Lately Michigan State University President Lou Anna Simon
stuck to her guns in the face of an attack by the Anti-Defamation League and said that the school will keep Archbishop Desmond Tutu as its commencement speaker, notwithstanding his criticism of Israel's Jim-Crow policies in Palestine. Bruce Wolman (who long lived in Norway) read the president's defense of her decision, and sent her a note:
Dear Ms. Simon,
I would like to express my support for your decision allowing Archbishop Tutu to continue serving as the speaker for the Michigan State Spring Convocation 2009.
However, I had the opportunity to read a letter from Brianne Walsh of your office and I am compelled to enquire further on the University's position. Ms. Walsh described Archbishop Tutu as a "controversial speaker". What exactly does your office mean by that?
I had the opportunity to stand in the freezing cold with Archbishop Tutu as he waited to give his Nobel Peace Prize lecture in 1984. Some might have said Tutu was a "controversial speaker" back then. At least someone thought so, as they had called in a bomb scare which cleared the University of Oslo auditorium that December day. As we shivered outside for several hours, I was able to talk with one of the most amiable individuals I have ever met. Even though he wasn't wearing a coat, Tutu remained jovial and only worried about our welfare and security until word came that his lecture was to be postponed until the following day. Somehow, Ms. Simon I doubt you would have considered Archbishop Tutu "controversial" that day had it been at your University.
I am wondering what other Nobel Peace Prize winners, besides maybe President Carter, would be considered "controversial" by your office should they be invited to speak at the University. Vice President Gore, Henry Kissinger, Kofi Annan, Nelson Mandela, Fredrik de Klerk, Mikhail Gorbachev, Martin Luther King Jr? What are the qualifications required for making the "controversial speaker" list?
What other winners of the Albert Schweitzer Prize for Humanitarianism and the Gandhi Peace Prize would require you to make sure your students heard alternative views before they could speak at Michigan State?
Would you have asked the South African embassy twenty-five years ago to provide alternative speakers for your students had Tutu spoken then?
If Hillel had invited another Nobel Prize Winner, Shimon Peres, to speak on your campus today, would your office call him "controversial", or work with Palestinian student groups to make sure your students were exposed to alternative views?
Or is this a courtesy only extended to your Jewish Studies Program, MSU Hillel, and the broader Michigan Jewish community?
I still believe you are insulting Archbishop Tutu and that you should reconsider your office's actions further.
Faithfully yours,
Bruce Wolman
