, democrats, etc. If we realize this,
there’s a chance that we can truly “build a new society within
the shell of the old.”
I would invite anyone intrigued by this line of thinking to
come to the 4th annual Anarchism and Christianity conference
that will be taking place at the Illinois Disciples Foundation
on August 4-5th. We will have a chance to explore more
in depth what it means to bring Christianity and anarchism
together to not only engage a critique of the state, but more
practically—How do we live in community? What is our
relationship to the police? Technology? Education? For more
information, go to www.jesusradicals.com
I would also invite folks interested in a practical outlet to
consider coming over to the Catholic Worker House where
many of us are intentionally asking these questions and trying
to live out the answers.

     will be a lifelong memory and
yours will be changed forever. Inviting a doula into your
birth space will help you have the most positive birth experience
possible.
A doula…
• Recognizes birth as a key life experience and as a fundamental
right of passage.
• Understands the basic physiology and the emotional
needs of a woman in labor.
• Compliments and works with the woman’s partner and
care provider.
• Allows the partner to participate at his or her own comfort
level rather than as the “labor authority.”
• Stays with you throughout your entire labor.
• Provides emotional, physical, and spiritual support.
A doula is not…
• Your voice, she can however help you find your voice,
helping you to form your thoughts and questions.
• A medical professional. A doula stays within her code of
practice and will not perform any medical procedures such
as vaginal exams, blood pressure…etc.
• Someone who tells you how to give birth.
A doula will work to educate you in simple ways:
• Trust your body first.
• Ask questions. Know what your provider’s standard procedures
are and if they don’t agree with your thoughts and
desires for birth, shop around and find someone who does.
• She will support you at home and/or in the hospital.
• If you choose to use medication, know and remember
that all women can give birth without it as long as there is
not a medical reason to use it. Know the facts about medication
before you choose to use.
• Trust is the key.
Studies done by Marshall H. Klaus, M.D., John H. Kennell,
M.D., and Phyllis H. Klaus, C.S.W., M.F.T. indicate
that doulas help…
• Decrease overall cesarean rates.
• Decrease length of labor.
• Decrease the need for epidurals.
• Decrease the use of oxytocin.
• Increase the confidence of the partner’s participation.
• Decrease postpartum depression and levels of anxiety.
It breaks my heart to hear a woman say that her birth was the
most horrible and painful experience in her life. That legacy
was passed to me by my mother and I swore I would not
pass it to my daughter. I wish I could help just one woman
understand that birth is the hardest work she will ever do in
her life and, although it hurts, it will teach her how powerful
and strong she is! We as doulas cannot keep unwanted
things from happening in your birth but we can stand with
you and hold your spirit in our heart as you go through this
part of your life. Birth is not something to fear; it is something
to respect and honor. And you can do it!
If you would like to know more about doulas and my
alternative birth sessions, Birth with Courage and Power,
visit suelathedoula.com.

   ’ , I was led to
believe throughout the prenatal period
that my O.B. and the hospital staff would
be supportive of a natural birth. When it
came time to actually labor and deliver,
the idea they seemed to have of “supporting”
a natural birth was not to physically
force you to have (most) interventions. (I
say “most” because the use of the vacuum
extractor WAS physically forced on
me.) There was no alternative offered to
any of the interventions, no actual “support”.
The two options for dealing with
the pain and difficulty of labor seemed to
be 1) drugs, or 2) nothing whatsoever. I
think it’s dishonest to allow a woman to
think you’re going to support her in natural
birth, when the entire system is set
up against it.
I was sent to the hospital by my OB
after about 24 hours of unproductive
labor, so they could start me on pitocin, an artificial version
of the hormone that gets labor going and keeps it
moving along. I had indicated that I didn’t want pitocin,
and had researched ways of getting labor moving, but
none of these measures were encouraged. Because of the
pitocin, continuous fetal monitoring was required. After
several hours strapped down to the bed with the fetal
monitor on one side and the IV on the other, I finally gave
in and started Nubain (a narcotic). The nurse came in to
turn up the pitocin periodically, despite my protests. After
several more hours, when I was fully dilated but had
stopped feeling contractions for some reason, I was told I
had to push. The baby was still very high up, and it was
really too early to push. He went into fetal distress and
was then pulled out by vacuum extractor without any
explanation or giving me even 10 seconds to get mentally
prepared for the insertion of the vacuum extractor. (Traumatic
birth has been compared to rape, incidentally, and I
suffered flashbacks and nightmares about the birth for
weeks.) I later read in a medical journal
that having the mother push when the
baby is up too high can cause fetal distress.
So basically, my OB actually created
a medical emergency. The term for this
type of situation is “iatrogenic”, meaning
that the physician’s actions actually do
more harm than doing nothing at all
would have done.
In the whole “emergency vacuum
extraction” fiasco, part of my vaginal
wall was caught in the thing, causing
damage that took many months to heal. This caused much
stress in our marriage, as we were not sure we would ever
be able to have another child. When I went back to see my
OB at about eight months postpartum to make sure everything
had healed right, she said it looked fine and told me
to use KY Jelly. I only found out after requesting (and
paying for) the birth record from the hospital that my
vaginal wall had been caught in the vacuum extractor.
Another example of dishonesty. I also believe that I was
given a “honeymoon stitch”, because things felt tighter
down there than before.
