Deb has asked me to forward this message, since a recent OSU email change has
left her unable to do it directly.

Hi, everyone.

I agree with all of the comments regarding free exchange of ideas and being
willing to host controversial speakers, including those whose ideas differ
from those of many, or even most, of our membership.

But, don't we need to draw the line between people who have ideas with
which we disagree and people whose actions actually perpetuate things we
consider abhorrent?

I found the debate over whether Ashcroft is a racist a particularly
interesting one.  The debate suggests that it is possible for someone not
to be racist.  We live in a racist society.  Is it really possible for
anyone, no matter what their race, to not notice other races and other the
racial identities of other people?  And, if we do notice other races and
other people's racial identities, then the whole range of subconscious
attitudes that penetrate all of us through the stereotypes that social
science research suggests affect us in all of our interactions means that
we are all racists. (And, the fact that most of us deny this makes it
difficult to have meaningful conversations about racism.)

HOWEVER, hopefully most of us try not to act on that racism and in fact try
to undermine the further perpetuation of racism.

My deep objection to John Ashcroft, including inviting him to participate
in *any way* in the ALSB meetings, is that he in fact has taken actions
that directly support and perpetuate racism--speaking at Bob Jones
University and the interview in the Southern Partisan are prime
examples.  And, as for the Missouri Supreme Court judge, even if Ashcroft
was motivated by political reasons that had nothing to do with racism, the
allegations he made against the judge perpetuated stereotypes and racism.

The ALSB should invite and support ideological and political disagreement;
we should not invite and support active intolerance.

Deb Ballam
[log in to unmask]

Lucy Katz
Fairfield University
Fairfield, CT 06430