By Emilia Benton
Students and other members of the University community had the opportunity to voice their opinions on a controversial topic at the Day of Dialogue (a day devoted to a campus-wide discussion of issues facing today’s world) lecture titled “Affirmative Action and Higher Education,” held Wednesday, March 21 in the Business Development Center.
The event was moderated by senior Tiffany Johnson, a Sociology major and active member of the Center for Civic Engagement. It included two keynote speakers, University professor and former Dean of the School of Law Monroe Freedman and Claftin University professor Miriam Chitiga. Each speaker had 20 minutes to provide their arguments before fielding questions from the audience.
“I chose to moderate this event not only because the Center for Civic Engagement was very involved in the coordination of the Day of Dialogue, but because affirmative action is an issue I am very interested in discussing,” said Johnson.
Although Freedman and Chitiga represented the liberal and conservative viewpoints on affirmative action respectively, Chitiga noted that she was “acting” and is actually pro-affirmative action. She was asked to represent the other side when the event’s scheduled Conservative speaker cancelled at the last minute. Her announcement ultimately affected the overall response to the event.
“I thought [Chitiga’s] fake representation was a disservice to the Conservative side of the argument,” said senior Kathleen Hunker, a dual political science/history major. “She should have just not mentioned the fact that she was acting; after this comment the whole presentation became a joke.”
Another student who wished to remain anonymous voiced the same opinion, sharing the overall sentiment of disappointment with the presentation.
“I really didn’t appreciated her mocking of the Conservative viewpoint; I feel that it just perpetuates liberal thinking,” said the student.
The discussion began with Freedman’s viewpoint on affirmative action. Freedman made it clear from the start that he supports affirmative action and provided a few examples of having dealt with it while making decisions on college admission boards. He noted that he was appalled to learn that most universities have a number of seats they set aside for students who “buy themselves in” by having their families donate money, describing it as an “open auction.”
Jumping back to the subject of race playing a factor, Freedman stated, “By being a part of a minority group, these candidates have prevailed against diversity.”
Freedman also stated that as a law school dean, he publicly announced which other groups of people he favored as far as affirmative action was concerned, including police officers and applicants who had shown an impressive dedication for community service, because of what he felt they contribute to the classroom and to society in general. He noted that he does not believe a student should be accepted to a university due solely to the fact that he or she has connections; he provided an example of a letter he received from a student currently matriculated at Harvard Law School recommending his friend, an unqualified prospective student.
“I was struck by the candor of this student, with unimpressive G.P.A. and LSAT scores, had the assumption that this letter would do it for him [and get him accepted],” said Freedman.
Freedman ended his 20-minute argument with a final statement to support his views.
“We live in a racist society, which means that if you have lived in this country as a member of a minority group, you have overcome significant obstacles,” said Freedman.
Chitiga then began her task of providing a Conservative point of view that she didn’t in fact agree with by reading slides from a PowerPoint deck she had created on her laptop.
“Many prospective students in this day and age were never forced to work as slaves, and neither were their families,” said Chitiga. “Therefore, they didn’t really suffer and don’t deserve preference from higher education institutions.”
One of Chitiga’s (acted) main points was that we now live in a country of equal opportunity. She stated that she believes that now that everyone is protected in the Constitution, racial discrimination has ceased to exist.
“That’s what affirmative action is- discrimination. How can we correct a wrong with another one?” asked Chitiga. “With affirmative action, we are imposing revenge for the suffering caused by slavery.”
The audience consisted of large groups of students with a small number of professors; most audience members came in groups as an alternative to a regular class session.
“Although I was required to come here for a sociology class, I thought the speakers provided a good compromise by focusing on economic issues in addition to racial perspectives,” said sophomore Elizabeth Warren, a political science major.

Monroe Freedman, professor of law, discusses affirmative action for Day of Dialogue.