In contrast, my homebirth was a different experience
entirely. I realize that some of this is due to the fact that
this was my second baby, but not all of it. I am convinced
that if I had had my first child in the care of the homebirth
midwives, everything would have turned out completely
different than in the hospital. In my homebirth, I was able
to move around freely throughout the house. I was able to
work with my body, getting into different positions
depending on what felt better. We had planned to use a
birthing tub, but couldn’t get it filled up in time. If I had
had the baby at the hospital, they would not have allowed
me to push the baby out in the birthing tub because of my
weight. I am heavy but not morbidly obese or anything.
My homebirth midwives never did a single cervical
check. I didn’t want them, and they don’t do them unless
requested by the mother. Cervical checks don’t really give
much useful information, and can lead to the mother
being told to push when it’s not really time yet. They can
also be disheartening for the mother in a labor that is not
following the classic “one centimeter per hour” pattern.
The homebirth midwives used a Doppler periodically
to monitor the baby’s heartrate. This allowed us to have
that information without interfering with my labor, as the
continuous fetal monitoring had at the hospital.
When the baby was born, he was handed to me immediately,
and the cord was let be until it finished pulsating
(giving the baby that valuable, oxygenated blood). I was
allowed to sit and hold him while waiting for the placenta
to come out. There was no rush. (At the hospital birth, the
cord had been cut immediately and the placenta was
pulled out by the OB right away.) The midwives had
pitocin on hand, in case it became necessary to encourage
the placenta to come out that way.
While I experienced more pain at the time of the actual
birth with the homebirth (because of not having any shots
in my bottom, as had been done in the hospital), the
recovery time was not comparable at all. I
didn’t have any stitches, despite a 2nd
degree tear, and experienced no discomfort.
My bottom actually feels BETTER
now than it did before the delivery.
I had never felt the urge to push with my
first child because he was up too high. In
contrast, my second child was able to
move down on his own and put pressure
on my perineum, making me push without
even realizing it. I felt like I was on a
runaway train. My body was just doing it
on its own. The mind-body connection was allowed to
happen. Very, very different from the over-medicalized
first birth.
Here are the interventions I had during my first birth and
the consequences they can have (off the top of my head):
• IV with fluids: Can cause labor to slow because the
mother’s hormone levels drop. Can also cause swelling in
the birth canal, making it harder for the baby to work its
way out. Can cause baby to be overhydrated at birth, making
for a larger weight loss in the early days before nursing
is well-established, which can cause unnecessary concern
on the part of parents or doctors.
• Pitocin: Can cause overzealous contractions, which
are harder on the mother and can cause fetal distress.
• Nubain: Makes the mother loopy and makes for a
sleepy baby, who can have a harder time getting started
nursing.
• Episiotomy: They are done to avoid tearing or to get
the baby out faster, but many tears end up being WORSE
because of the episiotomy. They cut through muscle,
which takes longer to heal.
• Vacuum extractor delivery: Can be a wonderful tool
if used sparingly, but damage can be done to the mother. I
think it is also painful to the baby’s head.
There were no interventions like these in the homebirth.
I had good perineal support and only had a 2nd
degree tear, despite the baby being born very, very quickly,
not allowing things to stretch.

 , July 22 at 8pm
a vigil will be held for
Quentin Larry, Terrell Layfield,
and others who have
died while in police custody
at the Champaign County jail.
Bring a candle and meet us at
204 E. Main, downtown Urbana, in front of
the Champaign County Sheriff’s office.
This vigil is first to honor the individuals
and their families. Secondly, it is a call for an
independent investigation into the five deaths
that have occurred within the past two years.
We plan to go to the Champaign County
Board with the demand that an independent
investigation be conducted into all five deaths.
Public concern arose in 2004 when three
suicides occurred within six months. IMC
reporters made contact with Twymenia Layfield,
the wife of Terrell Layfield, the last of
the three alleged suicides. It was through
conversations with Mrs. Layfield that they
found out about the restrictive and arbitrary
visitation rules, as well as the high cost of
phone calls from the Champaign County jail.
After these were exposed, Sheriff Walsh
allowed for more than the cut off number of
fifty visitations. Sandra Ahten and Champaign-
Urbana Citizens for Peace and Justice
successfully rallied to get the County Board
to renegotiate a contract awarding $14,000 a
month kickback to a phone company.
IMC reporters accompanied Mrs. Layfield
to the coroner’s inquest and all left feeling
they had not been given a full
explanation of Terell’s death.
The public hearing involved
Urbana officer Mike Metzler
giving an account of the
alleged suicide. No evidence
was presented, no photographs,
no bed sheet
claimed he used. No witnesses
testified, not the officer who
found the body. The matter
was quickly settled in under
ten minutes.
This coroner’s inquest was the culmination
of an investigation that was far from
independent. The Urbana police force was
assigned to investigate the Champaign County
jail. In a small town such as Urbana-
Champaign, the authorities are a small circle
of friends who know one another on a first
name basis and have lunch together.
From the beginning, the Sheriff could not
start his investigation until the Champaign
County State’s Attorney determined that no
criminal charges were to be filed. If the Sheriff
was to be sued, State’s Attorney Julia
Reitz would be his lawyer. In this scenario, as
Sandra Ahten writes, “the State’s Attorney
would be both prosecution and defense”
(ucimc.org 2/11/2005).
An independent investigation into the five
deaths is the final piece in the puzzle to find out
what is going on in the Champaign County jail.
The repeated incidents suggest that these
deaths are not “accidental” but
systemic and procedural. In the
words of Mrs. Layfield, “In my
opinion, suicides are not only
the fault of the jail system, but
also the justice system.”
