In T.J. Rodgers' recent op-ed, he accuses Professor Wilder of misrepresenting his perspective on diversity (The Dartmouth, "Popular Trustee Candidate Responds," May 12). He writes: "If Wilder had taken the trouble to read my trustee candidate statement on the Dartmouth website . . . he would have read the following introduction, which is followed by a statement that is obviously inconsistent with his claims." However, the quote he cites is not in the introduction to his candidate statement -- it is not in his candidate statement at all. Instead, it was written in response to a question posed to all candidates: "How would you address the challenges that confront the campus with respect to diversity, inclusiveness and principles of community?"
As a Dartmouth alumnus who made the mistake of endorsing Rodgers' petition for inclusion on the trustee ballot, I believe this distinction highlights an important aspect of Rodgers' campaign. In both the letter he wrote to solicit petition signatures and his candidate statement, Rodgers makes no mention of his controversial views on diversity -- only when asked directly does he address the issue. I endorsed Rodgers' petition because of his commitment to open government; had I known about his perspective on diversity, I never would have done so.
When I read about Rodgers' candidacy in The San Francisco Chronicle, I felt that I had been misled. The article, entitled "Silicon Valley CEO takes aim at 'diversity' education," (March 16) states that Rodgers believes Dartmouth "is wasting scarce money 'in the diversity area.' He wants the college to stop adding ethnic studies classes and refocus its resources on the fundamentals, such as civics, science, and history." It goes on to report: "In one notable episode during the mid-1990s, Rodgers rebuked a nun who had criticized Cypress [his corporation] for its lack of women or minority board members, saying it would be immoral for him to pick directors based on criteria other than merit."
Rodgers has a similar perspective on affirmative action -- that it is wrong to consider race as a factor in selecting applicants. He accuses affirmative action supporters of racism and suggests that they consider minorities to be incapable of succeeding without their assistance. Of course, no one supports affirmative action for this reason. People support affirmative action because it serves to counterbalance structural inequalities which work to the disadvantage of minorities.
Consider the influence of "legacy" in Dartmouth's application process. If I applied to Dartmouth and I happened to be the son of T.J. Rodgers, the admissions committee would certainly take this fact into consideration. Even if I were not as qualified as other applicants, they would be unlikely to jeopardize Rodgers' financial contributions by rejecting me. Thus, consideration of legacy status favors the descendants of Dartmouth graduates. Since the vast majority of Dartmouth graduates have until recently been white, the majority of those who benefit from legacy consideration are also white. Although Rodgers has taken a stand against affirmative action, he has taken no such stand against such preferential treatment. By thus opposing a system that helps minorities without addressing the advantages enjoyed by whites, I believe Rodgers pursues an agenda which is implicitly racist.
Unfortunately, legacy preference is only one of many structural inequalities that work to the disadvantage of minorities. Rodgers demonstrates an alarming lack of awareness regarding these racial inequalities. He writes that in his corporation, "[w]e rarely discuss race because it doesn't matter." As a wealthy white male, perhaps Rodgers is not aware of the benefits he has received from racial privilege. However, to those who have suffered from racial discrimination, it is obvious that race does matter.
To many Dartmouth students, professors and alumni, race is a subject worthy of study and debate. Rodgers' dismissive and disrespectful attitude toward these members of the Dartmouth community is deeply troubling. In response to Wilder, Rodgers writes: "Wilder is absolutely right in one of his implications: I could never represent his views as a Dartmouth trustee, because I treat minorities as true equals, not as social welfare projects." By thus dismissing Wilder's perspective, Rodgers insults and alienates those in the Dartmouth community who support affirmative action or diversity education. By admitting that he will be unable to represent Wilder as a trustee, Rodgers raises the disturbing possibility that he will likewise be unable to represent a significant proportion of the Dartmouth community.
