October 10, 2013
Letter of support for Amit Taneja and the Days-Massolo Center
We would like to respond to the recent letter in this paper maligning Director of Diversity and Inclusion Amit Taneja and attacking his work. The portrait of Mr. Taneja, frankly, bears no resemblance to reality. Mr. Taneja has been executing his job in a thoughtful and responsible way, living up to the mission of the Days-Massolo Center, which was created precisely to challenge the campus to engage in difficult conversations with the goal of increasing cultural literacy, leadership and a sense of community. Though emotions may run high whenever people engage in dialogue about sensitive subjects, Mr. Taneja has never encouraged nor himself engaged in anything but civil discourse.
As Mr. Taneja clearly expressed in the original invitation for a series of campus discussions on race, this first discussion for people of color was intended to be a conversation about internalized racism, a topic often overlooked in mixed-race groups. As such it was a particularly important part of a multi-stage discussion. To portray the creation of a “Safe Zone” for some of these discussions as a move toward racial segregation is at best misinformed and at worst disingenuous. A brief “Safe Zone” conversation for students of color, where the security of mutual understanding of common experiences is meant to foster self-awareness, has nothing to do with historical segregation by law.
As another letter to The Spectator recently pointed out, it is only by testing our assumptions, “assumptions we don’t even realize we’re making,” that we grow as thinkers and citizens of the world. We applaud Mr. Taneja’s efforts on this front and give him our full support to continue this important work.
Vivyan Adair
Abhishek Amar
Frank Anechiarico
Dave Bailey
Mark Bailey
Joyce M. Barry
John Bartle
Meghan Blask
Jen Borton
Debra Boutin
Phyllis Breland
Karen Brewer
Heather Buchman
Donald Carter
Wei-Jen Chang
Haeng-ja Chung
Sally Cockburn
Mark Cryer
Rick Decker
Katheryn Doran
Anne Feltovich
Todd Franklin
Ella Gant
Jinnie Garrett
Margaret Gentry
Christophre Georges
Barbara Gold
Naomi Guttman
Kevin Grant
Paul Hagstrom
Shelley P. Haley
Tina Hall
Lydia Hamessley
Steve Humphries-Brooks
Jenny Irons
Amy James
Marianne Janack
Shoshana Keller
Tim Kelly
Robin Kinnel
Phil Klinkner
Robert Knight
Mireille Koukjian
Anne Lacsamana
Chaise LaDousa
Doran Larson
Elizabeth Lee
Michelle LeMasurier
Alexandra List
Theresa Lopez
Seth Major
Jeff McArn
Tara McKee
Heather Merrill
Anjela Mescall
Cheryl Morgan
Anh Murphy
Joseph Mwantuali
Angel Nieves
Onno Oerlemans
Kyoko Omori
Patricia O’Neill
Stephen Orvis
Ann Owen
Yumi Pak
Sam Pellman
William Pfitsch
Debby Quayle
Nancy Rabinowitz
Peter Rabinowitz
Heidi Ravven
S. Brent Rodriguez-Plate
Ian Rosenstein
Carl Rubino
Frank Sciacca
Richard Seager
Ann Silversmith
Kristin Strohmeyer
Nat Strout
Katherine Terrell
Margaret Thickstun
Courtney L. Thompson
Lisa Trivedi
Bonnie Urciuoli
Jonathan Vaughan
Julio Videras
Doug Weldon
Rick Werner
Nigel Westmaas
Jay Williams
Thomas Wilson
Steven Yao
Penny Yee
Yvonne Zylan
Re: A plea for reflection from an alumnus
I would like to respond to recent discussion regarding Director of Diversity and Inclusion, Amit Taneja, and the dialogue on race sparked by the Days-Massolo Center. Some criticisms of Mr. Taneja, especially from individuals off campus, have impugned his character and professionalism. Other criticisms have been leveled at the Days-Massolo Center itself. First of all, Mr. Taneja has been an invaluable asset to our campus community. He has made the Days-Massolo Center into an indispensable place for vibrant intellectual discussion of cultural, social and political issues relating to diversity, inclusion, marginalization, individual rights and equality. He has always been willing to listen to divergent voices, and is always ready to bring opposing groups together. Two years ago, I participated in a discussion on the Occupy Wall Street movement that Mr. Taneja organized with members of the Publius Society. The discussion brought together students from across the political spectrum and was lively, heated, bracing, even appropriately tense at times; it offered the very sort of vigorous intellectual challenge that Dean Ball ’14 called for in his letter in last week’s Spectator. The personal picture of Mr. Taneja portrayed in Michael Guzzetti ’11’s letter, which borders on calumny, bears absolutely no resemblance to the decent, thoughtful, compassionate and fair-minded man that is Mr. Taneja. Even if you disagree with the original formulation of the dialogue on race, keep in mind that Mr. Taneja was responsive to feedback from the campus community and willing to change course, hardly the behavior of a “militant activist.” Let’s move on, and not make this an issue about Amit Taneja.
In that spirit, I turn to Dean Ball’s thoughtful letter. Ball rightly urged continued fidelity to the principles of critical thought and intellectual debate on campus. In response, however, I would raise the following points: Isn’t the very discussion which has roiled this campus in recent weeks, and was initially sparked by the Days-Massolo Center, exactly the sort of challenging intellectual debate that Ball championed? And though the conversation has gotten nasty and uncivil at times, this is an inevitable byproduct of a lively, contentious public square (though, again, we must refrain from personal attacks). Also, institutions like the Days-Massolo Center challenge the very safety, complacency and conflict avoidance that Ball rightly criticized. They raise uncomfortable but essential questions about economic, racial and sexual privilege, questions that are all the more urgent in the face of rising economic inequality, continued racial profiling, de facto racial segregation in housing and education and continued violence and discrimination against women and members of the LGBT community. Indeed, the mission of a liberal arts college is not, as Ball argued, “to promote the confident articulation of one’s viewpoint,” but to shake up that viewpoint. The Days-Massolo Center and, I would add, the Alexander Hamilton Institute, as well as other on-campus or nearly on-campus organizations, are, each in their own way, shaking up our viewpoints. Let the conversation continue.
Peter Cannavo, Associate Professor of Government
No comments yet.
Comment Guidelines
Please log in to post a comment