To police officers, jail guards,
lawyers, and judges, inmates
are not people who have loved
ones, wives, and children. Terrell
Layfield was charged with
cocaine possession. He took it
to trial and was found innocent. Yet he was
found guilty on the trivial charge of obstruction
of justice for lying to the police about his
name. The heavy sentence of more than five
years given by Judge Heidi Ladd should be
seen as retribution for his beating the drug
charges and lying to an officer. Layfield was
obviously distraught about the long sentence.
When he was denied a routine phone call to his
wife, he became upset and began to make noise
in his cell. He was not responded to for several
hours. Committing suicide was his final act of
protest against an unfair justice system.
According to the Department of Justice,
drug offenders were found to have the lowest
suicide and homicide rates of all inmates.
Terrell Layfield was not suicidal before he
entered the Champaign County jail. The
inhumane condition in our jails and prisons
do not correct, but only create more death
and destruction. Those who administer justice
become jaded and themselves become
dehumanized. In the courtroom, Judge Heidi
Ladd said Layfield received several years
because he was “living like a bum.”
On the ucimc.org web site, Mrs. Layfield
responded to these comments saying Terrell
was also a father, husband, friend, and son. She
blamed the authorities who failed to take the
first suicides seriously, “What did they change
to prevent this from happening again to me – it
seems nothing!” Her words were prophetic.
While steps have been taken by Sheriff Walsh,
not enough has been done to prevent two more
deaths in the jail. How many more before we
have a restoration of the public trust?
The individuals and their families are the
real victims in this country’s War on Drugs.
Quentin Larry, who died of a heart attack the
Sheriff is calling drug-related, is the latest victim.
Larry died over Memorial Day weekend
and his case is still under investigation. The
City of Champaign police have been assigned
to investigate this incident, another inside job.
The families of Quentin Larry and Terrell
Layfield are supporting this vigil and asking
for a full explanation of the death of their
loved ones. Join us on July 22 at 8 pm in
front of the Sheriff’s office, 204 E. Main
Street, downtown Urbana. The vigil is being
sponsored by the Urban League, Champaign
Urbana Citizens for Peace and Justice,
Visionaries Educating Youth and Adults
(VEYA), and Anti-War, Anti-Racism Effort
(AWARE). For more information see the
June issue of the Public i.

Between 2003 and 2005, , in the Darfur region of Sudan, the
government and Janjaweed militias burned and destroyed
hundreds of rural villages, raped and assaulted thousands of
women and girls, murdered over a hundred thousand people
and caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands more via starvation
and disease. According to a survey by the Coalition for
International Justice and the World Health Org a n i z a t i o n
(WHO), 400,000 people have died since the conflict in Darfur
began in 2003. They estimate that 140,000 have been killed by
Janjaweed and government attacks and that another 250,000
have died from disease, starvation and exposure. This breaks
down to the deaths of 500 people per day or 15,000 per month.
The Sudanese government’s campaign forced more than
two million Darfurians from their homes into the inhospitable
desert without food, water, or any other way to sustain life. As
of 2006, some 1.8 million live in camps in Darfur and approximately
220,000 have fled to Chad, where they struggle to
survive in camps that are repeatedly attacked by militias and
around which women are raped as they look for essential firewood.
In addition to the people displaced by the conflict, at
least 1.5 million other people need some form of food assistance
because the conflict has destroyed the local economy,
markets, and trade in Darfur. Just like the genocide in Rwanda,
the slaughter in the Balkans, and the Holocaust, this crisis
has received little attention in the media and even less international
attention.
Only 7,000 African Union troops have been deployed to
keep the peace, and they do not have a mission to protect
civilians. This inexperienced, under-funded and under-staffed
force has been only minimally effective in creating security in
the region and militias continue to attack refugee camps and
aid workers. Recent peace talks among the Sudanese government
and the rebel groups they seek to destroy, the UN
promise to send troops in 2007, and international awareness
events offer hope to an end of the conflict. However, immediate
NATO peacekeeping troops and funding are needed to
secure the region and to ensure humanitarian aid to the victims
of the crisis.
On April 30, 2006, with the stark white U.S. Capitol
Building as a backdrop to a simple stage, over sixty speakers
and performers, including directors of activist organizations,
religious leaders from many faiths, political leaders, survivors
of genocide, country music stars, sports stars and one
movie star, created a spectacle to end the worst human rights
crisis of the new millennium. As I stood on tip-toes in my
bright green “Stop Genocide in Sudan” T-shirt trying to see
Senator Barack Obama, Ellie Weisel, Al Sharpton, Pulitzerprize
winning author Samantha Power, Big & Rich, George
Clooney and other presenters on the stage and jumbo screen,
I became frustrated with trying to see over the large crowd.
Before expressing internal complaint, however, I remembered
what a wonderful problem a crowd is for as an activist.
On a sunny afternoon on the last day of April, I was one
among tens of thousands of people on the lawn of the U.S.
Capitol demanding that it be the last day that the U.S. and
international community ignore the Darfur human rights crisis.
Chanting “Never again”, “Not on our watch”, and “You
are not alone,” my voice joined the thousands of others in
Washington D.C. and at rallies across the country demanding
intervention to end the genocide in Darfur that had been raging
for three years.
The Save Darfur Coalition, a coalition of over 100 humanitarian
and human rights organizations, coordinated the rally.
