Illustration by Cody Angell

Right-of-center intellectuals would argue that so-called liberals have monopolized higher education.

While there is probably validity to that claim, one might gather the opposite should he or she listen to the radical left that is desperately attempting to permeate campus.

Thursday night, the leading leftist political action groups on campus had a chance to voice some of their top concerns at a forum titled Airing UA's Dirty Laundry. Now, they were mostly preaching to the choir. The audience was no doubt made up mostly of members of their organizations.

Still, the groups (e.g. Refuse and Resist, Students Against Racist Action, Students for Choice, Students Against Sweatshops and the American Civil Liberties Union) are making some serious accusations about UA policy and leadership.

While their extreme ideological rhetoric is mostly going unnoticed by administrators and everyone else on campus, it's important that the illogical spin and slander they present go no further than their pamphlets and posters.

Yes, the UA is headed down the wrong course in some areas. Yes, some major campus policy issues are out of whack. But the real dirty laundry smells a lot worse then anything presented at the Thursday lecture.

The groups oppose funding for building construction, but at the same time complain about faculty salaries.

Those who have talked with individual faculty know that, despite the fact that salaries are a big issue, the university's shortage of research space is more pressing to our faculty. So if you stand by the side of faculty, it would seem obvious that you would stand behind construction.

Daniel Scarpinato Columnist

Then Students Against Sweetshops finds a twisted connection between tuition dollars and private prison construction that they seem to understand even less than I do. First of all, the connection is so vague it's not worth worrying about. But more importantly: What's so bad about building prisons anyway?

Of course, far left groups would most likely oppose putting people in jail to begin with ÷ unless of course they worked at Enron.

Adorning the front of the room: a poster of Likins dressed as Napoleon with the now-infamous quote he delivered last year: "The university is not a democratic institution."

Now, if not placed in context, that quote could seem a bit authoritarian. Likins would argue that he will listen to anyone who is interested in a healthy, productive discussion or debate. But ultimately he has to make the call.

That's sounds reasonable. He is getting paid nearly half a million dollars a year to make those big decisions. Can you imagine how insanely complicated and unorganized this university would be if every decision was based on majority rule?

Although the university is funded with state dollars, allowing the academic institution to have some freedom and jurisdiction outside of state politics is a good thing and should be protected.

And there are democratic means to have a voice in who becomes university president.

The Arizona Board of Regents, appointed by our elected governor, is charged with hiring the UA's top dog.

Most unfortunate, however, was a fumbling attempt at the forum to connect UA policy with White House policy. Come on. Let's get real.

The Bush administration deserves criticism ÷ big criticism ÷ for its negligence on a ton of issues, but Likins isn't in bed with Karl Rove.

Hidden under the fallacies presented at the forum were some real problems ÷ namely, the Medical School's ban on abortion training. But that issue was lost under everything else.

Why not talk about some real concerns to students and faculty?

The lack of research space. An unfair tuition increase that redistributes wealth. A diversity policy that puts sole focus on race but ignores diversity of thought. Course and major expectations that have eroded the quality of a UA degree to that of a high school diploma from 30 years ago.

That's the real dirty laundry. But those problems are not nearly political enough. They don't represent a leftist or anarchic perspective. And you can't connect them to Bush, and not necessarily even to Likins.

No, those are issues that take time, effort and constructive compromise to address, something for which activists don't have the patience or longtime commitment.

Daniel Scarpinato is a journalism and political science senior. He can be reached at letters@wildcat.arizona.edu.