Give me a shot of whiskey

Tuesday, April 23, 1996

On-campus bar would be ideal forum for student debate

A good friend of mine recently returned from an internship in
Washington D.C. He worked for 10 weeks on Capitol Hill, yet when I
asked about the heated political debates that I was sure he had
witnessed during his stay at the nation’s Capitol, he replied that
he heard none while working on the Hill.

It seems that the real debates in Washington ­ not the ones
about constituent legislation, but the ones about actual personal
beliefs ­ take place outside the halls of the Capitol and
occur, instead, in places like Old Ebitt’s Bar and Grill. (At this
time please take note of the word BAR; how it is relevant to my
overall argument will be clear later).

Now, when you come to UCLA as a freshman, everyone is full of
personal beliefs, and most are eager and ready to discuss and
debate these beliefs and issues with others. Everyone thinks
differently, and therefore open discussion usually results in
counterarguments and renewed personal awareness. In truth, one
would think that this university’s "championed diversity" should be
the perfect open forum for this type of public debate.

Ironically, however, something happens during orientation and
during the first few days of school that proves to be inimical to
any of this positive and diversified public discourse. Often,
freshman students do not really know much about campus life, and
may not even know more than a few other students. As a result, they
are bombarded by a multitude of university groups, so that these
poor freshmen can reassimilate themselves into a group where
everyone (to a certain extent) believes the same as they do. The
result is a "diversity" of groups, not individuals, and for the
most part, rational discourse among those with differing points of
view can largely be ignored.

I’m not claiming that the grouping of individuals with similar
beliefs is a negative occurrence. Individuals often begin to
further develop their beliefs in a favorable environment, and in
most cases, groups help one to become involved in a healthy
exercise of these beliefs.

But the truth is that when greek legacies join the greek system,
the athletes join their teams, the religious join their respective
denominations on campus, the culturally-minded join together in
group celebration and all who have ever believed themselves to be
oppressed join the Students First! campaign, the benefits of
belonging to a diverse intellectual community become sadly lost.
Consequently, understanding and cooperation for all groups and
individuals never becomes a reality.

This is not unique to our campus community. The same phenomena
occurs in many localities in this country, including our nation’s
Congress. Our national legislators are divided between the
Republicans and the Democrats, the conservatives and the liberals,
the hawks and the doves, the foreign and the domestic ­ and
for those who hope to run for re-election, the moderates.

The resulting situation is one of competing factious groups
within Congress, and legislative debates that focus less on the
actual issues and more on the broad positions of the competing
groups. The personal beliefs behind the issues are hardly
discussed, and individual discourse and proper debate of these
issues becomes impossible and therefore forgotten. So if not in
Congress, where do these educated men and women debate issues and
discuss their own individual beliefs?

It seems that they go to social places, such as Old Ebitt’s Bar
and Grill, where they are not required to formally act as our
representatives, and which just happens to be, you guessed it, a
BAR. In truth, the real public forums in Washington are often found
in establishments where the atmosphere is relaxed and open, namely
the local bars and pubs. (I hope you have been keeping this in
mind, for it is now relevant to my somewhat befuddled yet
meaningful argument.)

This campus community does not have such an open public forum.
There is not a reserved area of public space where "diverse
individuals" from their respective groups can go to discuss their
different opinions and slants on the issues of our day. This campus
lacks the social forums that are so abundant in Washington for our
troubled congressional members. What this campus needs is an
institution that will allow for this type of social and human
interaction. What we need is an on-campus bar.

I’m not talking about another bar in Westwood, although it
couldn’t hurt, especially if it had a good happy hour. What I’m
talking about is an actual pub on the grounds of UCLA, available to
all students who can legally consume alcohol in the State of
California. Such an establishment would serve our university
community as a meeting place for all of our diverse campus groups.
Furthermore, it would bring UCLA up to speed with all of the other
UC campuses who are fortunate (and liberal) enough to already have
on-campus pubs.

Anti-bar advocates will claim that only certain types of
individuals would visit an on-campus pub, or that it would exclude
students who are not 21 years of age. But in truth, an on-campus
pub would only be frequented by a limited portion of the student
population if others were too closed-minded to participate in the
open market of ideas that a campus bar would provide.

And although the underage student population would not be
allowed to frequent an on-campus pub, these students would one day
reach the required age. They could then become a part of the
non-segregated diversity which campus factions have made
impossible.

Furthermore, an on-campus bar might just reconnect the lost
graduate student population with the undergraduate students and the
rest of the UCLA community, thereby reunifying this campus.

Bars have historically been a hub of social interaction and
public debate in this country. Beer and public debate have always
been one of America’s favorite social connections. Our
congressional leaders have continued this part of American culture,
and there is no reason why we should not support part of the
country’s heritage. An on-campus bar would be the perfect public
forum for UCLA students so that we may engage in the debates and
conversations that never are found in homogenous ideological
groups.

A UCLA bar would provide a heterogeneous and relaxed atmosphere
so that students from all cultures, religions, clubs and beliefs
could see each other on campus, enjoying their youth, discussing
the issues of the day and learning from each other.

I fear this campus is losing any strands of unity, and with it
the debate among our differing student groups. An on-campus bar is
just what this campus needs to replace the public forum that has
been lost and continue a tradition of public debate and good times
which our political leaders joyfully continue today.

Burke is a fourth-year political science/history student. His
column appears on alternate Wednesdays.