Notre Dame Disorientation Guide 2000

Item

Current View

Title

Notre Dame Disorientation Guide 2000

Date

2000

Place

Notre Dame, Indiana

extracted text

The
Notre Dame

DISORIENTATION GUIDE
A guide to what’s really going on...

Written By:

Why Disorientation?
Welcome to “God’s” University. You’ll have a great time here and are welcome so
long as you believe that the administration is flawless in its application of Catholic
teachings to the university setting, don’t care about free speech, enjoy being
treated as a child by the administration, and don’t ask tough questions.
If not, well then it’s too late to transfer and at least you got away from your
parents.
Fortunately there are a lot of great people at Notre Dame, both students and
faculty. We hope you will consider devoting time to working for justice, educating
yourself and your friends, and making this University the greatest in the world (or
at least the greatest in North-Central Indiana).
You’ve heard the hype, but as you will soon learn, not all is well on campus. This
guide shall break some of the myths and tell the truth as best as your humble guide
writers have been able to learn for themselves. We urge you to join the resistance
and fight for democracy, diversity and justice on campus and beyond.
In the next few month you’ll begin to experience Notre Dame for yourself. As you
do, you may find yourself struggling to compare the administrative propaganda
with things as they actually are. Whether you just arrived or whether you’ve been
here for years you’ll find this can be confusing, eye-opening, shocking, troubling,
infuriating – at the very least disorienting.
-Aaron Kreiderps: This is the second edition of the guide, roughly half of the contents are new.
pps: Front cover photos from top to bottom - Feb. 1999 Hayes-Hurley sit-in for
non-discrimination, Mar. 1998 rally for Fr. Garrick, Feb. 1998 first PSA chalking.

Page Two -- Disorientation Guide 2000

Table of Contents
Page 2 -- Why Disorientation?
Page 3 -- But Why Should I Be Active?
Page 4 -- Free Speech A-Zs
Page 6 -- Media Censorship
Page 7 -- Increasing Barriers to Activism
Page 8 -- Who’s got the power at ND?
Page 10 -- Who are the Trustees?
Page 11 -- Sweatshop King
Page 12 -- Profiting from Sweatshops

Page 13 -- Gay Rights History
Page 14 -- Multiculturalism History
Page 15 -- ROTC on Campus
Page 16 -- A Poem
Page 17 -- Why does the Admin. do it?
Page 18 -- Liberation Theology
Page 19 -- Directory
Page 20 -- We can Win!

But Why Should I Be Active?
But surely we aren’t serious? Isn’t ND a loving family of caring Catholics? Where is
this ‘oppression’? Unfortunately the experience of many students has proven that
Notre Dame’s message is too often a myth. We and many students before us have seen
the Administration blatantly squashing students’ rights, supporting homophobia,
furthering militarism, refusing to work for multiculturalism, denying workers their
rights, and persecuting women who dare to organize.
If you care about social justice, if any of these issues in this guide touch your
conscience and heart, then please join us in taking action. Get involved! Being active
is as simple as contacting a group and expressing a desire to help. No past experience
is required. And our community and greater society could really use your help!

My aim is to agitate and disturb people.
I’m not selling bread, I’m selling yeast.
(Miguel de Unamuno)

Student Rights (none)
Since Notre Dame is “private” students do not have the legal right to free speech, but
the moral right still exists. Unfortunately ND has an extensive array of rules that
make activism difficult. Regular people who are just trying to organize a rally, pass out
pieces of paper, form a club with their friends, or put up a poster have all got into
trouble for their attempts to do good. This happens far too often for such incidents
to be random. Try being an activist on campus and you’ll run into problems. The
following information comes from personal experience and duLac.
Challenging these rules and changing them is an essential task if we are to reduce the
institutional barriers to student activism on this campus. The Progressive Student
Alliance (PSA) is campaigning this school year to overhaul these rules.

Page Three -- Disorientation Guide 2000

Free Speech A-Zs
Assembly – You are not allowed to hold a student group meeting anywhere, even in
your dorm room, unless the group is recognized by Student Activities. This rule is not
enforced. For instance, the PSA met weekly for three months before we were
recognized. An official club can reserve a room with five day’s advance notice using a
Student Activities form.
Association – The Administration reserves the right to deny a club official status and
thus severely infringes on our freedom. A club may be denied status for not following
the University’s mission or the moral teachings of the Catholic Church (as arbitrarily
defined by the Administration), or because Student Activities decides that its goals are
already met by a preexisting group. For over twenty years the Administration has
refused to recognize a student-run gay, lesbian, and bisexual organization. There is
also a de-facto ban against the formation of a pro-choice club, or a feminist club that
would be pro-choice as part of its mission. It took the Progressive Student Alliance six
months to get recognized.
Canvassing – Knocking on doors in dormitories to gather support for a cause or group
is not allowed (see duLac on “Solicitation”). However student government candidates
due this all the time without any trouble.
Chalking – DuLac does not mention whether chalking is allowed or not. While
chalking was generally tolerated two years ago, the current policy is that political
messages are hosed down fairly quickly, whereas birthday greetings (or more recently
advertizements for “www.varsitybooks.com”) go untouched. Nobody in recent years
has ever got in trouble for chalking. To combat the University’s censorship, instead
of spending 10-20 minutes writing big messages in just a couple popular spots (like in
front of the cafeterias and well-used buildings), try writing many short messages that
are scattered all over campus. Also watch-out for the sprinkler system that can erase
a lot of it when turned on in the spring. Osco sells sidewalk chalk. Chalking is cheap
and fun – especially if it not erased.
Electronic Communications – the university reserves the right to read your email and
all of your files stored on the AFS network. You cannot post or send anything that
violates the mission of the university. For instance a private pro-choice email
message (or a public webpage) would violate duLac. If you know of an instance where
the university violates your electronic privacy – please inform PSA as we’ve only
heard unconfirmed rumors.
Leafleting – is viewed by the Administration as a demonstration and thus requires that
you get advance approval for a fixed time and location. Otherwise watch-out for
security and other administrators who will check to see if you have permission. The
Progressive Student Alliance was put on probation for having four people leaflet
without registering it, and we were told we could lose our club status if we do it again.
Note that a significant amount of leafleting goes unnoticed and thus unpunished.
Petitions – Requires pre-approval of the Director of Student Activities (see duLac on
“Solicitation”). And you must have prior approval for the location and time that you
will be petitioning. Just asking a friend to sign a petition, say in a dorm, violates
duLac. This rule is hard to enforce.

