Opinion
Questioning The Movement’s myriad demands
By Caroline Harrington ’16
December 3, 2015
It is always hard to come back after Thanksgiving Break with the anticipation of finals just around the corner. But the most difficult part of this year’s return was the bombardment of politicized conversation catalyzed by The Movement’s release of a thorough list of demands on Tuesday. The Movement, whose mission is to “ensure Equality, promote Agency, Serve and Protect all students, and foster Safe Spaces” has already become a large, albeit anonymous, presence on campus through its organization of a “Stand-In in Solidarity” and many posters and fliers around campus.
Starting with a definition of tokenism, the demands in the document that President Stewart forwarded to campus on Tuesday ranged from requiring the hiring of a person of color as the institution’s next president to the banning of Yik Yak to the removal of Elihu Root’s name from college property. Responses from students were swift and critical. Many complained using a similar anonymous tactic as The Movement and went directly to Yik Yak to voice their opinions.
Yet Tuesday’s demands brought the group an overwhelming amount of attention, mostly fostering negative responses. Even the online publication The Daily Beast picked up the story and criticized The Movement for their radicalism. Satirical “frat boy” website BroBible followed suit and mocked both the organization and the entire school. These nationally read reactions are quite frankly embarrassing and make it difficult to support the group that put our school on the radar for the wrong reasons.
As a white, heterosexual girl, I risk a lot by publicly expressing my opinions on this matter. I fear I will be labeled as racist or oppressive or worse that I could catalyze a similar call for censorship of our school newspaper that Wesleyan faced a few months back. I recognize this risk, but as a student at a liberal arts college I was trained to keep my mind open to all ranges of thoughts and to constantly question and debate aspects of my experiences that I do not fully understand or agree with. So here I am, writing an article saying that I do not support The Movement based on the majority of their demands issued Tuesday. I want to support them. I, like many students here, aim for equal opportunities and fairness. But I, like many voices, note some key flaws in what this organization is doing.
I want to attend a college where I can receive the best possible education from the best possible professors. This, I desire, regardless of race, gender, sexuality or any classification. I fear that discriminating applicants based on any description of identity can be dangerous to the quality of our institution.
I want to be in an environment that fosters and encourages opinions of all kinds, anonymous or public. Free speech is a tenet of our Constitution. It is a right and a privilege we should all enjoy. Shying away from a debate or arguing that opinions that disagree with yours are wrong is ignorant and inhibits personal growth. Banning Yik Yak is not a solution to any problem.
I want to be proud of the institution I chose to attend, including its history. We live in a country with a polemical history with many negative stories, but we cannot hold historical figures to the standards of today because that is not how we learn about history. We need to recognize the history of the College—the good and the bad—and vow to keep aiming for progress. Eliminating Elihu Root from our property is not progress. With this mentality, proponents of progress could argue for the eradication of our college’s founder based on his association with slavery. Recognize flaws from our past and swear to not repeat them.
Arguably my largest issue with the list of demands is the overwhelming length. The Movement seemed to make a mockery of their own organization due to their lack of focus and often poorly dictated demands. Besides the fact that the real world is not the same as the coddling college bubble we live in for four years and besides the fact that in asking for racial specifications for job positions makes their anti-tokenism rant seem hypocritical, The Movement is most guilty of overreaching. In asking for too much, they ruined the legitimacy of some valid requests.
I think the implementation of a Dean of Diversity could lead to positive change from the administrative side. The publicity of advancements of institutional changes is also a valid request, as it would hopefully foster a culture of transparency that leads to effective progress. I think the addition of Diversity Intensive courses to the curriculum could also be a minor but positive step toward a more understanding and inclusive campus culture.
Overall, this event has already led to the start of many necessary and positive conversations. Anthony Jackson ’15 posted a Facebook status about the demands calling for alumni to chime in their opinions, leading to civilized and thoroughly thought out discussions from both current and past students. These dialogues are necessary for the advancement of our school. Moving forward, I can only hope The Movement takes any criticisms into account and does not immediately discount them because they are not favorable.
I leave this article with a sense of optimism for the future of our institution. Let us continue to question and debate and move towards a better and happier campus culture.