INTRODUCTION

As the legal cases dealing with affirmative action begin to come to fruition in the courts, the group “The Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action By Any Means Necessary” or BAMN has become increasingly active on campus. For a number of reasons, BAMN has failed to achieve its stated purpose: to defend affirmative action. Despite the importance of the issue, all evidence suggests that BAMN entirely consists of a small but dedicated group of activists. Their attempts to create a “mass civil rights movement” through high-visibility advertising have fizzled: Their email list only contains a few names, their mass meetings do not draw more than 25 students(1) and the diag table volunteers seem to consist of no more than 10 to 15 students. However, a poll conducted by the Michigan Daily last year (2) revealed that the student body is virtually split on this important and controversial issue, which may be resolved through the court cases levied against our school.

With so much at stake at such a large school, why does the main group supporting Affirmative Action struggle to recruit support on campus, and why has this group failed to achieve their stated purpose? If thousands of students approve of affirmative action, undoubtedly including many of the campus’ minority students, where is BAMN’s support? The answer is simple: while affirmative action is important, and many students do support it, BAMN has failed to become an effective and powerful group by failing to defend it appropriately. BAMN repulses many students for a number of reasons: they inexplicably advocate violence, engage in angry rhetoric, and are organized by nothing less than “outside agitators” – Detroit Trotskyites who clearly possess ulterior motives. The truth is much stranger than you imagined. Michigan deserves an active, well-run student group to express student’s support for affirmative action, and to help articulate the pro-affirmative action position. BAMN is neither a student group, nor well-run, and with their violent, clichéd, and overwrought rhetoric, clearly does not effectively represent any student opinion. So what’s wrong with BAMN? Plenty:

#1 : MILITANCY AND THE OPPRESSED MAJORITY: All that talk of violence.

Yes you’ve heard it: that ominous “By Any Means Necessary” and “Mass Militant Civil Rights Movement” and the cry that a great struggle is at hand.(3) Where’s all this militancy and desperation coming from? BAMN has the support of the Board of Regents, the student government, and the student paper, not to mention a Supreme Court president in favor of affirmative action. In my opinion, violence should be a last resort in a struggle for social justice, and as a pro-affirmative action group, BAMN already posses strong support. If they do not feel that they have support, perhaps they aren’t representing a popular position: maybe their militancy and aggression to change a system that has already changed itself is misguided. To draw one conclusion about social movements in the 20^th century, it’s that the successful leaders and social movements are all nonviolent, or at least non-aggressive. Today, the admittedly non-violent Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. is a virtual national hero while the militant Malcolm X (who coined the phrase “by any means necessary”) and the black panthers are viewed as radicals and extremists. And it was King who helped secure significant change, not the Panthers. Violent social movements almost always indicate a moral lacking – and since history has shown a violent minority rarely succeeds, the value of violence must be only to challenge an injustice status quo. If the University already has significant support for its affirmative action policies, why does BAMN resort to the aggression of suppressed, minority groups? Good question.

#2 DOUBLESPEAK AND INARTICULANCE: Mindless rhetoric.

How many times have you heard the phrases “by any means necessary”, “end the desegregation of higher education”, “a new, militant civil rights movement”? The literature of BAMN smacks of such cliché, and the reliance on these stock phrases suggests a suspicious lack of intellectual acumen. Certainly, a group as important as BAMN, supporting such a controversial issue should never lack thoughtful, considered defense of affirmative action. Many scholars, notably Frank Wu (4) and others, have made powerful arguments for affirmative action, yet this seems remarkably absent BAMN’s literature. Instead, in their publication The Liberator, they call for a “mass movement” and the theoretical justification for Affirmative Action is left behind. At their rally on the diag this fall, speaker after speaker made impassioned calls to preserve affirmative action, often condemning racial, economic, and social injustice in broad statements.(5) No one seemed concerned with uncovering the causes of these injustices: (Is it segregated high schools? Poor school funding policies? Prejudiced admissions?) and instead relied on groundless, impassioned pleas to fix a smorgasbord of social problems. Again and again, speakers returned to the same stock phrases about affirmative action and social injustice in general, as if repetition might lend them the meaning that was strangely absent from the day. If BAMN seeks to defend affirmative action, they should do that. If BAMN wishes to advocate social changes, including affirmative action, to undo injustice in society – they should do that. The angry and inarticulate message aired during their “day of action” achieves nothing.

