Kathlyn Hotynski

Recently, there’s been some discussion by conservatives on campus regarding the supposed left-wing ideological bent of a majority of college organizations. While it may seem strange that a political culture which claims to promote the values of freedom and democracy is so preoccupied with the number of groups promoting alternative views, it’s not really all that out of character.

Bypassing the paranoia involved in making such claims, let us look at the most recent grievance. The barriers of entry for groups wishing to be recognized by Student Senate are relatively low. There are some basic criteria (a membership, leadership and constitution for example), but there is little room for rejection based upon subjective criteria (such as political affiliation). What, then, is the complaint? If any group may be recognized, why are conservatives incensed? Is it because liberals have a greater commitment to causes, hence the panoply of liberally focused student organizations? Or perhaps it’s a childish game of numbers. The idea that “they have more than us, that’s unfair,” also seems ubiquitous in collegiate conservative culture. There is a question, however, as to the accuracy of even this accusation. Are there truly more leftist organizations than conservative on this campus?

The application of the data cited in a recent article striving to prove the leftist bent is erratic and arbitrary at best, false and capricious at worst. Counting merely organizations in the “General Interest Societies” column, we are asked to take on faith claims that the ideological leanings of certain causes are “leftist.” Leftist is, of course, never defined, it’s merely a classification arbitrarily placed on issues with which the conservative author doesn’t agree. We are asked to find the “hidden” agendas of organizations which seem innocuous, but are really clandestine liberal front groups.

Ironically this same standard is not retroactively applied to organizations which might have a conservative agenda. It is doubtful, for example, that there are too many pro-gun-control hippies hanging out with the Rod and Gun Club (cited as an example of a neutral organization). It’s no great intellectual leap to infer that an organization which is comprised of hunters would promote gun ownership rights, typically associated with conservative ideology.

Then there’s the fact that one of the larger categorical concentrations of organizations on this campus is religiously affiliated. With some notable exceptions (such as the Baha’i Campus Club), most would agree that religious organizations tend to espouse more traditional conservative views on issues such as homosexuality and abortion.

Finally, there are the organizations which accommodate students in UW-Eau Claire’s most populous field of study – business. Is it likely that business groups, often seen as venerating the free market, would seek to promote the welfare state and corporate regulation? At the risk of shattering the well-crafted illusion of the long suffering persecuted college conservative oppressed by the unjust liberal college majority, I must question the logic of associating any of these groups with a left-wing ethos.

As to the issue of segregated fees (i.e. student tuition) funding organizations such as WAGE, let’s be clear about what we’re discussing here. The author of this article is proposing vetting organizations who seek funding, based on the subjective concept of political ideology.

If students wish to attend a university whose curriculum and organizations must be purged of any ideological slant (real or perceived) and funded based on mutual agreement, then America’s future has a greater existential threat than terrorism.

I would also like to point out that by referring to organizations who strive for “equality” and “justice” as “leftist,” there is a tacit implication that these are, somehow, leftist values. I personally know many conservatives who would take issue with this.

The point to be made here is that student organizations on UW-Eau Claire’s campus are what students make of them. They can be fun social networking groups, or ideological action committees, but the impetus must be offered by the members. There is no cloak and dagger plot to isolate certain groups while promoting others. Quantitatively, it is nearly impossible to determine the conservative/liberal slant of groups on campus because most organizations don’t view themselves in such dichotomous terms. It is unfortunate for everyone that some conservatives do.

Hawkins is a junior political science major and guest columnist for The Spectator.