Page Four -- Disorientation Guide 2000

Postering – Requires pre-approval from Student Activities and sponsorship of a
recognized student group or department. In recent years Student Activities has cracked
down on groups that put posters on the walls of O’Shaughnessy, Fitzpatrick, Nieuwland,
etc. You are only allowed to post on a bulletin board. Even though there are hundreds
(even thousands) of posters on those buildings’ walls, postering there puts your group
at risk (Ex. PSA was banned from putting up posters for two months). It is interesting
that Student Activities enforces the rule against university student organizations,
while failing to stop corporations from violating duLac by using bulletin boards
(notably credit card companies in O’Shaughnessy). If you see a corporate poster on a
bulletin board, feel free to tear it down.
Protests – An individual or a recognized student group has to register a protest in
advance with the associate vice-president of residential life (currently William “Bill”
Kirk), preferably in writing (not email). You must state time, location, purpose, what
you will do, and agree to follow the rules:
A. All demonstrations must be peaceful and orderly.
B. Only members of the University community may organize or lead a demonstration
on campus.
C. Demonstrators may not impede the freedom of the University community.
While duLac says nothing about unrecognized groups, there is a de-facto ban on
unrecognized clubs organizing a demonstration. For instance, when the PSA was
unrecognized a member sponsored a protest and received a letter (at 11pm the night
before hand-delivered by ND security) that banned any mention of PSA during the
demonstration. Since 1995 Pax Christi, Amnesty International, and the College
Democrats have all been threatened with a loss of club status because they held
protests that were not approved. If you apply for approval of your demonstration, it
can be refused.
If you want to hold a protest at Fieldhouse Mall, reserve the space at least five
working days in advance from Student Activities.
Enforcement of the rule on demonstrations is sporadic. In April 1991 over 60
students occupied the Registrar’s office for eleven hours to protest a lack of racial
diversity, however after negotiations they agreed to leave
and were not disciplined. Neither were 35 students who in
February 1999 sat-in Hayes-Hurley lobby, while it was being
used as the Administration building, to protest the
Administration’s refusal to add sexual orientation to the nondiscrimination clause. Both sit-ins were not registered in advance. On the other hand, four PSA members got the group
put on probation just for quietly passing out anti-sweatshops
leaflets outside the JACC in Feb. 2000.
Trips – If you want your club to fund an overnight group trip you need to have a
university representative (a.k.a. faculty or staff member) with you.
Speakers – There is a good open-speakers policy, except that you need to fill out a
Student Activities form a week in advance even if you are just having a non-ND friend
speak for free in front of ten members of your club.
Unauthorized Publications – If you want to start a newspaper, magazine, zines, etc –
then you’ll need pre-approval from the Director of Student Activities.

Page Five of Unauthorized Publication

Stories of Media Censorship
A free university would allow students to express and debate our ideas in open studentrun forums. However at Notre Dame…
1985/86 – Student managers of radio stations WSND and WVFI resigned after they
were banned from playing a public service announcement for the unrecognized Gays
and Lesbians of Notre Dame and St. Mary’s College (GLND/SMC). The next interim
manager for WSND was fired for playing it despite the ban and Student Activities took
control of the station.
1986/87 – A Juggler piece of art is censored for being too erotic. Scholastic reprints
the censored art and Student Activities shuts them down, changing the lock to their
office.
1990 – Scholastic editor Andrew Hilger notes of his position, “It always needs to be
in the back of your mind that the university owns the magazine and can shut it down
anytime.”
1995 – Student Activities threatens to shutdown Scholastic after the Gipper runs a
column on the Administration. Scholastic takes a strong stand for free speech, refuses
to back down, and after negotiations is allowed to continue publishing.
1999 – WVFI starts to broadcast on the Internet, greatly increasing its possible
audience. However after several weeks, the administration limits the broadcast to
only students and faculty on-campus without providing any rationale. Thus preventing students off-campus (and many others) from hearing the only ND student-programmed station, whose range is otherwise limited because it is very low power.
Ongoing – Controversy over whether student-run gay, lesbian, and bisexual group
(Outreach ND) or alumni group (GALA) is allowed to advertise in The Observer. Both
managed to advertize last year in The Observer, despite the wishes of the Administration that had in previous years stopped their advertisements.

