Conor Daly: Separating Tutu from his statements

Given the large Jewish population at Penn and President Rodin's feelings on divestment from Israel, it seems very peculiar that former Cape Town Archbishop Desmond Tutu will be receiving an honorary degree and delivering the address at this year's Commencement.

After all, in recent months, he has made no secret of his obvious prejudices against Jews and white people and his forgiving feelings toward al Qaeda terrorists.

At a conference on "Ending the Occupation" held in Boston early last year, long before he was announced as an honorary degree recipient and speaker, he succeeded at offering up some choice words that would not fail to offend a great many in the Penn community. He spoke at great length about how "Israel is like Hitler and apartheid" and that people in this country are afraid to stand up to Israel because the "Jewish lobby is powerful -- very powerful." But, as he explained, those fears can be overcome by appealing to history, and realizing that "Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Pinochet, Milosevic and Idi Amin were all powerful, but in the end, they bit the dust."

He also managed to condemn the entire white race in his rather short, 14-paragraph speech, saying that although the race is prone to "madness," he is not "anti-white."

Since that speech, he has delivered many others like it around the country and the world and written many editorials printed in international publications. It is unsurprising that his prejudicial rhetoric has seen few changes; in fact, he has expanded his repertoire to include flattery of al Qaeda terrorists, calling their activities a response to our nation's original injustice and our war on terror an exercise in "vengeance." Just when you thought he couldn't offend any more people, he hits us with that.

And yet, he remains our flagship Commencement guest, his name affixed firmly atop the program, despite the fact that the administration had knowledge of his speeches and editorials in time to rescind the honor and has received letters of concern from members of the University community.

In the Dec. 17 Almanac, one such letter was printed, and a response from University Secretary Leslie Kruhly immediately followed, detailing the administration's posture on Tutu. Kruhly explained that Tutu will be honored for his "profound contributions to human rights and visionary leadership in healing a society wracked by injustice and violence." Furthermore, the honor is not meant to "imply an endorsement of every one of his public statements," but rather, only his role in ending apartheid.

Admittedly, Tutu's role in ending apartheid was incredibly significant and deserving of great tributes -- the Nobel Peace Prize he received for his efforts

in 1984 was one such honor. He worked tirelessly, building the grassroots support that eventually razed that system of institutionalized racism, and if his work was deserving of a Nobel Peace Prize, then surely it would be appropriate to honor him with an honorary degree.

But, given his overtly racist and anti-Semitic comments during the past year, the issue is not so cut and dry. The administration cannot simply draw an imaginary line between Tutu the anti-apartheid hero and Tutu the bigot. Talking only about the good side does not legitimize his receipt of an honorary degree. As far as those among us who have read the Tutu articles and the text of his speeches are concerned, they are the same person, and if Tutu is honored for his apartheid work, then the University is also tacitly saying something about him with respect to his actions within the past year.

By honoring Tutu, the University is not necessarily endorsing his comments or his postures. However, Penn officials are demonstrating that no such bigotry, as that which Tutu projected, could possibly disqualify one from consideration for an honorary degree. That should erode the validity of the honorary degrees this University awards.

Tutu has the right to say whatever he wants about whomever, and we should respect that right. But that doesn't mean he is deserving of our University's esteem and respect when he carries on a campaign that serves to alienate a great number in our ranks.

Kruhly stated that "given the great diversity of the Penn community, it is unlikely that each member will approve of all recipients of the University's honorary degrees." This is very true.

However, there is a difference between disapproving of Jim Lehrer as a Commencement speaker because he is a bit dry and a tad boring and disapproving of another individual because of his conscious efforts to belittle ethnic and racial groups.

Conor Daly is a senior Political Science major from Boxford, Mass.

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.