Editorial

Debating The Movement

By Editorial Staff

Reactions to The Movement’s demands have been swift and decisive. Students, alumni and many outside of the campus community have denounced the demands as needlessly polemical, unproductive and even embarrassing. They’ve panned the notion of eliminating references to Elihu Root on campus, mandating a person-of-color as Hamilton’s next president, and free tuition for “indigenous” students. Some have even noted grammatical mistakes. It’s probably true that a document that makes many students say “what wallpaper?” is not the most productive. People have been quick to dismiss it as the absurd folly of a small number of students piggybacking on recent protests at the University of Missouri, Yale University and elsewhere. All this has gone to discredit the list of demands.

Ok, so we have some unproductive and, yes, even ridiculous demands. But why have we stopped asking questions? Instead of making assumptions about the people behind the document and touting the most far-reaching of the demands as the heart of the manifesto, we should first ask why? If even ten students wrote this, why did they write it? What do we learn from the extremity of their demands? And what can we take away from their most modest requests?

If this manifesto suggests ‘nothing is ever enough,’ what if we just accept that? What if we accept that this work is never ending and take The Movement’s demands, however polemical, as just another reminder of that? That should mobilize us to continue striving for change wherever our principles allow us because diversity and inclusion are among those principles. The administration has proven a strong example in how seriously they’ve taken engagement with The Movement. We, as a community, should not waste our breath mocking the most outlandish demands. That’s all too easy to do. Let’s engage.

All Editorial