Pascalwrote, "Plurality which is not reduced to unity is confusion; unity which does not depend on plurality is tyranny."
The tension between plurality and unity lies at the center of Dartmouth's multiculturalism debate. Dartmouth is challenged in its academic and social settings and, of course, in its Student Assembly elections, to respect the diversity of the student body without abandoning the values and interests that should unite us all.It is easy to do one or the other -- what Dartmouth needs now is a serious attempt to reconcile the two.
Until the early 20th century, the Christian religion provided this unifying force at Dartmouth. The College was a focal point for religious revivals and produced a striking number of ministers in its early years. More importantly, membership in Christian organizations exceeded three-quarters of the undergraduate student body, a fact that served to remind students of their common interests and beliefs.
That time has long since passed, and the growing number of non-Christian and non-religious students at Dartmouth means that any attempt to restore Christianity to its once central position would be met with justified opposition. Unfortunately, though, we have not replaced religion with a truly unifying vision, but instead with a multiculturalism that fractures Dartmouth more than it unites it.
Understanding and respecting diversity is a noble and necessary goal, but it cannot serve as the central theme of campus life. At best, it provides us the chance to understand diverse perspectives as a prerequisite to the formation of a college community. At worst, it splits the campus into factions over race, religion, sexual orientation and a myriad of other divisions, with each faction being so focused on its differences from the other groups that harmonization of the groups becomes impossible.
The truly remarkable aspect of diversity is that such great differences can exist within a framework of basic similarity. The current multicultural movement focuses on difference without celebrating the more important similarities among Dartmouth students. Worse, it creates a false dichotomy between unity and diversity, group interests and community interests, women's issues and campus issues and the so-called Right and Left in campus politics.
The reaction against the excesses of multiculturalism is equally counterproductive. Dartmouth is no longer the homogenous, isolated college on a hill that it once was. The College should represent all of its different elements and not try to force a cultural or political ideology on them. The unifying forces of the past, for better or worse, are gone forever, and our challenge is not to reminisce about them or try to resurrect them, but to replace them with something appropriate to the Dartmouth of the '90s.
The worst reaction, however, is the prevalent non-reaction of much of Dartmouth. Any discussion of community is bound to fail if it is defined by two polar opposites, as Dartmouth currently is. Ideology of either the Right or the Left is inappropriate to such a discussion, which, by definition, must have participation from the whole student body. The lack of constructive voices in the debate over diversity issues leaves us no choice but to pick sides in a fruitless battle over admissions policies, affinity housing and other subjects that will play an important role in the future of the College.
When we do this, though, rather than bemoaning the lack of choices, we should question how each one of us contributed to the lack of productive discussion. Fault lies not with our student leaders who have taken their cue from the divided student body, but with each student who, through action or inaction, has failed to provide the leadership with a sense of what is in the interest of Dartmouth as a whole.
A first step toward a new sense of unity for Dartmouth would be to focus on smaller, more practical steps to improve the quality of life. Dartmouth has had enough divisive ideology in the last two years to last a while. The new SA should put aside weighty philosophical questions for the moment and simply find things on which we all agree. Then we may discover that common ground is really not that hard to find.
The prescriptions in this column are admittedly rather vague. Finding a unifying force on a par with Christianity is a difficult task and necessarily requires the thoughtful involvement of the whole community. The greatest danger is that we will ignore the need for such a vision, and we will continue to splinter.
In its efforts to overcome the effects of past discrimination and to create a more culturally aware school, Dartmouth should keep sight of the whole of the college community and not replace Pascal's tyranny with confusion.