April 1997 Rally for Non-Discrimination

Page Six is not censored yet...

A History of Increasing Barriers to Activism
DuLac Pages Increase Ov er Time
250
200
150
100
50
0
1989

1992

1993

1994

1996

1999

2000

Demonstrations
DuLac’s rule on demonstrations was written in the Sixties, a decade during which there
was significantly more activism on campus and the potential for violence. The times
have changed and the protests from the past decade have been solidly nonviolent.
Even if someone were to attempt to “disrupt” the university, they would not be stupid
and try to register the protest in advance since doing so would only alert campus
security. Just look at the two student activist sit-ins in the 1990s. Neither was
registered.
Organization Recognition
In 1974, the only requirements for organization recognition were “(1) a $3 registration fee; (2) a CCND bank account; and (3) an organizational constitution.” In 1984/
1986 duLac the rule was changed so that “a club’s purpose must be consistent with the
University’s mission.” In 1989/1991 this was furthered strengthened to state that a
group may not “contravene the mission of University, or the moral teachings of the
Catholic Church.” Theses changes were to prevent a student-run gay and lesbian
group from being recognized.
Petitions
The rule that petitions must be approved by the director of student activities was
created in the 1986-1988 duLac, previously there was no rule.
Trips
In 1974 a student group trip only required about a week’s notice (Wednesday before
the trip). By 1984-1986 the rule was likewise lax and short (only two sentences or
so). However by 1988/89, a university representative was required for overnight
trips, and subsequently student groups were required to give 30 days advance notice.
This makes it hard to attend conferences or protests.
Parietals
Appears to have not changed since 1974.
It is easier to create rules than lift them. However due to this phenomenon, duLac is
overburdened with unnecessary rules, many of which were created as much as thirty
years before our time. Many such rules are unnecessarily burdensome, often patronizing, and should be eliminated.

Page Seven -- Disorientation Guide 2000

Who needs Democracy?
Students and faculty have very limited power. Major decisions are ultimately decided
by the Officers of the University (vice-presidents, president, and provost) or the
Board of Trustees (rich donors, CEOs, religious, or other conservative-administrative
flunkies). The Board of Trustees is appointed by a self-perpetuating body called “The
Fellows.” The president must be an Indiana Holy Cross priest. Students and faculty
have no votes on either body, and must rely upon our advisory power and our ability
to raise hell if we are to be heard. The only elected member of the Trustees is the
president of the Alumni Association.
Often the Administration will vote down issues that have gained 90% support in the
Faculty Senate, Student Government, and Graduate Student Union – or plainly refuse
to hear them. For instance in 1995 GLND/SMC recognition was favored by the above
bodies 30-3-4, 14-1-1, and 21-0-2 respectively, only to be vetoed by the Officers.
Who has the Power at ND
Student Senate – Advisory power. Very limited real power. Historically organizes
social activities, passes resolutions that are generally ignored, and biannually presents
to the Board of Trustees (ignored again). Addresses minor issues like Saferide, ATMs,
laundry in men’s dorms, etc. Online at http://www.nd.edu/~studegov/
Faculty Senate – Advisory power. More symbolic power than Student Senate. Can put
items on the agenda of the Academic Council, thus forcing the administration to deal
with them. Historically more liberal than the students and very much at odds with the
Administration (Ex. Voted “no confidence” in Fr. Malloy several years ago.)
Minutes and agenda available at http://www.nd.edu/~facsen/
Student Activities – Directly supervises student groups and tries to ensure that all the
unjust rules are followed to the letter. Possibly more a tool of the University Officers
than an independent source of power. Operates under the direction of the Office of
Student Affairs.
Student Affairs – Body of appeal for students and organizations who feel wronged by
Student Activities or who are subject to judicial proceedings.
University Officers (a.k.a. the “Administration”) – Consists of all vice-presidents,
the president, and the provost. There are twelve officers in total (all white and ten of
the twelve are male). Their decisions are likely made with memos and meetings that
are not public. They hold the real power at Notre Dame.
http://www.nd.edu/aboutnd/bios/index.shtml
Board of Trustees – Primarily a combination of very wealthy donors (including
CEOs) and religious people. Conservative. An online database of information on our
trustees is available at: http://www.nd.edu/~psa/trustees/
(in Access, Excel or tab-delimitted text)

Page Eight -- Disorientation Guide 2000

Fr. Richard Warner – Director of Campus Ministries, Counselor to the President, and
rumored power behind the throne especially now that Beauchamp was demoted from
executive vice-president.
President Fr. Malloy (a.k.a. “Monk”) – Overthrew the Hesburgh dynasty in the mid80s and disliked by some who preferred his predecessor. A conservative moderate.
Pretty powerful.
The Fellows – Six Holy Cross Indiana priests and six laypersons (including only one
woman). They are a self-perpetuating body that appoints the Board of Trustees and
chooses the president. President Fr. Malloy is also a Fellow.
An Active Student Body – If students take a committed stand and challenge the
administration, then we can achieve our aims and secure major concessions in favor
of social justice.

