A recent message from the Office of the President preached that, "All students, staff and faculty that call Dartmouth home must feel welcome, safe and included." Based on the complaints of hazing and discrimination, by either fraternities or the community as a whole, it should be obvious that all members of our community do not, in fact, feel welcome. Within the span of a single week, two "bias incidents" were reported, one involving verbal harassment and the other racist graffiti in a freshman dorm.
But for all the administration's calls to foster community, little is changing in the eyes of students who feel ignored or oppressed by the establishment. Clearly we need more empathy and understanding. But how to get it? The honest answer is less insistence on political correctness.
How could anyone call for less political correctness? This is the third rail of social discourse. Encroachment is deadly. But the truth is that mutual understanding and expression are stifled by the need to remain politically correct, and inquiry into hot political and social topics is muffled.
I do not advocate unrestrained insensitivity, but rather an ability to tolerate discussion. In today's PC generation, we condemn overtly racist actions, but we do little to stop stereotyping in our personal opinions. To achieve our ultimate goal of creating a more inclusive society, we must broaden social empathy through open awareness and understanding. Undoubtedly there is some justification for enforcing sensitivity. I have heard comments directed at me and in passing that make me cringe confusing Muslims with Arabs or Afghans with Arabs, and protesting hotly that the LGBT community does not face discrimination "because you can't tell from the outside."
Our campus is gasping for a breath of acceptance and understanding, but how can we engage in meaningful social discourse if we are afraid to offend classmates? This fear inhibits debate and leaves more members of our community ignorant of the issues facing disadvantaged is that the politically correct term? groups both on campus and in the larger world. As someone who has often played the PC police, I admit having withheld tentative opinions in classes and discussions with acquaintances for fear of being labeled sexist, insensitive or elitist. Only with my closest friends do I feel comfortable engaging in real, constructive discussion.
We have too much political correctness, yet we also have too little. The PC police are justified in patrolling our dialogue by handing out yellow cards. But as we know from our criminal justice system, punishment is not always constructive. Our community's convictions must be strong enough to discuss tender issues.
How can we come to terms with divisive issues if we are afraid to discuss them? Take affirmative action, for example. How can we expand our community's understanding of the purpose of affirmative action if we are afraid to admit that on average, black and Hispanic students score lower on standardized tests than white or Asian students?
Tiptoeing around sensitive issues can decrease the political and social consciousness on campus, especially regarding hot political issues like gay marriage, abortion and capital gains taxes. This Fall, during the height of the presidential campaign, I was stunned by how little activism and debate among classmates I witnessed. Facebook was the most popular venue for vigorous debate, but these battles usually ended when a third party intervened for the sake of "social cohesion." But the truth is that we will have no social cohesion until a mutual understanding is reached.
Freedom of expression would create a community more responsive to repeated calls for change, but we must be careful not to abuse this freedom by allowing insensitive students to create a less welcoming community. We should not focus on placating reports from the President's Office, but how to actively bend the moral arc of our campus culture toward justice.
I cannot tell you how many times I have heard administrators, instructors and community leaders preach Interim President Carol Folt's line. I would like to think her message is true, but the constant reminders make me doubt that the social discourse at this college pays any heed. If we are really to progress as a community we need empathy. And empathy can only come from discussions in which we are free to say what we really think.