As members of Save Darfur, Students Taking Action Now:
Darfur (STAND) and the Genocide Intervention Network
(GI-Net) are two student-based national organizations that
brought over 800 students from around the nation to the rally
and hosted a weekend, April 28-30, of student activism for
Darfur. Approximately 25 students from the University of
Illinois along with 80 from Northwestern University traveled
16 hours on a bus from Evanston, Illinois to Washington D.C.
to attend the weekend events, lobbying their congressional
and senate representatives on Friday, attending informational
workshops on Saturday, and rallying on Sunday.
Student volunteers coordinated the events. They set up
lobbying appointments, organized meeting space for workshops
at George Washington University and found housing
for 800 visiting students. Volunteers also created, compiled
and distributed to each workshop participant a packet of
information for lobbying and a binder with tips on how to
organize summer action. These student volunteers were able
to produce a professional and well-attended conference and
to mobilize a coordinated lobbying effort and provided tools
for continued activism.
GI-Net and STAND offered a brief training and reference
packet to each student who had a scheduled meeting with
their representative. The lobby packet included information
on the background and goals of STAND and GI-Net, updates
on the current situation in Darfur, and current needs or
requests to make of government representatives. STAND and
GI-Net officers provided lobbying training before appointments,
including review of the meeting outline, etiquette and
role plays of both a successful and an ineffective meeting.
They provided a unified message and requests of the representatives
including sponsorship of House Resolution 723,
support of NATO enforcement of a no-fly zone over Darfur
and deployment of on-the-ground troops, and funding for
peacekeeping in Sudan.
After a day of lobbying, STAND and GI-Net gathered
workshop participants for a large morning meeting and an
afternoon of brainstorming and guidance in regional groupings.
At the morning meeting, Samantha Power, Pulitzer prize
winner for A Problem from Hell: America and the Age of
Genocide, offered encouraging words to student activists:
“You are always going to be seeing what efforts you are
not achieving,” said Power. “There is hope in what you’re
doing…always remember that fewer people are dying than
there would be if you were doing nothing.”
After Powers’s lecture, participants broke up into groups by
region of the country. They brainstormed on how to expand
activism beyond the campus environment to their local communities
in the summer. These meetings and a binder with reference
material covered three steps – recruit, meet and take action
– and provided resources on how to accomplish those steps.
Despite being organized by all student volunteers, the
weekend had a strong impact. Lobbying resulted in the Senate’s
approval of the requested $173 million in emergency
funding for peacekeeping in Darfur. Also, the Sunday rally
generated 850 news segments on U.S. and Canadian radio
and TV and hundreds more in the print media.
Peace groups can learn not only from the well-organized
lobbying and conference of Darfur student activists, but also
from the foundations and regular practices that support them.
STAND was a single campus student organization that was
founded at Georgetown in September 2004. There are now
over 190 chapters at universities across the country, including
Action Darfur at the University of Illinois. The group has
grown both through grassroots contacts and the resources
they make publicly available.
STAND has an executive committee and regional coordinators
that contact and provide resources to the local chapters.
The organization has a user-friendly website, standnow.
org. On the new chapter page of the website, STAND
emphasizes that if you can provide the people, they will provide
the resources and tools for activism. STAND also gives
step-by-step instructions on sponsoring events and gaining
public support and media access. For each event, STAND
gives guidelines on offering clear information about Darfur
and national awareness campaigns. They also provide a
media kit, including sample press releases and alerts, which
local groups can use to gain media attention. STAND provides
all the tools necessary for successful grassroots campaigns.
It maximizes the potential of individual groups, but
also unifies these groups to have one strong message. STAND is also an example for other
grassroots movements on how to effectively
cooperate with other organizations.
STAND offers links to other groups on its
website and promotes other groups’
activities. It also encourages its chapters
to seek support and work cooperatively
with other human rights organizations.
The Awareness Week Events at the University
of Illinois in February were coordinated
by Action Darfur but were sponsored
by eleven other student organizations.
STAND and GI-Net also
announced during their D.C. activism
weekend that they will combine their
forces to create one long-standing genocide
awareness and intervention organization
that will have a continuing presence
beyond the Darfur crisis.
You can support the awareness work
of these students by staying updated on
news about the Darfur crisis and spreading
that information to friends and family.
You also can contact Rep. Timothy Johnson
and Senators Barack Obama and Dick
Durbin to tell them to support funding for
the peacekeeping missions in Sudan with
at least $700 million in 2007 and to pressure
for NATO enforcement of a no-fly
zone and deployment of peacekeeping
troops. Finally, you can send an on-line
postcard to President Bush at
w w w. s a v e d a r f u r. o rg to urge him to live
up to his promise of “Not on my watch.”

There are levels of severity to mental illness in addition
to its different manifestations. In this article I will attempt
to convey what I have seen stigma do to people after they
have been diagnosed. I have chosen bipolar disorder
because it’s one through which I’ve seen people robbed of
their personalities, not only by the stigma of others but by
themselves also.
The extreme low of this illness can be dangerous. The
depression is overwhelming and can be devastating. Apervasive
feeling of doom convinces the patient that the only
way out is suicide. Every task takes incredible effort, as
though one is literally wading in the mud.
At the extreme high end, people report feeling invincible,
highly aware, and energetic for days. Fun-loving behaviors
can get out of control. People report staying up for many
nights to complete a project. Ideas that friends think are outrageous
make perfect sense to a bipolar person. Some people
spend money uncontrollably and neglect their bills.
Imagine that you start to have bipolar symptoms and
before you know it, you hit either of these extremes. Your
life is out of control, you are suicidal, or both. You are
urged to get treatment. People that love you are worried and
want you to find out what the problem is. Perhaps you have
broken the law and are ordered to get an evaluation by the
court. Maybe the night you took the pills, someone found
you and rushed you to the hospital to save your life. Whatever
the case, you get a brand new label: Bipolar.
