Mission Accomplished

A week ago, Interim Vice President for Institutional Diversity Stuart Lord sent the campus a blitz that caused quite a stir among students. The blitz sarcastically exclaimed that campus concerns over racism and other diversity issues had been solved, as proven by the low attendance at his Campus Climate lunches. If students aren’t going to the lunches, so the reasoning goes, either the problem is solved or people don’t care enough to show up. Obviously what was apparently the biggest campus problem during the fall term hasn’t been solved, so people don’t care.

But what’s this? A criticism leveled at activism against racism? But that’s the crown jewel of Dartmouth campus activism! The Boston Globe reported that over 500 students stormed Dartmouth Hall in November to rally against hatred. That’s right, the rally was reported on by papers with larger circulation than TDI, or even the D! How could someone say Dartmouth students aren’t mobilized in diversity issues? This Lord character isn’t more credible than the Boston Globe, is he?

Well, maybe students were mobilized and Vice President Lord was just miffed that his Campus Climate lunches weren’t the sort of hardcore, to-the-streets activism that students pursued. We have seen some improvements in campus awareness of diversity issues. For example, The Student Assembly Diversity and Community Committee has enjoyed a far greater role under Tim Andreadis and has taken some proactive steps to increase the presence of these issues on campus. However, this isn’t the collective grassroots action that one would imagine would follow the Solidarity Against Hatred Rally. Seemingly the movement dimmed quite a bit in the subsequent months.

Student activists will take credit for improving the level of campus discourse surrounding racial issues. Those steps are commendable, and they are a good start. But anyone seeking real change will tell you that discourse is only that: a start. Especially on this campus, students tend to congregate with and talk to people similar to them. Hence the divisiveness created by virtually every hard-hitting issue on campus. The people who decry campus racism in their everyday conversations are likely to be doing so to people who already agree with them. If the changes are to reach the people that really need them, more than discourse is necessary.

Of course, Vice President Lord sent out another blitz later that evening. Some have interpreted his “Regarding Mission Accomplished” as an apology, representing either a surrender to Dartmouth’s oppressive forces of political correctness or the appropriate lamentation of an unprofessional affront to active students. But these interpretations miss a key fact: he didn’t apologize. The closest thing to an apology in the second blitz was a brief statement that “The Office of the Vice-President for Institutional Diversity values the hard work that many members of this community have devoted to raising awareness about issues of diversity.” Note the subject of that sentence. It’s not the most personal gratitude ever expressed. But it does allow the students crowding the November rally and subsequently carrying on casual conversations to feel appreciated. Basically, the definition of the “hard work” is left up to you: if you think you’ve done much to improve the campus climate, then thanks.

Still, there is a tinge of bitterness that more hasn’t been done. It should be obvious that Vice President Lord’s acrimony does not stem from low attendance of Campus Climate lunches. If there was a legitimately thriving student movement to improve diversity issues, he probably would not even hold the lunches, much less be upset by their less than stellar turnout. Rather, it seems that the Dartmouth community has turned away from diversity issues as its uniting rallying cry. There is now a dearth of widespread campus will to improve the situation, a lack of proactive steps in diversity issues. In this light, the campus activism from the Fall seems more fueled by anger than actual will for change. People got upset, expressed their anger, and felt their job was complete. This equates to reactivism, not activism. Mobilizing only when something pisses you off is no way to foster change on campus—and instead it creates the same divisiveness that will continue to plague campus discourse.