Where lies the responsibility of Duke University? How much can a university actually do?
In recent weeks, hate-driven incidents have occurred on the Duke University campus: a Black Lives Matter poster was defaced publicly, and a gay freshman and the homosexual community were threatened by a message left in the privacy of a dorm. These actions were met with shock, fear and anger. Lately, students, parents and outsiders have begun to point their fingers at the school, claiming that Duke University isn’t providing a safe environment for groups such as these.
This may or may not be true. It is unclear exactly how much Duke University has done, does and will do in order to create such an environment. Regardless, such a culture of tolerance must be created, enforced and maintained in order for Duke University to claim any credibility as a progressive institution.
What is clear, however, is that Duke University is not the main culprit, though the school might be the easiest target for those who are looking for one.
I think it’s fair to say that, if given the choice, college administrators wouldn’t want these despicable acts to occur on their campuses. And I believe that those who run these institutions aren’t solely invested in the image of their school; they are human beings, they aren’t soulless and they are sympathetic to the experiences of all students.
So, why, then, is the reductive message from the Chronicle’s editorial board, “Do better, Duke. Do a lot better”?
I agree that, in response to these grotesque acts, it is appropriate and necessary for the Duke community to seek improvement from administration.
But Duke University will never be able to eradicate the occurrence of these incidents, partially because Duke is not exempt from the issues that plague the real world. Hatred, intolerance, ignorance—these woes have troubled our world since Pandora first opened her box.
Duke University does not create its students. Through its admissions process, Duke invites candidates that it feels will gain from and give to the school. If there were a way to filter out the students capable of such acts, I believe that the Office of Undergraduate Admissions would already be doing so.
But there isn’t. We are who we are, and we learned what we learned, years before we got to Durham.
For 18 years, Duke University played no role in our lives. It was up to our parents, our respective communities and us, as individuals, to mold our identities, grow our character and learn how to function as members of society. For some of us, however, those 18 years were spent learning unprincipled attitudes that had the chance to fester long before arriving on East Campus. The thugs who committed these malicious acts were not influenced to do so by Duke University. They did not learn these attitudes here nor were there classes or organizations that encouraged or condoned such actions. The mentalities that drove these attacks were bred elsewhere and then brought onto our campus.
I am not saying that Duke University is an innocent bystander. It is the responsibility of any college to create a campus that is safe for all individuals and to root out those who threaten this safety. It is the school’s responsibility to be intolerant of intolerance and to promote progressiveness. And I am not saying that Duke has done it flawlessly; in fact, I believe that many of the recent criticisms should be heard and acted upon, swiftly and effectively.
But for a parent to post on a Parents’ Facebook Group that they “really expect better from students that are of a caliber to go to Duke” is just plain wrong. Duke University isn’t a part of that equation.
Look at the University of Missouri. After several incidents driven by hate, a number of students (including one who went on a hunger strike) and student-athletes (including many members of the football team) began protests aimed at forcing the president of the school to resign. On Monday, he did.
With that, the University of Missouri’s governing board announced that they would take steps toward improving the racial climate on campus: improving education, creating real conversations, as well as ... well, whatever that University feels it must do to achieve a safer, healthier, more open campus culture.
The protests on that campus had an end goal: to drive its President to resign. But the goal was not to end all acts of hatred. Because that university, or any university, will never be able to claim that it can prevent acts of hatred on campus. The University of Missouri cannot guarantee that the resignation of their president will end all on-campus injustices. And, observing some of the protests and hearing some of the private conversations and public statements made at this tense time at Duke University, I hear frustration at the notion that Duke University will also never be able to say the same.
It is Duke University’s responsibility to listen and respond. This requires greater emphasis on educating all students on issues of race, gender, religion, culture and sexual preference, to name a few. There must be more room for healthy and productive conversations, increased measures to accommodate those whose safety is threatened and improved means of investigating hate-crimes to prevent perpetrators from getting away with acts of ignorant, despicable violence.
It is the responsibility of a university to sincerely create this culture and put its best effort into maintaining it. It cannot, however, prevent incidents such as these from happening.
That’s on us and on the worlds we lived in before we ever arrived at Duke University. Yet, here we are. Duke University provides us with the opportunity to create a campus culture, no matter our backgrounds, that is by no means separated from the real world. But it is one that can try to be “better.” Rather than merely protest administration, we can act with awareness and courage to build a better Duke, rather than demand one.
Jackson Prince is a Trinity freshman.
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.