������Ƶ

The University of Hawaii Manoa continues to depend on its ineffective equal employment opportunity and affirmative action policies.

Amid increasing incidents of antisemitism on college campuses, Provost Michael Bruno sent a Nov. 14 email to UH faculty and staff in which he reiterated an earlier statement from UH President David Lassner. Shortly after the most recent conflict between Israel and Hamas began, Lassner emphasized that the university has a “firm commitment to non-discrimination and working together to overcome intolerance.”

Bruno’s message added, “By UH policy, discrimination is not permitted on the basis of, among other protected categories, race, sex, gender identity and expression, age, religion, color, national origin, ancestry, citizenship and disability.” These forms of discrimination are actually prohibited by U.S. law, which UH obviously needs to comply with. 

My concern is particularly with racial discrimination and racism, which I differentiated in a previous column. UH Manoa has failed to address these persisting problems and can only respond to potential or actual race-related incidents by pointing to its ineffective equal employment opportunity and affirmative action policies. 

Another recommendation in the provost’s message is for faculty and staff who have experienced discrimination to or the . These suggestions hardly seem like viable solutions to deeply entrenched and longstanding problems.

The provost’s statement reveals a primary reason for the university’s ongoing failure to deal with racism and racial discrimination. It recommends, “Anyone who feels that they may be a victim of discrimination or harassment is strongly encouraged to utilize the support services and other resources available at UH Manoa.” 

Insofar as it is addressed to “anyone,” this directive indicates a fundamental flaw in the university’s understanding of discrimination and racism as occurring primarily against individuals rather than groups, such as racial, ethnic and Indigenous minorities.

The university defended its efforts in an emailed response, saying it had updated its nondiscrimination and affirmative action policies and appointed an executive director of equity assurance to lead all aspected of civil rights compliance and equity and inclusion efforts. It also said a public database of UH decisions on diversity and inclusion is expected to be available next year.

However, the UH Manoa administration doesn’t seem to understand how racial discrimination and racism operate on campus and in society systemically and not merely interpersonally. As such, established university policies and practices themselves can be racially discriminatory insofar as they result in unfair or unequal treatment.

In contrast to discrimination, racism is not mentioned at all in UH policies regarding “non-discrimination” and equal employment opportunity. As opposed to racial discrimination, racism — understood as the false belief in or perception of the innate inferiority of a racial, ethnic or Indigenous group — isn’t necessarily against the law.

Nonetheless, that difference doesn’t mean that universities and other public or private institutions can’t prohibit expressions of racism, such as race-based hate speech. Such a ban was what I sought to have established as a member of the UH Manoa Commission on Racism and Bias when I applied and was invited to join by the provost in January 2020.

The commission was initiated by Bruno in response to the ongoing protests against construction of the Thirty Meter Telescope on Mauna Kea. Ultimately, the provost appointed almost 40 students, staff, faculty and administrators to the commission, rendering it far too large to have a productive exchange of ideas.

In announcing its formation, Bruno declared that “the timing and mission of this work is more urgent than ever. We need to be proactive, honest and fearless in order to address these issues head on, for the sake of our campus community.” That urgency and need remain, although the commission was terminated more than a year ago.

As a result of the Covid-19 pandemic beginning in spring 2020, the commission never had an in-person meeting and instead met via Zoom. 

Fortunately, the commissioners eventually divided themselves into four committees on policy, research, education and listening, which provided a focus to our separate discussions. I joined the policy committee because of my desire that the commission develop a policy that prohibited race-based hate speech by members of the UH Manoa community. 

However, my efforts to have our committee even recommend a UH Manoa policy banning racist hate speech were thwarted by others who argued that such assertions were protected by the First Amendment. It seems that these learned faculty were unaware that even free speech has restrictions, including the oft-mentioned rule against yelling “fire” in a crowded movie theater.

After about two years, the Commission on Racism and Bias came to a slow demise in 2022, by which time we had stopped having meetings, although one or two committees continued to meet and pursue their specific interests. The commission clearly failed to meet its charge of “examining how we have responded to racism and bias at UH Manoa and how we can together move forward.”

Its termination demonstrates how racism and discrimination are enabled to persist at universities and in society at large by an institutional unwillingness by those in power to challenge and develop policies and strategies against them.

The university defended its efforts in the statement mentioned above.

“The commission completed important work in multiple areas, and discussion moved to action. The university’s policy on implementing the UH Board of Regents Nondiscrimination and Affirmative Action policy has been updated,” the university said in an emailed statement. “The work is far from done, and UH Mānoa will continually evaluate ways to improve with the goal to create a campus free of racism and bias.”

With no formal policy against racist hate speech, any member of the UH Manoa community is free to express without fear of institutional sanction racist slurs against Jews, Palestinians, Native Hawaiians, or any racial or ethnic group on or off campus. What’s going to stop them?

Several years ago, nothing stopped several members of the Proud Boys chapter in Hawaii, including Jan. 6 convicted felon Nick Ochs, from intimidating a Jewish professor in his UH Manoa office until Honolulu Police Department officers arrived and removed them.  

In the same way that the First Amendment is not absolute in protecting freedom of speech, academic freedom should not be construed as a license to engage in racism, including hate speech. 

Colleges and universities, including the University of Hawaii, need to develop guidelines and procedures for determining when speech can be considered racist in content and goes beyond expressing an opinion about racial, ethnic or indigenous minorities or persons.