Commentary
Latino experience reduced with
acts of ‘tokenism, ’ inaccuracy
Guest commentary
Normally, I do not read the Eu
gene Weekly, until a recent article
titled “La Lingua” (May 1) caught
my attention. The article elaborat
ed on the barriers faced by local
Latinos, in particular Latinos that
have assimilated into the English
language and those that have re
tained their ancestors’ language
of Spanish.
Although the article attempted
to illustrate the experience of Lati
nos, I believe the article gravely re
duced their experiences. Addition
ally, it was nothing short of a token
attempt to understand Latino ex
periences, which resulted in a
white publication cashing in on
people of color.
Experiences (barriers being
faced) were reduced to conflicts be
tween English-speaking Latinos and
those that speak Spanish. The au
thors then further attempted to
show racial tension between the re
spective groups. Barriers faced by
Latinos are hardly those of inter
group conflicts and racism.
Who has one of the highest rates
of unemployment in Lane County?
What students have been the vic
tims of hate crimes at the Universi
ty? What group has been reduced to
having the international holiday un
derneath a highway? What group
gets pulled over by police at higher
rates than the white population?
The answer is Latinos, so to re
duce barriers to intergroup tensions
is a mischaracterization of the Lati
no experience and a slap in the face
to my people. Although the title “La
Lingua” caught my attention, it was
not because I felt pride. The article
drew me in because of its token ap
pearance. Tokenism occurs when
people in power appeal to the ma
jority’s prejudices of fairness and
equality but do little to actually ful
fill such values.
In the case of the article, tokenism
is evidenced in no one noticing the
obvious grammatical and spelling er
ror in the article’s title, “La Lingua.”
There were further Spanish errors
throughout the article. The point of
course is not to quibble about proper
punctuation, etc. The point is to in
terpret why this was allowed to oc
cur in the first place.
My experience has been that to
kenism occurs because white peo
ple (holders of power) generally
tend to do the minimum when it
comes to understanding and appre
ciating the cultures of people of col
or. In other words, enough is done
to appear fair and supporting of
equality, but in reality, no power is
given to those they claim to help.
Other examples of tokenism are
the following: The University sup
ports diversity, yet underfunds its
Ethnic Studies program. The Uni
versity promotes multiculturalism,
yet does not give the Office of Multi
cultural Affairs enough power to
hold other departments accountable
for its institutional racist practices.
The city of Eugene welcomes peo
ple of color, yet has had few city offi
cials of color. In my case, I get to
participate in the University’s com
mittees, centers and institutes, yet
am limited to catering to white val
ues and needs. Lastly, the Eugene
Weekly runs an article on Latinos,
yet does a poor job at representing
the Latino experience and in writing
the article.
Forty years have passed since the
civil rights movement. Although
some racist practices were eradicat
ed, similar institutional practices,
attitudes, beliefs and behaviors con
tinue to live on. The article “La Lin
gua” is only a comer representing a
system of racist reductionism and
tokenism the white population con
tinues to bank on.
Forty years have passed, but the
racist system of yesterday has yet to
be truly uprooted.
Javier Ayala lives in Eugene.
Liquor-control privatization would
slash badly needed funding source
Guest commentary
Oregon has a state budget deficit
of $ 2.5 billion. Other than the Ore
gon Lottery, there is one agency that
actually makes significant money for
the state — it turns a “profit,” for
lack of a better term.
So, why are some people so anx
ious to get rid of the Oregon Liquor
Control Commission?
As Oregon lawmakers struggle to
balance the budget, there is again
talk of privatizing the OLCC. Why?
As state legislators are looking for
every cent they can find, why
would anyone want to eliminate
this cash cow? It simply doesn’t
make sense — or “cents.” And it
also won’t save the state any mon
ey. Consider:
• OLCC “profits” are spread
statewide.
It costs $16.8 million a year to
operate the OLCC — that is more
than 200 family-wage jobs that
would be eliminated. But when
you add liquor sales, license fees
and beer and wine taxes, then sub
tract inventory purchase and com
missions paid to liquor agents,
there is still a healthy $104.2 mil
lion profit.
OLCC excess revenues are dis
tributed as follows: state General
Fund, $54.8 million; city revenue
snaring account, million;
cities, $19.5 million; counties, $9.7
million; mental health, alcoholism
and drug services account, $6.2 mil
lion; Oregon Wine Advisory Board,
$200,000.
• Shutting down the OLCC does
not save all of its costs.
Indeed, if you privatize the OLCC,
the state is still left with virtually 75
percent of its operating budget.
How? Because the business of buy
ing and distributing liquor is only a
small portion of the OLGG’s mission.
The agency has other functions that
would be shuttled to other state
agencies. Liquor law enforcement,
including specific programs aimed at
ID verification, “minor decoys” and
underage drinking; collection of beer
and wine taxes; liquor establishment
licensing; alcohol education pro
grams and alcohol service permits;
and others. These functions would
have to be divvied up between the
State Police, the Department of Rev
enue, the Department of Education
and others. All of these agencies are
already stretched thin and facing
budget cuts of their own; they do not
have the capacity to absorb duties
currently performed by the OLGG.
• Who gains from privatization?