Page Nine -- Disorientation Guide 2000

Who are the Trustees?
When I think of Indonesia—a country on the equator with 180 million people, a
median age of 18, and a Muslim ban on alcohol, I feel like I know what heaven looks
like. (Keough, 1992)
One would expect that a good way to analyze Notre
Dame’s goals is to look at who sits on the governing
board of trustees. Do these people represent the students, the Catholic Church, alumni, or whom? Have
they demonstrated a commitment to higher education
and social justice, or the rich corporate elite?
By and large most of the fifty-some trustees are CEOs
(presidents, chairman of boards, etc) or other business
leaders. Some of the other trustees are involved in
education and/or the Catholic Church.
Our directors lack diversity. The trustees are 77% male and 81% white. Eleven of the
twelve university Fellows are white males, the other is a white woman. Nor is there
anyone who represents middle or working class Americans.
Here is just a sample of who some of the trustees are:
| Roger E. Birk: chairman emeritus of Merrill Lynch & Co.
| Raymond G. Chambers: rich, has donated over $100 million through his
foundations.
| Alfred C. DeCrane, Jr.: retired CEO of Texaco – responsible for destruction of
indigenous land in Ecuador.
| William M. Goodyear: former chairman Bank of America Illinois - note the current
chairman earns $49 million (1999).
| John A. Kaneb: CEO Gulf Oil, donated $100,000 to the Republican National
Committee (7/2/98).
| Donald R. Keough – former CEO of Coca-Cola, and former chairman of the board
of trustees, financed Keough hall.
| Richard C. Notebaert: retired CEO of Ameritech.
| Philip J. Purcell – CEO of Morgan Stanley, Dean Witter & Co. Paid $21 million
and $11.4m of stock options in 1999, and $50.8 million in 1997.
| Condoleezza Rice: adviser to Republican presidential candidate George W. Bush.
| William Shaw: chairman of the board of Sodexho-Mariott, the largest investor in
the largest private prison company (Corrections Corporation of America) in the
United States.
(For a critique of Sodexho-Mariott — http://yang.earlham.edu/~epu/sodex/)
After looking at this list above, it becomes questionable as to whose interests Notre
Dame represents. If the University cares for the poor, then why does it shut them out
at its highest institutional levels? Why has our school filled the Board of Trustees
with (mostly) men than are profiting from the growing national and international gap
between rich and poor, whose money is a direct result of the past and current exploitation of workers? Notre Dame may know how to do devise deceitful rhetoric about
our school’s supposed care for social justice, but the facts show that the interests of
the corporate elite too often come first.

Page Ten -- Disorientation Guide 2000

Sweatshop King
Perhaps the most intriguing figure on the ND board of trustees is Douglas Tong Hsu. Hsu
graduated from Notre Dame in 1966 and was elected a Trustee in 1995. He is CEO of Taiwan’s fifth
largest conglomerate, the Far Eastern Group (FEG), and has an estimated personal fortune of $2.6
billion (according to Forbes Asia, 1999). The Far Eastern Group has 22,500 employees in
Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong, the U.S., Philippines, China and Bermuda. One of its main
subsidiaries is Far Eastern Textile, the second largest textile exporter in Taiwan. Their key
products include “Men’s shirts, jackets, suits, [and] knitwear.” While labor conditions are better
in Taiwan than in Third World countries, to counter this Far Eastern Textiles is moving production to areas with lower labor costs. Recently the corporation opened a $250 million plant in
Pudong, China (where they have at least two other plants) and a $40 million one in Thailand.
Hsu plays a leading role in the global textile (a.k.a. sweatshop) industry, serving as Chairman of
Taiwan Textile Federation and President of the International Textile Manufacturers Federation.
Sweatshop conditions are rampant in the textile industry. Since even many U.S. factories are in
violation of U.S. labor law and/or have sweatshop conditions, it is very likely that Far Eastern
Textile’s plants in Taiwan are sweatshops and certainly the ones in China are. Workers in China
typically work 60-90 hour weeks for a mere 13 to 28 cents per hour.
In January 2000, Notre Dame announced that by June 2001 it would refuse to buy apparel or other
products from countries that do not give workers the legal right to form unions. In taking this
tough stance, Notre Dame has practically guaranteed that we will stop buying clothing from China,
where independent unions are banned.
At first it might seem that Notre Dame’s act of independence shows that the composition of the
board of trustees does not matter. But it is interesting that the university would select people, like
Hsu, for the board who clearly oppose the university’s and Church’s expoused goals of social
justice. Other Notre Dame trustees that are involved in the apparel/textiles industry include
Anthony F. Earley who is president of CE-Tex Inc. Former trustees Edmond R. Haggar Sr. and J.
M. Haggar Jr. owned Haggar Company (which markets clothes under the DKNY label among
others). Besides the United States, Haggar does business in Indonesia, India, and Mexico – likely,
given the working conditions in those countries, using sweatshop labor. Also Trustee Philip M.
Hawley is a former CEO of retail clothing chain Carter Hawley Hale Stores.
Now given that several Notre Dame trustees have specific interests in the apparel industry, that
many more are CEOs and want to break unions to keep labor costs low, and that Notre Dame makes
$3-$5 million each year from apparel sales, it is not surprising that the university so far refuses to
take a strong stand against sweatshops by joining over fifty schools who belong to the Worker
Rights Consortium. Instead the university has sided with Nike and joined the Fair Labor
Association whose standards are weak and goal is to help corporations look good by creating the
apparition that the corporations will solve the problem without public pressure.
Could you imagine Notre Dame having just one trustee who represents the millions of textile/
sweatshop workers (or workers in general)? (Surprising, how “ridiculous” and unlikely it seems).
Instead we’re exerting a preferential option for rich CEOs.
Besides FEG being guilty of using sweatshops, another of its subsidiaries, Formosa Plastic,
dumped 4400 tons of mercury-contaminated toxic waste in Cambodia in 1998, causing two direct
deaths from toxicity, and several more from the riots and chaos that ensued:
http://www.greenaction.org/la/pr/060900.shtml
A third FEG subsidiary, Asia Cement, stole land from indigenous Taiwanese by fraud, and is
currently threatening communities with landslides due to its unsafe mining practices on slopes
near their villages.
http://www.freespeech.org/taiwanfns/tfn/tien.html
http://www.freespeech.org/taiwanfns/tfn/PCTaroko.htm

