Free Association in School and Society

In a recent pre-election controversy, the Harvard College Democrats (HCD) confronted a tough issue: the freedom of association. On one hand, no group wants a reputation for “discriminating” against people by restricting membership based on political affiliation. On the other, they recognize the importance of supporting the mission of their association, the reason they came together in the first place.

It seems, however, that upon consideration, the latter won out: discrimination is their policy.

An Oct. 26 Crimson article showed that the Harvard College Democrats blatantly discriminate in their membership. The Crimson quoted last year’s HCD President Marcie B. Bianco ’02 as saying, “You must be a Democrat—a dues-paying one—to vote.” Her successor Sonia H. Kastner ’03, agrees: “Non-Democrats are not free to join the club.” In these strong and sober statements, they seem to take themselves a bit too seriously, as if membership in their campus club requires some ceremonial Solemn and Binding Oath to the Party.

Most Harvard clubs, by contrast, have no political litmus test or affirmation of any creed, but invite all Harvard students to become participating members. These other clubs are admirable for their non-discriminatory membership policy.

But HCD should not be ashamed to be one of only a few campus clubs that does not welcome all students as members. It would be ridiculous for Harvard to force HCD to allow communists and anarchists to run for office in their club. In this sense, discrimination can be good, and even necessary for the survival of a political association. We should allow campus groups to selectively deny membership or voting status to some students in order to maintain the group’s unity and mission—for example, if an anti-Semite applied for a leadership position at Hillel, or if an Aryan Nations supporter tried to gain office in the Black Students Association.

Of course it’s true that Harvard, as a private association, can write its own rules as it pleases, but these rules would do best to acknowledge the importance of each group unabashedly asserting a mission, even if that mission might preclude some students from membership. If the stated mission of the Black Men’s Forum excludes racist white women from joining, then so be it. Student groups, and civil associations in general, should have a freedom of association. This is as important here on our college campus as it is in broader society.

Our liberties as human beings and as Americans include the freedom of association. This is what allows us to band together and accomplish common goals in civil society. Sometimes affiliations we dislike limit membership and advocate causes we disagree with, but we must defend that as their right. Just rules and laws cannot selectively favor causes we like and attempt to constrain those we do not. Our rights must be grounded in a firm foundation of justice, and not upon the changing winds of arbitrary legislation.

The most recent national case involving freedom of association was the controversy over the Boy Scouts of America. The group has attracted much criticism because they have a policy that homosexuals may not assume Scout leadership positions. As distasteful as most Harvard students find this policy, we should recognize the importance of their right and freedom of association.

Our government should rule according to carefully chosen principles, not unbridled tyranny of the majority. We must insist that rights are unalienable in all cases, not simply the cases we happen to prefer today.

If our country did not insist on the freedom of association, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) might have met an untimely demise. In 1958, when Alabama officials were attempting to oust and undermine the NAACP, the U.S. Supreme Court recognized that the freedom of association was vital to their survival. Without this principle of freedom, we might not have the great progress the civil rights movement achieved to oust racism and institutional inequalities in our country.

—Richard T. Halvorson