Perhaps you suddenly realize you’re not the loser you
thought you were. You’re not lazy stupid, senseless, selfish
or any of the names and labels that have already been handed
to you. Maybe you thought that your character flaws
were the reason things were never steady. But no – now you
know its not you. It’s the disease. What a relief…well,
maybe for a little while.
Time for medication. Many people require meds to manage
their moods and actions. Some say these medications
make them feel dull, less creative and more boring. But for
many, medication can work well and enable them to lead
what can be considered to be a normal life.
Now let’s look at the issue of stigma from a more personal
point of viewa bit further.You have been told thatmany of
your feelings and actions are a result of your disease. Soon
you begin to wonder which is you and which is the disease.
Are you in a good mood today or are you at the beginning of
an extreme high? That occasional urge to be irreverent – is
this your fun spirit or the illness? Are you irritable today
because you are overworked, or is it your illness?
You find yourself yelling at your children and maybe
your wife, who asks if you forgot to take your medicines.
When you tell someone that you are upset with them, they
ask the same thing. Suddenly you are no longer able to have
legitimate complaints, feelings and urges, or make mistakes
like everyone else; they are always in questioned or minimized
because they can be attributed to your “disease.” You
now look to others to see how to act and validate your feelings.
And god forbid that you show strong emotion!
Have you ever spent too much money? To some, that’s
simply “retail therapy.” For a person suffering from bipolar
disorder, this is part of your craziness and you should be
concerned.
Have you ever stayed up all night working on a project?
That’s enthusiasm and ambition; you should be proud of
yourself! A person with bipolar may fear another high followed
by a crash.
Have you ever gotten angry with a sales clerk or lost
your temper at work? Well, don’t we all? As a person with
b i p o l a r, you might want to consider a medication adjustm
e n t .
Have you ever had a boss, doctor or a family member do
or say something nasty to you when no one else is around?
You complain. You deserve to be heard and you expect an
apology.A person with a bipolar might be accused of blowing
things out of proportion, of having false perceptions, or
making false accusations. I have personally seen complaints
thrown out without any investigation, simply
because the plaintiff had a mental illness. Who are people
going to believe – the woman that is bipolar or the man in
power who she claims assaulted her?
This is vulnerability. This is a loss of personal power.
This is stigma, a constant companion of those diagnosed
with a mental disorder.

The phone rang at midnight, and Sten
Johensen answered it, with a good idea of
who it might be.At the other end of the line, a
familiar voice was frantic and crying. “They
w o n ’t give me my meds!” It was Sten’s good
friend, whom we will call Sue, who had had
shoulder surgery that day. Sten had been with
her at the hospital before the operation, after
her recovery, and in the evening for the nursing
change at 8:00 PM. He had accompanied
her all day not only as a friend, but also as her
advocate, to assure that she would be given
her psychiatric medications without interruption
due to oversight or negligence. Sue was
on a strict regimen of medication for her bipolar
disorder, post traumatic stress disorder,
and dissociative identity disorder. At each
step of the pre- and post-surgical procedures,
Sue and Sten had asked for assurance that the
meds would be administered at the designated
times, as prescribed by Sue’s psychiatrist.
They spoke with the night nurse to make her
aware of the situation.
During Sue’s midnight phone call, that
same nurse said the medications weren’t listed
for Sue, nor had then been provided, and
she couldn’t give them anyway without the
doctor’s orders. Sten then called a night-duty
psychiatric nurse at the psychiatric ward
where Sue had often been treated. The nurse
there called Sue’s psychiatrist at home (at 1
AM), who then called the hospital staff to
demand the medications for Sue.
Sue’s pleas to the nurses on duty had
gone unheeded. The reason? Stigma.
Sten knows all too well about stigma and
what it can do to people who have emotional
difficulties or disabilities. He is a facilitator
for the Depression and Bipolar Support
Alliance of Urbana Champaign. DBSA is a
nationwide network of peer support groups
for people who suffer from depression or
Bipolar Disorder. The local group meets
twice weekly and the members share common
experiences, problems and possible
solutions. Many of the issues discussed
involve the ubiquitous, subtle and not-sosubtle
forms of stigma. I sat down to talk
with Sten about some of the things the group
can do for its members.
“Family is not always the best support”,
he said. “Sometimes family
relationships carry with them
baggage, which can actually
add to the problem.” In such
cases, a peer group can provide
an understanding
refuge. Many group members
show obvious distress
after spending time with
their families and sometimes after a doctor’s
appointment.
One might wonder how doctors could be a
source of distress when in fact they are supposed
to be the source of healing. Sten notes
that some DBSA members often find their
doctors to be impersonal in nature, condescending
or unwilling to listen. He reports
that many members come back from appointments
feeling deflated and beaten down.
They feel they are not taken seriously and if
they have a complaint, it is just attributed to
their emotional condition. This is a big area
of vulnerability where stigma is the culprit.
So, if a patient is having difficulties with
a doctor, why not visit another doctor? This
would be simple if everyone had a health
care plan that treated mental illness the same
as physical illness. This, however is rare,
even with the best of plans. Insurance companies
often dictate which doctors a patient
can see and which medications they will pay
for as well as restrict the number of therapy
sessions available per year. In many cases,
insurance itself is an issue. Some DBSA
members are on public aid, while some have
no coverage at all.
