The dynamics between Occupy Albuquerque on the UNM campus and the UNM Administration remind me of three influences that may eat into the intellectual fabric of any public university, anywhere in the world.
The most obvious of these is capitalism. The board of regents may behave a bit like the board of directors of a large corporation, and therefore treat the students as plain old customers instead of young, open-minded scholars willing to stand up for their beliefs.
Under this influence, tuition is treated by the Administration as a base price that is raised according to how much the “market” can pay.
A clear sign of capitalism is when tuition is raised repeatedly over time, even as capital outlays (read: investments) in the form of buildings on campus multiply like crazy. Another sign is a plethora of “public-private partnerships,” which result in higher prices in stores on campus.
The second and less obvious influence is militarism, especially when a sizable (but hidden) chunk of the University’s research budget is connected with defense research. A thriving nuclear engineering program, special deference to multiple ROTC units on campus and the University’s favoring of national security studies are all signs of militarism on campus.
The third and most subtle influence is a religious one. Many UNM staff members, especially lower-level staff and temps, may belong to the majority religion in their state. This may be partly because members of religious right that runs the state has pulled strings to get them their jobs. Once in, they pull in others “of like mind.”
Such non-faculty staffers encroach on the separation of church and state required in such a government-run university, as in displays in their offices for holidays pertaining to only one religion, wearing religious symbols, and by quietly inviting this or that student who walks in to their own religious service, thus raising the specter of favoritism.
At the level of space allocation, multiple buildings on campus may be taken over by this one religion. At the residential level, a prominent frat house may be exclusively for members of a certain religion. The campus park, meant for the entire community to find peace and quiet, may be taken over regularly by campus adherents to said religion, not just by visual presence but with blaring sounds.
Such official enabling by the Administration may embolden individuals from outside the University to destroy the peace elsewhere on campus through loud, angry tirades, which include thinly veiled threats to non-adherents, all in the name of this one religion.
The police may do nothing about this, but may hand out orders to cease and desist on the complaint of just one staffer to some lone singer chanting the names of God in another religion. Thus “Free Speech zones” may be selectively enforced against the rights of majority religions, or those free thinkers with no religion at all.
Thus the University as a whole may indirectly fund the “establishment of religion,” but only of one certain religion.
When other parts of the country take notice of this, scriptural literalists from around the country and even the world may force themselves onto campus.
Get content from The Daily Lobo delivered to your inbox
One way is to label themselves “non-traditional students” and dominate the corresponding clubs at the student union, even though it uses student activity fees paid for by all students, even those who are not religious.
Such behavior from staffers, certain faculty of the majority religion in any campus department of religious studies and fellow students has an intimidating effect on non-adherents, who are made to be the target of the tyranny of this majority.
Thus, a student club can get packed with office holders who are strong followers of just one faith. This way it can discriminate in based religion, even though the club is not a religious association.
There is a word for when all three of these influences overlap. It’s called fascism.