Think about this: The current
OLGG-licensed liquor agents are
Oregon business people and tax
payers. Eliminate the OLGG, and
wnere will that extra money go r
Here’s a clue: Fred Meyer, Safe
way, Albertson’s, Costco — none
of which are based in Oregon. In
cidentally, while some recent re
ports have said current OLCC
agents were “split” on the privati
zation issue, our own survey
shows more than 90 percent of
agents statewide are against pri
vatization.
Privatization proponents also ar
gue booze would be more readily
available without the current OLCC
licensed outlets. This is good?
Somebody go ask MADD members
what they think about making hard
liquor more available around the
clock. Responsible drinkers don’t
have to buy vodka at a 24-hour con
venience store at 3:30 a.m. — prob
lem drinkers do!
Here’s a final mental image. Tool
down 1-5 and look to the west while
passing through Redding, Calif.
You’ll see a huge building with a
bright neon sign that says “Liquor
Barn.” Is this a sign we need dotting
our own landscape?
Barns in Oregon typically house
farm animals. Let’s keep it that way.
Mary Botkin is the senior political
coordinator for the Oregon chapter of
the American Federation of State,
County and Municipal Employees.
AFSCME Local 2505 represents most
OLCC employees.
Letter to the editor
Education should
be available to all
Education is a priceless commodi
ty — one that should not be denied
to any person showing interest.
However, new budget cut proposals
are at work to largely reduce the
funding given as grants to low in
come students.
The Oregon Opportunity Grant
is Oregon’s only student grant pro
gram. It was originally intended
that the grant would cover tuition
plus some additional costs, or
about 20 percent of annual educa
tion costs.
Now, however, the grant covers
less than 9 percent of annual costs.
More cuts will drastically affect ac
cess to college, as well as add to
those losses already suffered this
year. The losses from recent budget
cuts already mean that 6,500 fewer
students will be able to receive a
grant in 2003-04.
If the proposed budget is put
into effect, the Opportunity Grant
would serve less than half of eligi
ble students in 2003-05. As a re
cipient of the Oregon Opportunity
Grant, it is to my dismay that
these cuts are even an issue. I
worked very hard to be able to re
ceive a higher education, one that
I unfortunately might not have
been able to obtain if it were not
for this grant.
Equal access to education should
be something we strive for. Why,
then, are we allowing education to
become more difficult to obtain for
many low-income students'?
Maria Cortez
freshman
undeclared
Don’t have any more
DUCK BUCKS ?
Don’t have a cowman...
mAQMBmmmmmmmi?
If hi Ml—kl
Bn Out dossil mean It ism roiL
ill
RACE
the power of an illusion
A nationwide release of a three-pan documentary series by California Newsreel
View each
provocative
episode
and then
engage in
facilitated
dialogue
within a
safe and
supportive
space.
All levels
of interest
are welcome
Tues. May 6th 6:30-8:30pm Ben Linder Rm (EMO)
EPISODE I - The Difference Between Us
Everyone can tett a Norwegian from a Nubian, so why doesrt t it make sense to
sort people into biological races? Examine the contemporary sunnce-injJudintj
genetics-that challenges our assumptions about twrnan groups,; .
Thurs. May 8th 6:30-8:30pm Gumwood Rm (EMU)
EPISODE il - The Story We Tell
Hast! I race aiways been with us? Explore me roots of the race concept, the
19th century science that legitimized it. and how it gamed such a hold over
our minds,
Tues. May 13th 6:30-8:30pm Ben Linder Rm(EMU)
EPISODE III - The House We Live In
Race may be a. biological, myth, but racism still gives different groups -vastly
different '‘fe-chances Forty years after the Civil Rights movement the playing
field is still not level and 'colorblind" policies only perpetuate inequality
LET’S ENGAGE IT.
VIST THE CfiMPAMOfN WEB SITE (£> www.ptis.org/race
O
UNIVERSITY OF OREGON
For more information contact
the BRTat 346-U 39 or
oa»il lmi))K»(airiarii*Tng.i»reggi'.«l>i
ill
^ ; ■
ililiil
considering leadership:
how personal styles
influence leadership
During the first part of this workshop you will have
the opportunity to take a self-score version of the
Myers-Briggs Personality Inventory. Then you'll learn
how the way you operate in the world influences
your definition of leadership, your expectations from
a leader and how you think you should act when in
a leadership position. We will discuss how differing
views of leadership can lead to differing conclusions
in each of these areas.
3-6:30PM ■ ROGUE ROOM ■ EMU
approaches to
conflict resolution
This interactive workshop will explore concepts and
skills related to effective communication and conflict
resolution. We will cover topics such as distinguishing
positions from interests, looking at the impact of
assumptions and inferences, shifting your “conflict
lens" and the art of asking questions.
3-5PM ■ UMPQUA ROOM ■ EMU
WORKSHOPS ARE FREE. LIMITED SEATING. PRE-REGISTRATION SUGGESTED.
REFRESHMENTS WILL BE AVAILABLE.
TO REGISTER OR FOR MORE INFORMATION CALL: 346-61 1 9 OR EMAIL
LLATOUR@OREGON.UOREGON.EDU
sponsored by fhe crb memorial union and pepsi cola of eugene