The April 28 edition of The Dartmouth was awash in a larger-than-usual amount of campus controversy. In particular, two advertisements were published that stated grievances against recent content in The Dartmouth: a community denouncement of Alexander Felix '08 and James Bleuer '08's comic ("BlarFlex," April 24), and a statement condemning a comment made about Liberian President and commencement speaker Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf ("Highlights and Lowlights," April 25). Both ads have arisen out of a felt experience of offense and outrage. However, only one demonstrates the way in which these socially sensitive matters should be handled.
On the one hand, the advertisement decrying the comic clearly pointed out why the strip was offensive with enumerated reasons and rationale for grievance. Furthermore, the ad's authors were able to garner a high degree of intercommunity support -- as well they should, given the gross intolerance -- and demonstrate the strength of their cause. Most importantly, the discourse never departed from civility and logic.
For lack of a better phrase, the "offense ad" placed by Students For Africa does not achieve these practical ends. While alerting me to the "insensitive, offensive, and disrespectful" nature of a statement made in the most recent edition of The Dartmouth Mirror , the ad asserts that "such disrespectful statements should not go unnoticed in a society that claims to value the dignity of all humankind." Note that the maligning quip was in the "Highlights-Lowlights" section, along with the line "The pope loves cats almost as much as Hitler Youth." Even if we are to treat this clearly satirical comment with sobriety, the ad offers no articulated reason for the group's indignation. Is Students For Africa contesting the comment that Liberia is "a failed state," or the insinuation that Johnson-Sirleaf has only personal experience about civil war to offer graduating seniors? Since the ad only offers incoherent discontent, I will address these two possibilities in turn.
By all accountable factors, Liberia is indeed a failed state, or one whose central government is unable to maintain sufficient control over its territory. For the last three years, the think-tank Fund for Peace and Foreign Policy magazine have placed Liberia in the highest category of their Failed States Index. Two civil wars have wracked the country in the last 20 years; Amnesty International said of the country in 2006 that "sporadic outbreaks of violence continued to threaten prospects of peace." Life expectancy is less than 45 years, nearly 6 percent of adults have HIV-AIDS and less than 50 percent of women are literate. In 2003, only 15 percent of the population was employed, and 80 percent of the population is currently living in poverty. Unless Students For Africa is contesting that the term is a normative judgment of Liberian culture, "failed state" is an aptly applied term that underscores the grave situation in the country.
As for President Johnson-Sirleaf only being able to share "how to survive a civil war," I am puzzled as to why Students For Africa found this such a profoundly lacking topic of discussion. We live in a society that is increasingly polarized, both at home and abroad; we are inheriting a world embroiled in genocide and terrorism. Our generation must confront these divisive issues and implement global solutions. The experience of the first African female president in a country wracked by decades of civil war is one we would do well to listen to. In fact, Johnson-Sirleaf's words may even encourage us to heal the divisions within our own Dartmouth community -- even lead us to engage in dialogue before sharpening our well-developed sense of what is offensive!
The Students For Africa ad reveals an unfortunate truth about Dartmouth discourse -- that when we sense an affront to race, sex, gender or other well-championed "politically correct" categories, we cry "I'm offended!" and discredit any argument that might attempt to engage in debate. Johnson-Sirleaf is a political leader who is not free from judgment in a democratic society. We routinely lambaste President Bush; it is hypocritical to refuse examination of a African female leader with the same critical gaze. While it is perfectly within anyone's purview to argue his or her opinion, to claim that one's own "feelings" prevent judgment is simply arrogance.
Following the fine example of the "BlarFlex" comic ad, I hope future grievances on campus can be aired in a way that promotes constructive conversation and can ameliorate tensions in our community, instead of resorting to knee-jerk reactions that occur painfully often on campus.