Page Eleven -- Disorientation Guide 2000

Profiting from Sweatshops
Notre Dame makes between $3 and $5 million profit each year from selling apparel,
most of which is made in sweatshops. A sweatshop is a workplace that violates labor
law, and/or fails to pay a living wage and provide acceptable working conditions.
Students at 100-200 campuses, including Notre Dame, are working to get their universities to only buy clothes made under fair working conditions. Notre Dame’s
response to this issue has been mixed. On the positive side in 1997 it became the first
university to adopt a Code of Conduct (rules regulating the production of apparel).
Also in January 2000, it enacted the strongest “Right to Organize” clause of any
university – stating that by June 2001 it will pullout production from countries like
China that do not allow independent unions.
On the other hand the university has remained insensitive to the concerns of the antisweatshop movement and sweatshop workers. In the spring of 1999, Notre Dame
created a committee to investigate the issue, however unlike other universities that
included multiple representatives from their campus anti-sweatshop group, Notre
Dame chose to exclude the activists. This is even more obnoxious as the university
gave three non-voting seats to corporate representatives, including one from Adidas
and one from Follett (which then gave ND $1 million a month later).
After setting up the committee, the university joined the Fair Labor Association
(FLA) as a founding member. The FLA is a weak system of monitoring sweatshops
that is strongly supported by Nike and is viewed by activists as an attempt at squashing
the anti-sweatshop movement by creating a “sweat-free” label without alleviating the
sweatshop conditions. The FLA lets sweatshop corporations veto major decisions,
does not represent workers, has low standards, and is based on secrecy (the monitoring
reports are not disclosed).
The anti-sweatshop movement responded by creating a stronger monitoring system
called the “Worker Rights Consortium” (WRC) that was based on transparency and
designed to empower workers, not corporations. Due to a strong student movement,
including ten sit-ins, fifty-seven schools are now members of the WRC (including St.
Mary’s College). Notre Dame remains a member of the FLA, and while it is considering joining the WRC, has so far failed to do so.
Progressive Student Alliance members have distributed leaflets and protested on home
football game days, leafleted in front of Junior Parent’s Weekend Mass, sponsored a
teach-in, met with administrators, sponsored an open forum with President Fr. Malloy,
and passed a Faculty Senate resolution in support of Notre Dame joining the WRC.

JUST DO IT.

RUN LIKE HELL.

Twelve Social Justice Issues worth fighting for

The Struggle for Equal Rights at Notre Dame
The largest campus issue of the past decade has been the campaign to get the university to recognize a student-run gay-lesbian-bisexual organization and to include sexual
orientation in the nondiscrimination clause.
The catechism says both that homosexuality is “intrinsically disordered”, but also
calls that “Every sign of unjust discrimination in their [homosexuals] regard should be
avoided.” Over 35 Catholic schools have recognized gay, lesbian, bisexual groups.
The initial Notre Dame gay student group was started in 1970, though they did not
apply for de-facto recognition until 1986. Vice President of Student Affairs Fr. David
Tyson turned them down writing, “... it is our judgement that formal recognition of
GLND/SMC carries with it an implicit sanction for a homosexual lifestyle which is
not in keeping with the values of the University or the teachings of the Church”.
Tyson referred them to the Counseling Center and Campus Ministries.
But student support grew. Thirty people attended a coming-out day rally on Oct. 11,
1991, for which the organizers received a threatening letter. In the spring, the Faculty
Senate voted to support GLND/SMC recognition, but the application was again
denied.
The greatest uproar occurred when GLND/SMC was expelled on Jan. 23, 1995 from
the Counseling Center where they had been meeting informally for nine years.
Different elected bodies voiced their support for GLND/SMC: Graduate Student Council (21-0-2), Student Senate (14-1-1), Campus Life Council (13-2-1), Hall President’s
Council (unanimous), and the Faculty Senate (30-3-4).
Protests grew from sixty, to three hundred, to four hundred students!
The Administration formed a committee that recommended that the university study
whether or not to include sexual orientation in the nondiscrimination clause. It also
created a Campus Ministries support group for students.
In the Spring of 1997, 400-500 students, still waiting for the Administration to
address the issue as previously promised, demonstrated in support of including sexual
orientation in the nondiscrimination clause. That fall, the university released the
Spirit of Inclusion – calling for acceptance, but without legal weight.
In March 1998, Fr. David Garrick (a Theatre professor and openly gay celibate priest)
resigned in protest and 300 students protested. This led to the Academic Council
voting in favor of changing the nondiscrimination clause and a 120 person fast in
February 1999. During the fast, students were told that the University Fellows had
already made the decision in December 1998! In response 35 people sat-in the
administration building for several hours. Since then the issue has defused, but it is
likely to come up again as each year more and more Catholic universities realize their
mistake and recognize gay, lesbian, bisexual student groups.