In regards to treatment, there are many
breakthrough therapies and medications to
treat depression, but only 15.3% of the people
with mental illness in the United States get
what would be described as adequate treatment
(C h a rtbook on Mental Health, 2006)
There is treatment available for low
income persons but there is usually a waiting
list. Some members of DBSA have had to
wait up to 6 weeks to see a doctor. Unfortunately,
depression can be a downward spiral,
and often by the time a person
seeks help or someone
assists them, they may be in
acute psychological distress.
For someone clinically
depressed, a day can seem
like a lifetime, let alone
waiting weeks for the next
available appointment.
Many people end up in the emergency room
with a crisis because of this lack of immediate
support.
Sten has found that some doctors in the
community will help out in an emergency
situation. He himself has also escorted many
patients to the hospital.
In the case of physical disability, it may
take months or years for someone to acquire a
rightful disability claim.Most are turned down
2 or 3 times before they become eligible. T h i s
is especially true when it is a first time emerg
e n c y. Sten told me that many DBSA m e mbers
have had to hire lawyers to get a fair
shake at disability. One of the benefits of the
peer group is that members can advise each
other on good disability lawyers in town.
In addition to the difficulties in obtaining
treatment, a client may also face stigma during
treatment. If a person is on public assistance
and has made it through the wait list, she will
then be assigned a doctor.
Unfortunately, Sten has found that DBSA
members commonly have many problems
with their doctors. In many cases a member
will tell the doctor that their medication is
producing side affects or not working at all,
only to be completely dismissed. Advocates
have tried to go with these clients to give
their complaints credibility but doctors will
often, and inexplicably keep these people
from joining them in the office.
If a client is unhappy with her doctor, she
may file a complaint, but it takes another 6
weeks to get a different doctor who still may
not be competent. This can be devastating if
medication side effects are a problem or the
medications are not helping at all. To complicate
matters, many medications for
depression take weeks to take eff e c t .
Although most people in the mental health
community work very hard to meet the needs
of the clients, the uncaring nature of some of
the doctors and the system itself can be
harmful to people with depression.
F o r t u n a t e l y, there is some good news.
Sten sees the emergence of a new way of
treatment coming from the certain psychiatrists
who do not base their practice on autocratic
ideals. They listen when a client is concerned
and work with the individual to
improve the effects of treatment. I asked Sten
how many of these doctors were available
and although he claims no statistics, from
what he has heard from members, about 15%
of them have this type of treatment.
There is a long road ahead and a great need
for better mental health care and delivery in
this country. Issues of stigma have to be
addressed as they are linked to the illness
itself.With so many medications and therapies
available, acquiring good treatment and being
treated with respect are the main issues at
hand.With improvements in these areas, combined
with peer groups willing to advocate for
each other, we may be on the road to recovery.

Police have long been regarded by many in the
African American community
as an occupying army.
The recent use of overwhelming
force by police
in Garden Hills, a predominantly
working class African A m e r i c a n
neighborhood in Champaign, only feeds into
this perception. After a four-hour standoff,
Carl “Dennis” Stewart, 46, was forced into a
corner by police and he killed himself.
The death of this husband and family man
cornered by police should be regarded by all
members of the Champaign-Urbana community
as a sign of continued social ills.
On the afternoon of May 11, 2006, Champaign
police responded to a domestic violence
call in the Garden Hills neighborhood,
just north of Bradley Avenue and west of
Prospect. Upon arriving at the scene, they
found Stewart, a well-liked head custodian at
Booker T. Washington elementary school,
sitting alone in his parked car in the driveway
of a neighborhood house with a gun. It
was learned that Stewart had been separated
from his wife, was going through marital
problems, and was suicidal.
Champaign police quickly leaped into
action by calling in the S.W.A.T. (Special
Weapons and Tactics) team and rolling out
the force’s prized A.P.C. (Armored Personel
Carrier), an expensive high-tech tank
designed to suppress mobs and riots. Intead
of handling this as a potential suicide, the
police reacted as if this were a terrorist
attack.
Police brought in a hostage negotiator,
but after several hours they had gained no
ground. Pinned into a corner by the police
tank, Stewart attempted to flee in his car, and
was trapped by police. The situation ended
with the worst outcome when Stewart turned
the gun on himself.
A new watchdog organization called
Community Court Watch grew out of Cop
Watch efforts that began over two years ago.
Court Watch members Aaron Ammons of CU
Citizens for Peace and Justice, Tanya
Parker of Habari Connection, and myself
went out into the Garden Hills community to
interview people about their perception of
the police reaction.
One woman who lives on Joanne Lane,
where the standoff occurred, told us she has
not received a full explanation from the
police. The first thing she saw was police
with drawn pistols and rifles in her front
yard. When she went outside, she was sternly
directed by police to go back into the
house. Her greatest concern was for her child
who was returning home from school.
She went on to explain that she saw the
armored tank chase Stewart’s vehicle up the
block. She described the site where the suicide
occurred and told us it looked like the
armored tank had rammed Stewart’s car,
pushed him off the road and into a post.
Other neighbors we interviewed told us
they heard six shots, not the alleged single
gunshot.
Many we talked to expressed their concern
that police did not allow family members
to talk with Stewart. Aphoto in the May
12, 2006 issue of the News-Gazette showed
Stewart’s brother restrained by police, quoted
as crying repeatedly, “You’re just going to
shoot him anyway.”
One interviewee who knows Stewart’s
mother said that even she was not given a
chance to talk to her own son. Police brought
Stewart’s mother to the scene, but would not
allow her to talk to him. “If anyone could,”
the interviewee explained, “certainly a mother
could talk to her son.”
