Last week The Dartmouth editorialized that Kappa Chi Kappa's decision to revert to its historical name of Kappa Kappa Kappa damages the Dartmouth community because of the name's initials ("Change to Tri-Kap is Insensitive," Oct. 25). Doubtless some people will take offense at the name; that cannot be helped. However, by promoting the irrational judgments of a few, the newspaper does more harm.
Tri-Kap, the College's oldest local fraternity, has been at Dartmouth since 1842; the Ku Klux Klan was founded in 1865. Clearly, Tri-Kap could not have anticipated that a different KKK would rise to prominence. The Dartmouth Editorial Board acknowledges this point but still condemns the name change as "insensitive." The editorial recognizes that "Tri-Kap's founding predates the establishment of the Klan and admits that Tri-Kap was not "being racist, or even associating itself with the Klan." It even points out that "the house will avoid using the symbol KKK."
Tri-Kap will be the only Greek organization that chooses not to display its initials. Anyone who goes to the trouble of mentally converting "Tri-Kap" into "Kappa Kappa Kappa," then into "KKK," then into "Ku Klux Klan" should be able to recognize that the groups have no connection.
The Dartmouth says that because some will make the association anyway, "it is impossible for the house to dictate campus perceptions." That is precisely why the campus newspaper should be explaining the issue and discouraging misunderstanding, rather than promoting whatever unfounded conclusions people would like to draw. Instead, The D's statement that "it is unrealistic to think the fraternity can ever escape the perceived connection" is a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Since no one provides any criteria for judging insensitivity, the charge unfairly damages the house's reputation. Tri-Kap could defend itself against accusations of racism, but because of the term's subjectivity, if anyone takes offense, the fraternity is defenseless against charges of "insensitivity."
Moreover, the editorial promotes a harmful view of community. If community is a forum wherein any member may criticize any other member with or without cause, it becomes a source of repression. A community obligates all of its members not only to be sensitive but also to respect the decisions of other groups when they do not cause harm.
Further, members of a community should defend each other against undeserved criticism. If a student from another college asked about Tri-Kap, Dartmouth students should quickly point out that the fraternity predates the Klan, lest the visitor get the wrong idea. Instead, The Dartmouth encourages misperceptions about the College.
I can only imagine what the Editorial Board thinks about Atlanta Braves fans who hung K's along the wall to mark strikeouts in the World Series. Maybe "the city too busy to hate" is simply unaware of the other meaning of KKK.
Still, Abiola Lapite raises an interesting analogy in "The Limits of Tradition" (Oct. 31, 1995). He points out that the swastika was a symbol of peace in several religions long before it was expropriated by the Nazis, but that a student displaying the symbol with good intentions would likely give offense.
While this observation perceptively highlights the question of whether Dartmouth should object to symbols of hate when they are used in other contexts, the comparison to Tri-Kap is a stretch. For one thing, many students may not be aware of the archaic meaning of the swastika, but anyone can figure out that "Kappa Kappa Kappa" on a fraternity house is not related to the Klan. Mistaking the meaning of the swastika may be an honest mistake; taking offense at Tri-Kap requires willful rejection of readily available facts.
More importantly, though, if someone used a swastika as a symbol of peace, Dartmouth would be wrong to take offense. Jews were not exterminated by the swastika, just as African-Americans were not lynched by the letter K. They were oppressed by people who were, in turn, motivated by ideas. By focusing on the ancillary symbols of the Nazis and the Klan, we would ignore the real threat -- hateful thinking.
Minorities have fought hard to erase society's harmful misperceptions. By changing its standards with respect to Tri-Kap, Dartmouth opens the door to damaging and unfair misjudgments of all its members.