Hannah Arendt spoke of such a thing in her Eichman in Jerusalem, where she claims Nazis like Eichman could avoid considering their actions through the use of state-sponsored stock phrases and colloquialisms. “ . . . Whether writing his memoirs in Argentina or in Jerusalem, whether speaking to the police examiner or to the court, what he said was always the same, expressed in the same words.” (p 67) Not to say that BAMN is Nazi, or that all of their members do not think clearly about their positions, only that, because they have a greater agenda, they fail to clearly communicate well-reasoned arguments for affirmative action to the public. When the Michigan Daily asked Jessica Curtain about her loss to Justin Wilson for the Peace and Justice Commission seat, Curtain responded “It's unfortunate, but not a big obstacle to DAAP to build a national movement to defend affirmative action and integration” (6) Who asked her about the movement? The reporter wanted to know about her loss as chair to the Peace and Justice commission, but she simply replied with a stock BAMN cliché, albeit slightly modified. To defend affirmative action By Whatever Means Necessary, BAMN should not only hold rallies and petition the parties involved with the lawsuits, but also clearly articulate the many good reasons that exist to preserve affirmative action. This is exactly what great civil rights leaders have done: a close reading of Dr. Martin Luther King or even Jesse Jackson reveal a balance between moderated appeals to emotion and solid rational arguments, hence their success as political leaders. BAMN should learn from the struggles of yesterday to achieve success today.

#3 OUTSIDE AGITATORS AND TROTZKITES: Outside organizers.

Shouldn’t a group that claims to represent many students’ opinions should be led by students? Many think so, but apparently not BAMN. BAMN has a long and intriguing history - its leaders have connections not only to the original BAMN in California, and to a variety of minor, extremist groups, and also to lawyers involved in the Affirmative Action court cases. BAMN, and the people who run BAMN, all have connections back to one group – the Revolutionary Workers League in Detroit. Again and again, coverage by the Michigan Daily, State News, the Ann Arbor News, and other news sources (see this page for a variety of BAMN-related articles) quote the same people who sometimes identify themselves as BAMN members and organizers, and sometimes members of other groups. BAMN has not revealed its executive leadership, but it can be concluded that these reoccurring people are probably active members, if not organizers. Who are these people? Why aren’t they appropriate leaders for any allegedly student-run group that received funding as such from the student government? Let’s find out.

BAMN first arose on the campus of the University of California Berkeley, after the passage of a state referendum making affirmative action illegal. Usurping an existing, active pro-affirmative action group, they engaged in actions strangely reminiscent of those partaken on the U of M campus: they disrupted meetings, and held loud, angry protests. They were accused of stealing 7,000 copies of the Daily Californian on several occasions (7) – all when the paper condemned BAMN or stated anti-affirmative action positions. They also disrupted a “Take Back the Night” Rally (8), and an event where Jesse Jackson spoke. (9) The UC chapter of BAMN was widely condemned by both the existing activist groups and communist groups around the country. (10)

Allegations were made in print that BAMN was created by the Revolutionary Workers Alliance, RWL, a Detroit-based Trotskyist group. A September 25 article of the Daily Californian, the UC Berkeley daily student paper, chronicles the struggle between the then-newly formed BAMN and the existing organization, Diversity in Action, or DIA, quoting the leader of DIA: “Much of the problem, said Choy, comes from the fact that the ‘The Coalition [to defend affirmative action by any means necessary] has been organized by members of the Revolutionary Workers' League (RWL), a socialist workers' organization based in Detroit. Known for its extreme and disruptive tactics, RWL has made a name for itself through aggressive protests nationwide. ‘“ (11) The article continues to say: “Not so, argues Coalition member Heather Bergman, a California RWL member and Vista Community College student. Bergman said members came to help the group get started, gaining valuable experience for when the RWL takes a similar protest to the University of Michigan.” As the reader knows, BAMN would indeed take “a similar protest” to the University of Michigan. Except here, no one seems to know they were created by the RWL, and coverage in campus media has been largely corporative and sympathetic, perhaps because no other, “true”, student pro-affirmative action group exists.