Page Thirteen -- Disorientation Guide 2000

Multicultural Activism History
There’s nothing covert about wearing black face, there’s nothing covert about soul
food dinner with black balloons and watermelon, there’s nothing covert about a
swastika as a symbol at a multicultural festival, or a professor saying that blacks were
better off as slaves, there’s nothing covert about these incidents.
-SUFR spokesperson Robert Price, spring 1991We need more racial diversity in the student body, faculty, administration and curriculum. In 1969 the basketball team threatened to boycott the next game if the administration didn’t act to diversify Notre Dame and it worked! In 1970 students elected
the first (and only) African-American student body president, who was also a radical
advocate of “black power,” and Notre Dame soon established a Black Studies
program. Seven years later, citing insufficient university progress in diversifying,
students sat on the steps of the Adminstration building. In 1991, for the same reasons
Students United For Respect (SUFR) protested and eventually peacefully occupied the
Registrar’s office for eleven hours. In 1997/1998 students formed a group called
P.E.A.C.E. to demonstrate their concern over a racist cartoon in The Observer,
stood-up to Fr. Malloy (literally), and expressed a series of demands regarding the lack
of racial diversity. Each of these outbursts has pushed the administration and as a
result Notre Dame has gone from having only 1 or 2% students of color in the late
Sixties to 15% today.
In 1988, the university committed to be 6% Latino, 6% African-American and 1%
Native American by 1992. Currently we are below 4% African-American and around
0.7% Native American. And since 40% of U.S. Catholics are Latino and Notre Dame
is 85% Catholic, we should be 34% Latino, not 7% as it is now. We need to open our
doors to people of color. It is clear from the repeated signs of student discontent and
action that additional work to fight racism is necessary.

Spring 1991, Students United For Respect (SUFR) protest lack of racial diversity

Page Fourteen -- Disorientation Guide 2000

For God or for Country: ROTC on Campus

President Fr. Malloy serves as “presiding officer”, during the presidential review of the ROTC, May 2000.

Notre Dame has the largest number of students on ROTC-scholarship of any university, and the largset participation rate of any voluntary program. Unlike secular
universities that do not have strong moral foundations, Notre Dame is Catholic and
our programs should reflect the nature of our faith. The Catholic Church supports two
positions on War: Just War Theory and Pacifism.
The least strict of the two, Just War Theory, has a set of conditions that must be met
before one goes to war (including just cause, competent authority, comparative justice, and right intention), and another set governing one’s behavior during war (including due process, necessity, proportionality, immunity of the innocent, discrimination, respect for the dignity of humankind, and respect for previous treaties). If all
of these conditions are met, than a Catholic can wage war to overcome evil without
sinning. But if just one of these conditions is not met, then Catholics must refuse to
fight.
An initial problem with the ROTC program at Notre Dame is that students do not
adequately discuss Catholic Just War Theory, and thus they lack the grounding necessary to judge whether or not any given war or act within a war is “just”. Since the
ROTC curriculum is national, it is written by the military and is not intended for a
Catholic university.
The next problem is with the military which ROTC students will join. It does not
adhere to Just War Theory. Thus ROTC students risk serving in wars that are unjust,
like the recent bombing of Yugoslavia that the Pope opposed. In addition, the
military does not recognize the right to selectively refuse to serve in unjust wars, and
Catholics who refuse to do so will face significant punishment. So by participating in
ROTC, students place their Catholic faith at risk to the secular nationalist influence
of the military.
During the last school year, Notre Dame’s Pax Christi chapter started a dialogue
regarding whether the ROTC program follows Catholic Just War Theory, and if not,
what can be done to change it. Stay tuned for further developments!

Page Fifteen -- Disorientation Guide 2000

PRIVILEGE
A poem for men who don’t understand what we mean when we say they have it.
privilege is simple:
going for a pleasant stroll after dark,
not checking the back of your car as you gee in, sleeping soundly,
speaking without interruption, and not remembering
dreams of rape, that follow you all day, that woke you crying, and
privilege
is not seeing your stripped, humiliated body
plastered in celebration across every magazine rack, privilege
is going to the movies and not seeing yourself
terrorized, defamed, battered, butchered
privilege is
riding your bicycle across town without being screamed at or
run off the road, not needing an abortion, taking off your shirt
on a hot day in a crowd, not wishing you could type better
just in case, not shaving your legs, having a decent job and expecting to keep it not
feeling the boss’s hand up your crotch
dozing off on late-night buses, privilege
is being the hero in the TV show not the dumb broad,
living where your genitals are totemized not denied,
knowing your doctor won’t rape you
privilege is being
smiled at all day by nice helpful women, it is
the way you pass judgement on their appearance with magisterial authority,
the way you face a judge of your own sex in court and
are overrepresented in Congress and are not strip searched for a traffic ticket
or used as a dart board by your friendly mechanic, privilege
is seeing your bearded face reflected through the history texts
not only of your high school days but all your life, not being
relegated to a paragraph
every other chapter, the way you occupy
entire volumes of poetry and more than your share of the couch unchallenged,
it is your mouthing smug, atrocious insults at women
who blink and change the subject-politely-privilege
is how seldom the rapist’s name appears in the papers
and the way you smirk over your PLAYBOY
it’s simply really, privilege
means someone else’s pain, your wealth
is my terror, your uniform
is a woman raped to death here or in Cambodia or wherever
wherever your obscene privilege
writes your name is my blood, it’s that simple
you’ve always had it, that’s why it doesn’t
seem to make you sick at stomach,
you have it, we pay for it, now
do you understand
-D.A. Clarke from Banshee, 1981-