Someone else we talked to said she also
knows the family. She claimed that it was
after police cut off a phone conversation
between Stewart and his wife that he took off
in his car.
A witness told us that the white hostage
negotiator was not very helpful. Watching
the incident from the front window of his
house, he stated bluntly that after listening to
the negoiator, he was ready to kill himself.
One question raised is: why a hostage
negotiator and not a suicide counselor?
Pointing to Arrowhead Lanes bowling
alley at the end of the street, a neighbor
described the army of police officers lined up
in the parking lot, allwearing black uniforms.
While we interviewed her, a UPS truck drove
b y. Gesturing at it, she said the police truck
was even bigger – a “big blue tank.” I asked
if the police seemed as if they were carrying
out a military exercise. She said, “Shoot, they
was worse than the military. ”
I asked one woman if it could have ended
another way. She told me, “It went down
exactly how they wanted it to go down. He
was Black. They didn’t care.” Do you think
this would have happened in a white neighborhood?
She said, “Hell no!”
Those we interviewed felt that only half
the story has been told by the local media.
The News-Gazette did little more than dictate
what the police told them to say. In the
newspaper, Champaign Police Chief R.T.
Finney congratulated his force and said,
“There was a considerable amount of
restraint shown” (5/13/2006).
Two years ago, when the African American
community opposed the purchase of
Tasers in Champaign, Chief Finney was just
beginning his tenure with the force. After the
City Council failed to endorse the purchase
of Tasers, Finney agreed it was best and said
it should be his priority to improve his relationship
with the community (News-Gazette
3/25/2004).
After this latest police stunt in Garden
Hills, it does not look like Chief Finney has
made much progress in this relationship.
In Urbana, new Police Chief Mike Billy
is talking about reinstituting the Street Crime
Unit to fight drugs, yet another heavy-handed
police response to what is at its root a
problem that should be treated through
social services, not more police raids.
Of course, an investigation will most
likely absolve the Champaign police department
of all blame. Unfortunately, community
relations between African American residents
and the police will continue to worsen.

There is a growing disparity
in America between those
who receive health care, and
those who do not. Nowhere is
this disparity more apparent
than here in Champaign, Illinois.
There is a young lady
here in Champaign, 21 years of age, who is
legally blind, suffers from a brain tumor, and
has a slipped disk in her lower back.
Her health conditions are fully documented,
so there is no question about the reality of
her ailments. With such documentation, one
would think that she would have no problem
with receiving medical assistance.Wrong! Not
only has she been refused medical help from
the many doctors here in Champaign, she has
been denied public assistance, and has been
refused help from the office of Social Security.
Although this young woman is legally
blind, she has three percent better vision in her
right eye than in her left eye, and this is above
the minimum to receive anymedical assistance.
The real reason she has been denied medical
assistance is because she is poor. She is
certainly not the only person to suffer from a
health care system that condemns one to death
for being poor, and offers a better quality of
life to those who are more affluent. In Champaign,
to be poor and ill is punishable by
DEATH!
Earl Robinson, First Citizen, works around
issues of health care and economic justice. He
is a student at Parkland College in criminal
justice.

Here we are once again, talking about the
chief. You know who I mean. Not the fire
chief, not the police chief, but our own dearlyinvented,
unfailingly-controversial, nationalcelebrity,
real live imaginary Indian chief. It
just goes on and on—the story of the two
towns, the buckskin gown, the two Dee
Browns, and the halftime dancer with the multiple
million-dollar frown. Will it ever end?
On April 28, 2006, the Executive Committee
of the NCAA, the membership organization
that governs college sports, turned down
an appeal by the University of Illinois to keep
the sports symbol of its Champaign-Urbana
campus teams. UIUC is now out of compliance
with the NCAA and ineligible to host
post-season events.
Athletic Director Ron Guenther immediately
said the ruling would have an “unbelievably
negative effect” on the sports program.
Chief fans criticized Guenther as defeatist.
Chairman of the Board of Trustees Lawrence
Eppley backed Guenther in a commentary in
the Champaign-Urbana News-Gazette on May
7. The commentary ended, “I value Ron’s
counsel and commitment to excellence in Illini
athletics. All loyal Illini do.”
In contrast, Eppley never issued one word
of support for Nancy Cantor, Chancellor of the
campus from 2001 to 2004, when she was
attacked day after day in letters to the editor,
state-wide billboards, and on local talk radio
for saying that an inclusive campus was her
priority.
For the past ten years, UIUC has
paid a huge price to keep the
chief—millions of dollars in cash
and wasted resources, a divided
student body, disaffected faculty,
painful tensions on campus,
especially for the few Native students,
declining respect from academic
peers, contradictions between
its mission to diversity and reality, compromised
integrity. The school’s leadership
was willing to pay all those prices, although
any one seemed exorbitant to many of us.
But now, the price is even higher, and
probably, finally, just too high: the sports program
will suff e r. The men’s tennis team,
although they have little connection to the
chief, could not host championship events this
year. Trying to compete while out of compliance
with NCAA regulations is like trying to
play basketball in lead shoes. The other teams
are bound to win. They’ll recruit the most
competitive athletes and coaches and the consequences
will be felt for years.
