Opinion
Absence lets the mind wander
By Terri Moise ’17
April 21, 2016
Tags opinion
How does student activism impact a campus? Does activism lead to change and growth? Or is this activism viewed with a level of disdain from those who feel naught but apathy?
For the past few years, Hamilton College has been home to an anonymous organization publicly known as the Movement. However, the members of this organization have remained anonymous, a point of contention among the Hamilton community. Many argue that this anonymity has prevented them from making true progress and does nothing but allow them to remain hidden behind posters and demands. Yet others see the Movement as something that this campus needs, prompting conversation and crucial dialogue that was perhaps necessary. Perhaps on a campus that makes claims of being liberal, yet seems to avoid dialogues surrounding sensitive issues, the Movement was too radical?
In the spring of my freshman year, the Movement released a list of seven goals and 10 demands, detailing what issues they felt needed to be dealt with, ranging from financial assistance with transportation, diversity training and acknowledgment of the Social Justice Initiative, the organization that was significant in the development and establishment of the Days-Massolo Center. As I saw it, it seemed as if the Movement’s primary goals were the uplifting of marginalized groups and the promotion of equality.
Yet the Movement was met with backlash. While there were some who sympathized or, at the very least, understood the goals of the Movement, many felt that the Movement was overstepping its boundaries by speaking for specific communities on campus. This was due to the fact the no one had any idea who comprised the Movement. Furthermore, the Movement was critiqued for its tactics, which many believed left no room for conversation and dialogue, but rather served as a means of inciting the masses, prompting many derogatory remarks through social media platforms such as the Facebook page, Hamilton Secrets and the anonymous posting app, Yik Yak.
In December of 2015, the Movement prompted a huge campus reaction with the issuing of another series of demands. This list was, by far, the most extensive list of demands that the Movement had put out. There were numerous discussions surrounding the demands, ranging from the validity, the grammar and structure and the writer(s) of the demands. One significant result of the demands was the commencement of the Crucial Conversations, a project spearheaded by Director of Opportunity Programs and Interim Director of Diversity and Inclusion Phyllis Breland. The Crucial Conversation dialogue series serves as a means for members of the Hamilton community to come together and address the issues that they feel are pressing.
While the first Crucial Conversation was highly successful in terms of both turnout and the setting of goals, over time attendance decreased. Furthermore, following the issuance of their last set of demands, there has been no public activity from the Movement. While this may be a cause for celebration for some, it pushes me to ponder what role the Movement played in pushing Hamilton faculty, staff and students to discuss those sensitive topics that some pretend exist only in academia, rather than existing as the lived realities for some.
Why was the Movement faulted for speaking up about issues when given an avenue for conversation, it is steadily ignored? Crucial Conversations is one of the few avenues in which members of the Hamilton community can actively contribute their thoughts, questions and needs. Yet attendance decreases as each conversation goes on. Even within clubs and organizations that discuss social and political issues, it seems as if attendance at these clubs’ events has also diminished in the past few semesters. This might suggest that Hamilton College is a place that breeds and cultivates apathy. However, I do have the pleasure of having conversations with professors and students who want to move past conversation and head down the path of action.
This makes me question what pushes people to work together with both the community and their peers. How should the Hamilton community go about working to support each other and developing an actual understanding of social and political issues? Does it take radical action to trigger even the simplest of responses from Hamilton’s campus? While the Movement was flawed, it served a purpose in pushing the Hamilton community to understand that the problems that were mentioned actually exist on this campus. The Movement, at both the time of its inception and seeming conclusion, may have been what Hamilton needed to truly shatter this idea of Hamilton College existing in a bubble, untapped by the issues of the outside world. In its absence, perhaps the Movement has left a stronger message: Hamilton College may indeed be in need of action and change, as complacency in a bad situation aids no one.