Page Sixteen -- Disorientation Guide 2000

What can explain the Administration’s Actions?
The Administration needs to maintain control of the University so that it can follow
the wishes of rich donors (alumni and others), whose conservative values do not
match those of the student body. To stay in charge, the administration must limit
student activism, and act in accordance with the conservative (pro-corporate and
often homophobic) beliefs of its donors. Many of whom, like Edward Debartolo who
gave $33 million in 1989, or the Mendozas who gave $35 million in 2000, give
millions of dollars and outweigh smaller donors by a factor of a thousand. In 1998, 3%
of the donors who gave an average of $500,000 each were responsible for 60% of the
money the university received. Notre Dame exercises a preferential option for the
rich. By maximizing its donations and revenues, Notre Dame maximizes its endowment (now at $3 billion) and the endowment’s payout, allowing it to maintain its US
News and World Report ranking (currently 19th) and thus attract privileged students.
The rankings fail to include any measure of justice or diversity.
Culturally, the ideology of control dominates the minds of our administration. Their
idea of what students are able to decide upon for ourselves (and thus their notion of
student freedom), is limited sharply by a concern that students do not know our own
interests as well as adminstrators do. To the extent that control is the goal, the
administration does not discriminate against progressive or conservative activism –
instead it create rules to regulate ALL forms of student behavior and to limit ALL
activism.
Finally, there are competing schools of thought as to what Catholicism is and what
the role of a Catholic University should be. Our administration has one interpretation
and acts on that. It isn’t blindly following the interests of conservative donors for the
sake of money – as, by in large, it shares these same values. Especially beginning with
the papacy of John Paul II, people who manage to rise to positions of authority
within the Catholic Church are conservative. Firstly people are socialized into conservative values through the religious educational process, and then if they *still*
dare to dissent – they are simply shunned. By contrast if you follow the beliefs of the
Catholic Worker movement or Liberation Theology then you might decide that
oppression is sin, God is on the side of the poor and oppressed, and that you should
work to end all oppression. How would Notre Dame have to change to fit this
liberating ideal?
The combined factors of needing to please the rich donors to maximize our university’s
ranking, the ideology of control, and their own conservative values all result in a
limitation of student freedom and the creation of barriers to student activism.
Getting Beyond Campus
Notre Dame should become a safe-space for progressive activism. Most of duLac’s
rules against activism should be removed. Once we achieve justice on campus we can
tackle larger societal issues. Students should be free to organize an on-campus protest
against NATO bombing of Yugoslavia, an execution in the Michigan City prison,
welfare reform that will hurt the poor, U.S. military support for Colombia, or any of
the other possible off-campus issues that could arise. By doing so we can inform the
rest of the campus community and pressure our government to achieve progressive
social change. This campus has been activist in the past and can be again so today.

Page Seventeen -- Disorientation Guide 2000

Liberation Theology: A Sketch
By Professor Matthew Ashley
In 1965 the Second Vatican Council asserted that in order for the Church to fulfill its
task of carrying forward the work of Christ, it had “the duty of scrutinizing the signs
of the times and of interpreting them in the light of the Gospel.” The Latin American Bishops, meeting at Medellín in 1968, identified the existence of massive dehumanizing poverty in a world of so much wealth and power as the “sign of the times”
that the Church had to scrutinize and interpret in the light of the Gospel. In language
since echoed by Pope John Paul II and the U.S. Catholic Bishops, the Latin American
Bishops asserted that the Church must make a “preferential option for the poor.”
This means that all of the Church’s actions and institutions (including its universities!) should be measured by the degree to which they help the poor to understand
themselves as precious children of God. This requires denouncing economic and
political policies and institutions that treat the poor as less than fully human, as
dispensable whenever the needs of “national security” of “the market” require it. It
also requires announcing, in word and in way of life, a new possibility to the world: the
possibility of living together as brothers and sisters, sitting down together at the great
banquet-table of the Lord (as slain Salvadoran priest, Rutilio Grande liked to say).
Liberation theology attempts to serve this Gospel work by reading the Scriptures and
Catholic tradition as absolutely relevant to the challenge posed today by poverty and
injustice that cry out to heaven. Yet understanding this poverty and injustice, and
responding decisively and creatively to them, requires more than just theology. It
requires all the disciplines in all the colleges of a modern university: arts and letters,
science, engineering, law, and business. Finally, liberation theology urges us not just
work “for” the poor and oppressed, but acompañamiento, to walk with them in a
spirit of prayer and celebration, because that is what Jesus did. Thus, as one would
expect from any Christian way of life, the option for the poor is a total way of life
that can touch every person in every profession, and in every dimension of her or his
life.
More than three decades after liberation theology’s beginnings we have only just
begun to realize its challenge to us, particularly in the wealthiest nation in the world.
It has, however, the capacity to animate lives of courage, joy, and beauty, as the lives
of the four American churchwomen martyred twenty years ago in El Salvador attest.
Let us remember them: Dorothy Kazel, Ita Ford, Maura Clark, and Jean Donovan.

