Yesterday, I wrote about WCU’s decision to uninvite the Chester County Peace Movement’s director from a panel hosted by the University’s Contemporary Issues series. The student who helps coordinate the series responded this morning to my e-mail query about the decision by expressing his agreement with my claims. In response to my specific question about the source of the complaints, he says that among others, the College Republicans are upset because they have a “Support the Troops” rally scheduled for the following day, and they’re mad that Contemporary Issues has scheduled this event the day before.
So now I’ve e-mailed the President of the College Republicans in hopes of opening an actual dialog. My question to him, put simply, is how he resolves the following contradiction–
1. Contemporary Issues violated the principle of balance by failing to invite a pro-war speaker to their panel.
2. We (College Republicans) didn’t violate the principle of balance even though we didn’t invite a peace movement representative to our rally.
I can imagine a couple of responses here. He might say, for example, that Contemporary Issues is a university-sponsored series and as such has a different obligation. That would be true if the College Republicans didn’t get financial support from the university also. He might also say that the explicitly partisan nature of the College Republicans gets them off the hook from fairness. I hope he says this to me, in fact. If that’s true, then the whole argument about fairness goes up in flames because it means that all you have to do is define yourself as unfair, and then you can say whatever you want. If he wants to open that can of worms, he’s welcome to!
The student from CI didn’t take up my request to let me see some of the e-mails, unfortunately. I’d love to see the talking points show up over and over and over again, as I’m sure they do.
More to come, I’m (sadly) sure.