An Alternate Opinion on UCSD’s “Compton Cookout”
So I’m currently attending UC San Diego, and there’s no doubt that you’ve probably heard about us in the news very recently. Recently, there was an offensive party thrown off-campus by a group of ignorant individuals, who have been associated with the Pi Kappa Alpha fraternity (“Pike”), attempting to mock the Black History month of February. This they called the “Compton Cookout.” Now, people have gotten very offended by this party and some politicians have lashed out against the individuals, seeking legal action and perhaps trying to revoke Pike’s charter from the entire UC system. (Google News: Compton Cookout)
Okay, so let me throw my scandalous, edgy opinion out into the burning fire. What’s the big deal? Now, I am in no way attempting to justify the actions of these individuals, nor am I condoning what they did in any way. I think what they did was very hateful and wrong and should have never been done in the first place. Having said that, I don’t see why people are getting so enraged at these individuals. Sure, they thought what they did would be funny, humorous, cute, and obviously the rest of the UCSD community, and even the state of California strongly disagreed with their opinion. Things like this happen all the time. People are rude, spiteful, racist, sexist, and hateful about many topics, not just black people. People are entitled to their own opinions, regardless of whether or not the opinions they possess are hateful or offensive to other people. The First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America guarantees an American citizen the right to Free Speech (except of course in the case of shouting fire in a crowded theater) despite whether or not that speech is hateful.
The politicians suggesting “sensitivity training, revoking Pike’s charters (from all UC’s!), and requiring students STATEWIDE to learn how to be racially correct” (Facebook Group: UCSD Students OUTRAGED By The Compton Cookout) are completely ridiculous in their attempts to prosecute the individuals involved in the ‘Cookout. I don’t see how it is possible to punish the individuals through either the legal system or through the college. Now, if they used University funding to pay for the party, then they deserve to have the book thrown at them and have them expelled from every conceivable place they can be. If they did not, however, what is there that anyone can do besides say “You did a bad thing”? They had a party off-campus, not sponsored, funded, or condoned by any UCSD group or organization. What can the school do to these individuals without Unconstitutionally infringing on the rights of the individuals? The Constitution doesn’t just apply when you want it to, it applies in all cases as the “supreme law of the land.”
Just recently, many of my first-year Thurgood Marshall classmates and I turned in a 6 page paper to our “Dimensions of Culture” class entitled “Justice.” This paper asked us to evaluate the significance of “American democracy, the implicit promise of and criteria for membership in the American social contract, and whether there should be limits on majority rule” (Source), specifically in regards to the two Supreme Court cases of Minersville School District v. Gobitis (1940) and West Virginia Board of Education v. Barnette (1943). In the first of these two cases, the Supreme Court upheld that “State’s interest in ‘national cohesion’ was ‘inferior to none in the hierarchy of legal values’” (Wikipedia) and therefore was of more importance than the individual freedoms and rights guaranteed to the Gobitis children by the Constitution. This decision was later overturned in the Barnette case, where the Supreme Court upheld that individual rights were more important than this “social need for conformity” that the State was trying to impose. This case signified a large shift in the Supreme Court’s upholding of individual rights claims, and marked a significant precedent that would be referenced many times in future decisions.
Now, having just (within the last week) written a 6 page paper on the topic of individual freedoms and rights guaranteed to individuals by the Constitution, I can personally say that I think the individuals in their actions were well within their Constitutional rights to express themselves in whatever way they see fit. Now, even though the majority of people in the UCSD community extremely disagree with the actions of these individuals, I think that there are no legal ramifications that can be imparted upon the individuals involved in event. Pike members, if you are retaliated against by the University or by powerful politicians, I encourage you to stand by your Constitutional rights and fight back.
