Discrimination is not where it appears

Author: Steve Jaskikoff '05

This is not an attempt to defend or justify what many have recently referred to as the discriminatory hiring practices of America's Armed Forces. All forms of discrimination are wrong, whether they be directed towards homosexuals or military personnel.

Despite the careful cultivation of a long history of tolerance and diversity, Middlebury College's track record in regards to America's military since the Vietnam era has been questionable at best. One need not look farther than popular histories such as David Stameshkin's The Strength of the Hills to find evidence of this disturbing phenomenon. An examination of Middlebury's relationship with America's military is essential in understanding the current ill-will exhibited by some members of this community.

In 1969, our faculty voted that "none of the ROTC staff would have full faculty status or voting rights." This was blatantly discriminatory. One year later, the building that housed the ROTC offices on this campus was burned to the ground by an arsonist. To this day, Old Chapel's official stance is that the culprit acted alone and was not motivated by intolerance for the military. This explanation is highly improbable and dangerously oversimplified. Acts of violence and intolerance towards the US military and its sympathizers continued at Middlebury throughout the 1970s. Not only were students taunted and spat upon, ROTC classrooms became the targets of vandals and demonstrators. There are striking similarities between this type of intolerance and that displayed towards Middlebury's gay community with incidents like the repeated vandalism of MIddlebury Open Queer Alliance's (moqa) symbolic closet.

Not long ago, a visit by a military recruiter prompted a large majority of our faculty to propose a resolution preventing employers who cannot adhere to Middlebury College's anti-discrimination policy from recruiting here, regardless of whether the practices in question are considered legal according to federal law. The recent faculty vote is identical to one that occurred here in the late 1980s when Middlebury's faculty ended recruiting visits by the CIA because it was rumored they did not hire gay applicants. The fact that one of the world's most prestigious language institutes prevented the CIA from recruiting its graduates is without a doubt illogical. It is, in fact, no less ridiculous than the U.S. military's history of discharging openly gay language translators, a practice that has been criticized by those on this campus opposing the periodic, college-sanctioned presence of military recruiters.

While certain components of the federal government, namely Congress, continue to sponsor selective and indeed unfair hiring practices, Middlebury College and a number of similar institutions of higher learning have maintained discriminatory policies closely resembling this system. Evidence can be found in a recent landmark ruling by a federal appeals court. For the first time, it was deemed unconstitutional for the federal government to withhold funding from colleges and universities that do not welcome military recruiters.

The judges supporting this ruling felt that private institutions of higher learning reserve the right to discriminate against our military. They based their opinions on the U.S. Supreme Court decision currently allowing the Boy Scouts, also a private entity, to discriminate against homosexuals. While few at Middlebury have jumped to defend the military's right to recruit here, most would agree that exclusion of gays by the Boy Scouts is blameworthy. One cannot accuse the U.S. government of sponsoring unfair hiring practices without first acknowledging the discriminatory practices espoused by Middlebury College and some of its educational equivalents.

Soon Old Chapel will make a formal resolution regarding the fate of military recruiters on this campus. If Middlebury College continues to discriminate against the US military, we as intellectuals will have shirked our responsibilities as defenders of career choice and advocates of the liberal education we so cherish. Students deserve the chance to be educated about the career opportunities offered by our military without being relegated to secretive meetings in the Grille or forced to drive two hours to visit military recruiters in Albany. The mere presence of military recruiters does not hinder the civil liberties of anyone on this campus. Their exclusion, however, goes against the idea that students should be encouraged to learn about different beliefs and ideologies while deciding for themselves which career paths and lifestyles are most desirable.

For decades, some members of the Middlebury community have ostracized the U.S. military. This discrimination, like discrimination towards gay Americans, must come to an end. Preventing military recruiters from coming to Middlebury College is not going to change "Don't ask, Don't tell," or promote policy changes within the U.S. military, it will only serve to ignore the underlying dilemma while burying it under additional intolerance and discrimination.