Last week, some students expressed concerns to administrators regarding the theme of a fundraiser for cardiac research. The Office of Pluralism and Leadership told Phi Delta Alpha fraternity and Alpha Phi sorority, who had spent months organizing the event, to cancel the fundraiser because of opposition to its theme. This message was relayed to the campus groups via Greek Letter Organizations and Societies. The nonsense regarding the perceived racism of the “Phiesta” was discussed on these pages yesterday (“Hawley: A Frightening Precedent,” April 29). Opposition to this charitable event is symptomatic of a larger phenomenon of anti-privilege rhetoric at work on Dartmouth’s campus that is rooted in misdirected anger and intellectual hubris.
Over the past year and a half, a small group of students have convinced the larger American public that Dartmouth students are racist, homophobic and sexist — charges that the school has acknowledged. According to the ”Freedom Budget” proposal, “Dartmouth epitomizes power being isolated to rich, white males,” while other communities suffer “economic oppression at the hands of rich, white power structures.” OPAL’s decision to encourage the cancelation of the charity event speaks volumes about how this radical message has taken the College hostage.
When I try to engage with peers sympathetic to the discussions about the issues affecting the non-white-males on campus, I get variations of the following sentiment — “How could you ever understand — look at yourself.” When I attempt to voice opinions about my experience, a member of the Dartmouth Real Talk group told me “I understand your ignorance since you’ve never had to face true systemic adversity.” In those interactions I am rendered a passive, ignorant observer of the enlightened movement toward social change, as if because of my essentially privileged qualities I have nothing to add to the intellectual discussion. My options are to fully agree or be wrong.
An email sent Thursday afternoon encouraged recipients to “report [the ‘Phiesta’] as either a Bias Incident or (preferably, because there are more consequences) email Wes Schaub.” This email was sent before the Greek houses organizing the event heard of any issues with the fundraiser. This indicates that campus radicals do not seem interested in conversation. Seemingly convinced of the superiority of their position, they do not call for compromise or an exchange of ideas with those who may disagree. The siege mentality of these groups contributes nothing to actual understanding and growth.
The existence of mean-spirited people with racist beliefs is an unfortunate reality that the incredibly vast majority of students want to combat. The fact that, for this column to be published, I must include this caveat is an insult to the intelligence and morality of the students of this school. Because Dartmouth is not a racist institution. The Dartmouth student body is not racist. The “Phiesta” was not a racist event. Telling me my privilege precludes me from the discussion insults my intelligence and my own sense of ethics.
Yes, racist incidents occur at Dartmouth just as they occur everywhere. But the difference between Dartmouth and nearly every other place in the world is that in this bubble there are roughly 5,000 smart, capable and well-informed young people who are supremely committed to creating a safe and accepting community. We, as a school, do not tolerate racism. I do not tolerate racism. Yet, for some reason, we have been told that we are the definition of racism.
The student body at large cannot empathize with campus radicals because of a perceived illegitimacy to demands illustrated in expressions like the “Freedom Budget.” Arguments about the evils of Dartmouth as a community and institution are mired in academic jargon unfamiliar to most students. A fluid understanding of intersectionality is not needed to be well informed. If any perceived campus problems are to be corrected, the campus must first be united in seeing a problem. Otherwise, this accusatory and dismissive rhetoric will continue to dominate campus discourse.