Like I have said repeatedly, I personally think the individuals should not have acted how they did, and I believe they should issue an apology to the African American community at UCSD (however small their numbers may be). But, having said that, I do not think it is right for anyone to attack the individuals because of their actions. Sure, it may seem hateful and racist, but this is the United States of America, where even haters and racists are protected by the Constitution and it’s pesky Amendments. No matter how hard it is to say, I think this is the way it should be. The Constitution should not be extended only to people that conform, only to people that think the way that you or I may think; but nonetheless should be guaranteed to all citizens of America. John Locke’s principle of a “social contract” implies that “individuals give up sovereignty to a government or other authority in order to receive or maintain social order through the rule of law,” and it is this “rule of law” that guarantees that “the law is above everybody and applies to everyone.”
You may or may not agree with the opinions I have expressed in this (lengthy) post, and I respect that you may have your own opinions about the issue. Heck, I may come back tomorrow and think something completely different, but I felt that this was something that should be said by somebody in this whole debacle. If you know me personally, you know that I am a person who respects other people’s feelings and beliefs, even if I do not agree with them. I think people should be justified to their own thoughts, and having an opinion about an issue (be it politics, religion, etc) that differs from my own does not make me dislike that person. If you don’t know me personally, you’ll just have to take my word for it. ;)
-B
P.S. I will say it once again in case you didn’t hear me: I do not agree with, condone, justify, associate myself with, or even like what the individuals did in planning this event, but nonetheless, I believe that the Constitution still applies to their hateful words and actions.
2/19 3:22am Update 1: To clarify a little bit, I mean the “what’s the big deal?” questions at the politicians and people who are trying to go after the individuals. Like I said many times, I think what they did was hateful, racist, and stupid. Of course the individuals being racist towards the UCSD African American community is a big deal, and I don’t mean to undermine that point. -Brandon
2/19 4:34am Update 2: I will be the first to admit, I definitely have a differing opinion on this matter than may people because I am not directly affected by the issue. I was not here for the weekend that the event happened, nor am I African American. I did not mean any of what I said above to be mean, disrespectful, or hurtful to anybody in the African American community. I am basically voicing an outsider’s opinion on the issue, as that is what I am: an outsider. I normally try to stay out of fueled situations, and I already think I have said too much. The last thing I need is more people hating me for what I think or do. More fuel for the fire I guess… -B
College, Life, UCSD
| 
College, Compton Cookout, constitution, first amendment, law, Life, politics, racism, supreme court, UCSD
Themocracy
Hey-
For the most part, I agree with what you said. I am OUTRAGED, OFFENDED, and DISGUSTED by what happened, but I agree- UCSD cannot do anything about it (with respect to legal action) except make a statement about it and increase their efforts to improve the numbers of African-Americans on this campus.
However, I don’t feel the same sentiment when you pose the question, “What’s the big deal?” In my opinion, I think it is a very big deal. I think everyone is “getting so enraged” because they are shocked; is this not an institution of higher learning? Isn’t this supposed to be beneath us?
As a black student who is a member of UCSD’s Panhellenic community- I’m shocked. Weren’t these people supposed to be my friends? And yet, the thought- “Maybe this isn’t such a good idea…” never crossed any of their minds?
During times like these- and I speak solely for myself- it’s difficult to separate emotion from logic, which is why I really appreciated the way you approached the situation in this post.
-blackstudentatucsd
PS. You have to admit though- if you were the president of Pi Kappa Alpha Fraternity, Inc and heard about the situation- you probably would briefly consider flying down to UCSD in order to shut down their chapter. No one wants to be known as the president of “the racist fraternity.”
To clarify a little bit:
I meant the “what’s the big deal?” at the politicians and stuff who are trying to go after the guys. Like I said many times, I think what they did was hateful, racist, and stupid. Of course them being racist towards the UCSD African American community is a big deal, and I didn’t/don’t mean to undermine that point.
-Brandon
Gotcha.
You make sense but when you ask about “what’s the big deal” don’t forget that they had a public party. Ask Tiger Woods about consequences. Just because you can do something, doesn’t mean you should. They put themselves out there and have to deal with the results. The fact that they didn’t think doesn’t let them off. But sure, they have the right, even though they are acting in a dehumanizing and despicable manner.