Page Eighteen -- Disorientation Guide 2000

Where can I get involved?
Progressive Student Alliance
The Progressive Student Alliance (PSA) not only wrote this wonderful guide, but is
also the most ACTIVIST student organization at ND! We’re always willing to assist
another organization or person with whatever justice issue that fires them up (as time
and resources permit). The PSA works for social justice on campus and beyond. We
have opposed the US bombing of Iraq (and the sanctions), organized to get sexual
orientation included in Notre Dame’s nondiscrimination clause, worked to ensure that
ND apparel is not made in sweatshops, and are currently focussing on campaigning for
student rights. And we’ve only started!
http://www.nd.edu/~psa
Contact: Aaron.Kreider.1@nd.edu (4-4346)
Email List: http://listserv.nd.edu/archives/nd-psa-l.html
The Progressive Student Alliance opposes all forms of oppression and is working
for social justice by raising awareness of social issues, cooperating with existing
groups, empowering students, and encouraging action.
Here are some other good campus organizations:
Amnesty International Matthew Monberg.
Common Sense Progressive Notre Dame newspaper! Three times per semester.
East Timor Action Network Jim Madden
OUTreach ND The original and only student run lesbian, gay, bisexual organization.
Support, social events, education, and activism. Unrecognized.
PO Box 194, Notre Dame, IN 46556. http://www.outreachnd.org/
Co-Chairs: Dave Wyncott, Molly Morin
Pax Christi Peace group opposing the School of Americas and questioning the presence of
ROTC on campus. Sheila McCarthy.
Students for Environmental Action Ramin Skibba.
Women’s Resource Center
Student run by volunteers, open 1:00-7:00 PM, Sunday to Thursday.
Located on the third floor of Lafortune. Tel: 1-9028 http://www.nd.edu/~wrc/
St. Mary’s Peacemakers. Maureen Capillo.
Community

St. Joe Valley Greens. http://users.michiana.org/greens/
North Indiana Peace Action. http://www.ipan.net/
Alumni

Gay and Lesbian Alumni/ae of the University of Notre Dame and Saint Mary’s College
(GALAND/SMC) A 750+ member alumni group supporting OUTreach ND and increasing the
visibility of lgbt alumni. http://www.galandsmc.org/
Notre Dame PeaceNet International
Working for peace, networking alumni, trying to establish a Chair in Catholic Nonviolence at ND
and the eventual abolition of ROTC on campus.
Contact Chairs: John Finnegan
johfinn@epix.net
(717-675-4482)
Frank Carver
ipsinlet@lightlink.com
(607-387-6140)

Page Nineteen -- Disorientation Guide 2000

Student Liberation – We Can Win!
Ain’t no power like the power of the people, cause the power of the people don’t stop!
The ‘futures’ and ‘careers’ for which American students now prepare are for the most part
intellectual and moral wastelands. This chrome-plated consumers’ paradise would have us
grow up to be well-behaved children. But an important minority of men and women coming
to the front today have shown that they will die rather than be standardized, replaceable and
irrelevant. (Mario Savio 1964)

There are two possibilities. Either injustice exists and it is futile to oppose it, or it is
possible to challenge it and achieve our dreams. So what has the history of ND student
activism shown to be true?
In the Sixties progressives formed the Action Student Party (ASP) and won student
government elections on a platform of student rights, civil rights, and opposing the
Vietnam War. Students rights were greatly extended, ROTC was reformed, and the
first (and only) African-American student body president led the students in an
extended strike in May 1970 in response to the National Guard killing four students
at Kent State and the US invasion of Cambodia. You can still see STRIKE spraypainted twice inside Nieuwland (on the stairway by the main entrance) from that
time. The basketball team threatened to boycott games and Notre Dame rapidly
created a Black Studies program and devoted substantial resources to students of color.
There are now ten times more students of color enrolled than thirty years ago.
During the Eighties, students and faculty who were demanding that Notre Dame divest
from corporations involved in South Africa, started a
progressive newspaper called Common Sense which
provides us with our own uncensored alternative media.
Within the past ten years the Administration has been forced
to acknowledge the presence of gays, lesbians, and bisexuals,
and to commit resources to ensuring their well being. The
Standing Committee on Gay and Lesbian Student Needs is
the direct result of a series of protests and votes in the
spring of 1995. The Spirit of Inclusion statement was a
direct result of 400-500 students protesting a change to the
nondiscrimination clause in the spring of 1997.
Women have organized and by forming the Women’s
Resource Center have provided a safe-space for women (and
men) to discuss gender-issues and a platform from which to
tackle institutional and personal sexism.
Beyond the concrete victories, thousands of students have
been educated about the evils of war, sexism, racism, homophobia, economic
injustice, and the potential for a world in which they no longer exist. For it is possible,
and indeed absolutely necessary, that we achieve a just society and start doing so on
our campus community today.
Notre Dame students are just a push away from winning recognition for OUTreach
ND and getting our university to support a monitoring system that would ensure our
apparel is not made in sweatshops. This (and so much more!) can be accomplished if
YOU talk to your friends. Ask them what they think about these issues? Ask them if
they’d like to make a difference? Ask the if they’re sick of complacency and want to
discover the true spirit of Notre Dame?
If you and they are willing to join in the great project of working for peace and justice
– then we invite you to join with us, and together we’ll realize our dreams!

Page Twenty -- Disorientation Guide 2000

Item sets