You would think after all these years I would have learned not to go. But then again curiosity, and a love of chaos theory, made me watch the annual farce that is the Student Senate presidential debate.

Then again it’s only a farce because of its location and the inadequate attention level of its audience. It’s a lot like, say the Roman philosopher Livy speaking at the Coliseum while Christians are being thrown to the lions. He might’ve had an audience, but there is something better going on.

Yet, a quick once-over on each ticket will show a cornucopia of items highlighted by a better commitment to “diversity” on campus.

What exactly does that mean? The whole idea behind diversity seems like it’s a command from Olympus (Madison), and like Olympus, it’s not wise to question the will of Zeus. Yet there, the latest buzzword from the leftovers of Donna Shulula’s years has germinated into an all-out culture of hyper-political correctness, “progressive” thought that goes unchallenged, and the creation of hyphenated groups of victims.

Don’t believe me, blacks aren’t blacks; they are African-Americans (even if they come from Jamaica). Then there is the “longing to return to one’s roots” crowd of Italian-Americans, Arab-Americans and so on.

Whatever happened to the idea of treating someone as an individual first? Now we’re trapped in some bizarre PC-crazed hand-wringing cult of victimhood that focuses on atrocities of the past instead of the present day. Instead of treating minorities as people, which I’m fairly sure they would prefer, universities and student governments handle them with kid gloves. After all, they’ve been hurt enough, heaven forbid we anger them.

It seems right about there that Madison’s idea of diversity stops. Not that this overall bothers me. Coming from a small town in eastern Wisconsin with a majority having German heritage, it’s good to see that the world is indeed a vast kaleidoscope of backgrounds and colors. What does bother me is the non-stop pandering by guilty white liberals who feel they must atone for some deed they had no part in.

College conservatives and Christians, often indistinguishable by liberals, know they are outnumbered by a ratio of 50-to-1; be it from their classmates, campus organizations, or even their own professors. A recent poll of Ivy League professors came up with these numbers. Thirty-four percent said they were “liberal,” 30 percent were “somewhat liberal,” 6 percent were “somewhat conservative,” and zero percent said they were “conservative.”

This is no surprise, since trying to get a conservative on a campus, either a professor, speaker, or lecturer is a lot like a military operation. From the second one steps on enemy soil, you will be met with instant opposition, demagoguery, and insults.

Where was Ann Coulter to counter Helen Caldicott? Where is the Jonah Goldberg, Thomas Sowell, or Walter Williams to refute Michael Moore? Why are leftists given free reign, but a conservative or Republican has to go through hoops?

UCLA demonstrated this perfectly when its Education School graduates protested First Lady Laura Bush’s selection as their commencement speaker on the grounds that she “has no merit,” or “achievements in the field.” The woman has a bachelor’s in education and masters in library sciences. Compared to past speakers, Mrs. Bush is overqualified.

True “diversity” on college campuses will not be achieved until students of all thoughts, beliefs, and ideologies are heard and respected. Universities have been controlled by the left since the 60s and shutting out the right, isn’t right.