What Richard Spencer tries to do strikes me a plan less for a visit than for a strategic attack on the values upheld by the U-M institution. But then I thought such would be the case only if this school’s values stand against Spencer’s, in both theory and practice. And many of the Regents’ statements led me to doubt. The grounds of their justifications for allowing a fascist platform on our campus seemed to be, in descending order of expressed importance, ethical (pronounced almost unanimously), legal (occasionally), and financial (not at all). The criticism that the school’s moral standpoint amounts only to rhetoric not to action, is definitely not new. Witnessing the emotional harm done to many classmates throughout this week, let alone the possibility of physical harm, I was able to develop my belief that Spencer should be banned. Forcing a minority student-worker at the Union to help set up the corporeal stage for white supremacy might not be the destruction of that person’s self, but it will be the destruction of this place as home. What provides future generations with greater ethical insights may be Cameron Padgett v. University of Michigan, not a boycotted rally filled with fascists. My knowledge falls short but the school’s principles shouldn’t, if this is an honest institution.