According to the “view source” command on a browser, The Revolutionary Worker’s Party’s webpage, www.rwl-us.org, was created by Lee Felarca. In March 31, 1998, the Michigan Daily identified Mr. Felarca as a BAMN member, and on that day he handed out literature on the diag. The BAMN website and the RWL website are hosted on the same computer, their IP addresses differ by only one digit. Also, BAMN shares a PO box with other groups allegedly created by the RWL – including the Homeless Power Union (WPU), the National Woman’s Rights Organizing Coalition (NWROC), the Ann Arbor Antiracist Defense Campaign (AAADC), the Membership Action Caucus (MAC), the Movement for Justice (MOJ), United for Equality and Affirmative Action (UEAA) and probably other groups. All of these are listed on the same web page on tripod. (12) The specific connections can be found in an article published in the Michigan Review (13), which concludes that these groups often share phone numbers, P.O. boxes, and IP addresses. All evidence suggests that all these groups consist of a few of the same activists- leading one to suspect that their purpose is to recruit a variety of people for the Revolutionary Workers League - but that cannot be conclusively proven.

The UC-Berkeley chapter of BAMN says BAMN’s national coordinator is Shanta Driver. Both Shanta Driver and Luke Massie have been active as BAMN organizers on the U. of M. campus, and both are members of a political party in Detroit- the “Fighting Worker Slate” – which shares a P.O. box with the Revolutionary Workers League (14). A July, 1999 Ann Arbor News article also identifies Shanta Driver and Luke Massie, as organizers of a violent anti-KKK protest, as members of the National Women’s Rights Organizing Coalition, one of the groups with links to BAMN, and the RWL (15) . Ironically, a Michigan Review article about a sparsely-attended BAMN meeting last fall that identified Driver as a BAMN organizer and Wayne State Law Student (1), was written by Justin Wilson, who would go on to defeat Jessica Curtin in the election for the Peace and Justice Commission chair for Winter term 2001 (6)

Additionally, Mr. Massie’s sister, Miranda K.S. Massie, is a lawyer for the intervening students. (16) Mrs. Massie has appeared on campus on other occasions, including during last year’s Michiguma fiasco, where she told the Michigan Daily that she would be filing legal action against the University on behalf of Erika Dowdell, an active BAMN and DAAP member (17). If the tortured interconnections in our story have not yet convinced you of the dubious nature of BAMN as a “student” group, the Law firm Miranda Massie works for, Scheff & Washington, have also taken legal actions on behalf of some of the organizations with links to BAMN and the RWL - including the NWROC.

The bottom line is this: the BAMN chapter on our campus has concrete links through shared membership and resources to other leftist organizations with a variety of stated goals, all formed by the Revolutionary Workers League. This party, based in Detroit, created the first BAMN chapter in California, and presumably created the Ann Arbor chapter of BAMN. Clearly, the members and organizers of BAMN have a variety of interests beyond simply defending affirmative action, and all evidence indicates that the organizers of BAMN (Shanta Driver, Luke Massie, etc) are not Michigan students. The details revealed here also raise interesting ethical considerations: UEAA and BAMN (both RWL groups) both applied for MSA funding – although evidence suggests that they are two names for the same people doing the same work. Also, there is some evidence linking DAAP and BAMN. In California, BAMN coordinator Heather Bergman sent an email to BAMN members asking them to run for the student government in the DAAP party, suggesting she would help them do this. (18) Several days later, BAMN wrote a press release trumpeting the newly formed DAAP. (19) Also, in September 1999, a MSA publication contained the statement “Run with the Defend Affirmative Action Party in the Michigan Student Assembly Elections – November”. But, Carloline Wong, a BAMN member, took responsibility for the statement. BAMN then pledged to remove the statement and re-distribute the publication. (20)Why did BAMN take responsibility for an MSA publication supporting DAAP? Perhaps because DAAP and BAMN are the same organization. By giving $100 to BAMN for the winter term, MSA may inadvertently be funding the political party DAAP, (violating its own by-laws).

CONCLUSIONS

Hopefully, it is evident by now that BAMN has failed to support affirmative action because of their advocacy of violence, failure to clearly articulate arguments in support of this issue, and because they are not a student group, and possess ulterior motives. Does this somehow strip them the right to exist, or make themselves heard on campus? No, but if they honestly seek to defend affirmative action they should try to establish legitimacy and consequently a real, significant membership by being more forthcoming about their goals and leadership, and ceasing to advocate violence.

There is nothing “wrong” with radical groups like the Revolutionary Workers League exercising their constitutional rights to gain membership and make themselves heard on campus. There is something wrong with these groups operating secretly, or misrepresenting themselves and their goals. Affirmative action is important: let’s use our collective strength to work to influence the judges in the legal cases to whatever side we agree with, and build popular support for our positions. This is the only appropriate way to proceed, and as corny as it sounds, this is the American way.