The Simpson Protest Paradox

A "Simpson's paradox" in introductory statistics is an outcome that seems counterintuitive upon first inspection. On Monday night, a Simpson's paradox happened, and it wasn't only because the target of a pro-legal immigration protest was a man named Simpson.

Odds are that Senator Alan K. Simpson (R-Wyo.) did not go home that night to tell his wife that he'd be back at the Institute of Politics anytime soon. Odds are that he did not change his mind on the Senate bill S. 1394 restricting legal immigration. Odds are that other speakers may have been scared away. For Simpson had received the honorarium of a combative battery of questions following his speech in addition to the jeers of 150 bullhorn-touting, slogan-shouting, rabble-rousing students.

My criticism of the rally is two-pronged. First, it limits or, at least inhibits, ideological freedom because people with controversial views might refrain from speaking at the Kennedy School. Second, the rally gave students a superficial bird's-eye view of the controversy. Thus, by protesting the political ideology of a forum speaker, these students have potentially deprived themselves of other speakers who might offer different opinions. It seems as if the students who were walking in a circle, protesting and singing chants, were not just walking in circles in a literal sense.

The rally, featuring slogans such as "Legal immigrant under attack--what do we do? Stand up, fight back," though lyrically apt, did little to inform students about the nature of the controversy. But surprisingly, the rally managed to educate them in other ways. Passions ran high. A sort of synergistic fever that was greater than the sum of its parts had gripped each participant. I was personally surprised to see people, whom I know as being normally on the quiet side, start to wield their mastery of group dynamics and start chants.

A student who was standing on the side watched the group walking in circles around the tree in front of the K-School. Hands in his pockets, baseball cap pulled deep into his face, he just stared. Moments later, I looked back at the spot and he was gone. Then I saw him again. And again. He had joined the circle and was now walking with the crowd.

An open letter to the Harvard community signed by 20 of the minority groups at Harvard and the information distributed by the Massachusetts Immigration and Refugee Advocacy Coalition created the massive energy. Even those people who were just there because they were curious either joined the protest or read the fliers. People flocked to sign a petition asking the Judiciary Committee in the Congress to split Simpson's bill.

The emotional bond formed during the protest was in stark contrast to the apathy normally associated with worldly issues. By raising awareness, the rally also raised the stakes people have in this issue, enlightening them and promoting their interests. Over dinner, I talked to a fellow student who afterwards looked up Simpson's S-1394 bill on the Internet and read it because his interest and curiosity had been piqued by the protest.

But the educational aspect of the rally came at the actual speech. In that sense, the forum is an ideal stage for intellectual and ideological clash. The tough questions about legal immigration asked of Simpson raised the consciousness of students about the issue. Because the audience was about evenly split over the issue of legal imigration, each question and comment forced members of the audience to re-examine their viewpoints.

The assumption that a protest will drive away potential speakers is unfounded. Just the opposite is true. After about 15 minutes of questioning, the presiding Kennedy School officer wanted to end the questioning, but Simpson cut in, saying that 'it's just getting good' and continued to take questions.

Will he come back? Will others come knowing they will face potential opposition from the students? The short answer to that is yes. But to insure that future forum speakers are welcome, rallies must be careful to maintain civility and respect for those whose views are being questioned. To give way to insults and bickering in the name of peaceful rallying would be the biggest paradox of all.