Campus Quiet After Speech Code Defeat : Cal State Northridge: Only three of 15 students had heard about the debate over discriminatory language.

If this week’s debate at Cal State Northridge reflected an ideological battle raging at the nation’s universities, the campus was a distinctly serene and civilized battlefield Friday.

The day after the Faculty Senate voted overwhelmingly to reject a proposed speech code that would have banned discriminatory language, multiethnic groups of students tossed Frisbees on lawns and studied in the shade. They were evidently more engrossed in fun or finals than ideology.

Of 15 students interviewed, only three had even heard about the CSUN debate, which has been similar to disputes at universities around the nation. One side has sought speech codes to protect the civil rights of students. The other side views such proposals as an assault on free expression.

The few students with opinions Friday included accounting major Nathan Russell, who is black. The campus has the same kind of ethnic tensions as the rest of society, he said, but does not need a speech code.

“It limits expressing yourself in an honest way,” Russell said. “It limits dealing with different kinds of people honestly. The best way is to come out and be honest. . . . The Ku Klux Klan doesn’t say certain things I like, but they have a right to say them.”

As Russell’s tone indicates, people on both sides said that a potentially shrill dispute had been handled thoughtfully and civilly, in a manner befitting a university.

Discussions leading up to Thursday’s 43-12 vote by the Faculty Senate fostered considerable soul-searching and unusual alliances between liberals and conservatives, said Jorge Garcia, dean of the School of Humanities.

“It was a process we needed to go through,” said Garcia, an opponent of the policy and self-described liberal activist. “I found myself aligning with people I don’t really ever align with. We walked out of it a stronger institution.”

Garcia served on the task force that developed the policy, but said he gradually reversed his initial support as he realized it might jeopardize his ability to combat discrimination and injustice.

“The deeper we got into it, the more I realized that to be successful in combatting racism, those of us who do so directly exercise fully our rights to denounce it,” he said, grinning. “We may even exercise our right to free assembly and picket you. Since I believe in a rigorous confrontational style, I could have been in danger . . . liberals and radicals are the first to suffer from the limiting of ideas.”

Richard Kaplan, a 24-year-old student of international business, had a less complicated outlook. He was among several students who said CSUN is generally free of discrimination and tension.

“It was about some of the liberal groups imposing liberal words in class,” he said. “It sounds more like Nazism, fascist political control of what we say. Not that being conservative has anything to do with being prejudiced or racist. It just seemed unnecessary here.”

On the other hand, Prof. Selase Williams, chairman of the Pan-African Studies Department and co-author of the proposal, said it would have been a mechanism to resolve complaints of discrimination in a positive way. A committee proposed under the code would not have had enforcement power, but it would have had the option to refer discrimination complaints to the campus affirmative action office for disciplinary action.

“It was a civil rights issue,” he said. “It leaves us without a clear-cut set of procedures for handling allegations. It would have created opportunities for mediation and education.”

While Williams said CSUN has experienced no high-profile racial incidents, he said two black students have complained to him in past years about courses in which professors allegedly made sweeping generalizations about blacks. He said there have been increasing tensions at student housing as the minority population there grows.

Williams said he was heartened at the Senate’s accompanying vote Thursday to prepare an official statement of opposition to discriminatory harassment.

Differences of Thought Liberal activism--”I found myself aligning with people I don’t really ever align with. ... I could have been in danger . . . liberals and radicals are the first to suffer from the limiting of ideas.” --Jorge Garcia, Dean of Humanities Thought control--”It sounds more like Nazism, fascist political control of what we say . . . . Not that being conservative has anything to do with being prejudiced. It just seemed unnecessary here.” --Richard Kaplan, Student Author of policy--”It was a civil rights issue. It leaves us without a clear-cut set of procedures for handling allegations. It would have created opportunities for mediation and education.” --Prof. Selase Williams, Pan-African Studies