Becca Vargo Daggett wrote:
Many respectable people have wanted to overhaul General College for many years, and it isn't fair to call them racist or elitist. And I don't think John was out of line to point out that Councilmember Johnson Lee isn't making a good faith effort to understand where this proposal is coming from.
Peter Vevang writes:
Regardless of what Councilmember Johnson Lee may or may not have said, it is innapropriate to directly call her naive. She is voicing concerns that have been put forward by many people in our community that stand beside her, shoulder to shoulder. Calling her naive, is like calling everyone who stands with her naive. That isn't right. I don't agree with her on some things, but she doesn't deserve that kind of treatment. We owe her, and by association the people she represents, a measure of respect.
I agree, the General College needs an overhaul, it has been starved of resources and attention, and has been left to languish. But the solution is to fix it, not eliminate it.
The reason given by the U of M for its elimination is that they want to move the U of M up the college food chain, they want it to be one of the top 3 public research institutions. That isn't its primary mission, but regardless of that, being a top research institution doesn't preclude the existence of the General College. The U of M is supposed to be a tool of Minnesota as a whole, not just a tool of industry. The U of M is a Land Grant University, it has special duties and obligations that other public Universities do not have. It is tasked in its charter with serving the broad public interest.
Here is their mission: http://www1.umn.edu/twincities/01_abt_gen_hist.php
Here is their charter: http://www1.umn.edu/regents/polchart.html
We are not living up to our obligations if we eliminate the General College.
The proposed elimination of the General College is symptomatic of a trend in this state, to strike a line through the social contract and to eliminate those things that support civic life and the welfare of our citizens. This issue is a symbol of the decline in our civic values. The belief that we have a broader obligation to the people of our state seems to have been lost. The idea that these kids should be dumped in a second tier school is unnaceptable to me, that is not OK. I don't care if people say it is standard practice in other states. It isn't acceptable here, not in Minnesota, not in Minneapolis. Kids aren't trash to be kicked down the line, they deserve the respect and honor of being able to attend the University of Minnesota.
This is a question of civic ethics, of our moral committment to all of our citizens. The General College is a symbol of our committment. Who we keep out of our public universities is a bigger statement than who we let in. I believe that as a matter of principle, the General College deserves to be supported. The doors to the University of Minnesota should remain open to all inasmuch as that is possible.
Peter Vevang NE Minneapolis
REMINDERS: 1. Be civil! Please read the NEW RULES at http://www.e-democracy.org/rules. If you think a member is in violation, contact the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list.
2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.
For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[email protected] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