Aside from Guenther’s real-politik, the
response of boosters has been indignation at
the big bad NCAA, which they say has overstepped
its bounds, and lots of chest-thumping
about local control. Governor Rod Blagojevich
commented that the NCAA was “out of line”
and Eppley said, “The NCAA’s insistence on
dictating social policy for a few select member
institutions intrudes on the University of Illinois
Board of Tr u s t e e s ’ autonomy…”
Jumping into the breach, Representative
Tim Johnson and House Speaker Dennis
Hastert introduced a bill in Congress that
would limit the NCAA’s ability to sanction
schools because of their mascots or team
names. Late-night comedians are probably
sending them flowers.
Their bill is called the “Protection of University
Governance Act of 2006.” T h r e e
Democrats also co-sponsored, proving that
grandstanding for political gain and stupidity
are non-partisan. At this particular moment in
history, the Speaker of the House introducing
a law protecting universities from overactive
surveillance by the NCAA is some kind of
tragic chutzpah.
It’s also a surprise that Johnson is now
committed to protecting university autonomy.
He took the opposite position in 1995 when he
thought the university might retire the chief,
sponsoring a bill in the Illinois state legislature
to overstep the university’s authority. He
did this against the wishes of university leaders
who considered it a dangerous precedent.
After introducing HR 5289 to Congress,
Johnson commented that the NCAA should
“leave the social engineering to others.” Roger
Huddleston, a sports booster and pro-chief
activist, said recently, “The Chief is not the
issue, as much as I love the Chief. This is
about right of self-determination.”
The comments about social policy, social
engineering, and local control recall the
rhetoric of the States’ Rights Dixiecrats in
1948. These southern politicians left the
Democratic Party because of President Truman’s
civil rights agenda, which included
anti-poll tax and anti-lynching legislation. The
keynote speaker at the States’ Rights convention,
Frank Dixon, accused Truman of “trying
to enforce a social revolution in the South.”
Strom Thurmond, the States’ Rights candidate
for President, urged southerners to fight for
local self-government so they could keep
white rule. He frequently said the issue was
not so much civil rights as constitutional
states’ rights. It’s the same old song and dance.
The NCAA Executive Committee decision
is final and won’t change no
matter how much Illinois politicians
threaten. As for overstepping
its bounds, the NCAA
exists to govern college sports.
This is why UIUC belongs—so
that the teams they compete
against train and recruit under the
same rules they do. By enforcing Title IX,
the NCAA has engineered a social revolution—
pre-Title IX my high school didn’t have
sports teams for girls!
TheNCAAhas “core values” which include
a strong commitment to diversity and inclusiveness,
demonstrated through hundreds of
programs that promote gender and racial equity
for athletes, coaches, staff, and fans. The mascot
policy makes explicit that this commitment
extends to Native Americans and creates consequences
for schools that refuse to comply.
UIUC has chosen to keep its students, fans,
and alumni in the dark about the true nature of
the opposition to Chief Illiniwek. The repeated
requests for retirement of the logo and performance
from Native alumni, national Native
leaders, and the Peoria Tribe of Oklahoma, the
legitimate descendants of the Illinois tribes,
never appear in the alumni magazine. Nor do
the criticisms of the civil rights community,
including recent honorary degree recipient
Julian Bond. Alumni don’t realize that Chief
Illiniwek downgrades the prestige of their
school and the value of their degree. Years of
denial and secrecy make the university’s job
harder now.
UIUC was lucky to keep the team name
“Fighting Illini.” It’s a gift from the Peoria
Tribe and the NCAA. A little gratitude would
be in order. The NCAA u rged Illinois to educate
its fans about the new meaning of “Illini”
to ensure they understand it is not a reference to
any living, historical, or imaginary Indian tribe.
A savvy public relations campaign is essential
– picture Dee Brown, the one in the orange
headband, talking about respect. Why not
remind alums that Illinois was also the home of
the other Dee Brown, who re-wrote A m e r i c a n
history to include a Native point of view?
No one can dictate to fans what they can
wear nor what they can do at private parties.But
when pro-Chief fanatics pressure the university
to keep the chief at any cost, they are working
against the best interests of both the Illinois
sports program and the university as a whole.
If the symbol is retired it will be a relief.
But I don’t see anything to celebrate. The university
hasn’t acknowledged this as a civil
rights issue. If UIUC does retire the logo and
performance, it will be because it was forced
to by the only outside institution with a big
enough stick.
I’ve often said that the trustees should have
consulted some mothers. The question I would
put to them is: if you have to pull a band-aid
off a kid’s skin and you know it will hurt, will
it hurt LESS if you do it really, really slowly?
Say, take about 15 years?
My unscientific sample of mothers all
responded, “NO! It will become an obsession
and the kid will think about the band-aid all the
time. Rip it off and go for ice cream.” But
o b v i o u s l y, the Illinois politicos never asked us.
The fact that this issue has been allowed to
fester for so long and do so much damage
demonstrates that the University of Illinois
has serious governance and leadership problems.
Former President of the University of
Illinois and of the American Council of Higher
Education Stanley Ikenberry has called for
reform in the way the trustees are selected. A
larger board, selected in more diverse ways,
would probably have shown more effective
leadership and might not have been hamstrung
by political conflicts of interest.
So whether you’re town, gown, a fan of
both or either Dee Browns, if you care about
UIUC, tell the Governor it’s time to RETIRE
and REUNITE over a very large order of blue
and orange ice cream. For genuine “Protection
of University Governance,” help start a movement
for governance reform. And don’t vote
for a Congressperson that wastes our time
playing Dixiecrat.
Carol Spindel is a lecturer in English at the
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
She is the author of Dancing at Halftime:
Sports and the Controversy Over American
Indian Mascots.