Why is it that when supposedly "educated" people put their feet in their mouths and make a racist or classless decision, their superiors feel that "sensitivity training and awareness" will remedy whatever consequences come of such an ignorant action?
Here at Duke, when someone makes a statement, such as the one in The Chronicle last Thursday, most students and administrators will say "I do not think so-and-so' is racist, but that he or she just made a foolish mistake." Baloney! This trend of mistakes has taken place for too long since the dawn of the age of political correctness, and there has been no accountability by the powers that be, especially in the case of The Chronicle. I believe in the freedom of the press, but I also believe that you should call a spade a spade. Bottom line, the writer and editor in charge of the publication of that article should be released.
Seniors and others around for the 2000-2001 academic year may recall the David Horowitz affair. The Chronicle's editor at the time, Greg Pessin, made the decision to permit Horowitz to purchase an ad in which Horowitz advocated 10 reasons why there should not be reparations for slavery. About a year later, former Chronicle writer Jonas Blank, currently a law student up at Harvard, wrote that he has "never been more proud of a piece of writing than the response we wrote" to criticism by the Duke Student Movement. In addition, Blank also wrote that he felt "ashamed" that people perceived The Chronicle as "racist" and that The Chronicle had not responded by waving the First Amendment in the faces of those who happened to be "offended."
Newsflash: accept the consequences of your actions you cry-baby wussies! Of course The Chronicle had every legal write to "sell out" to Horowitz the space; however, being deemed a "racist," self-righteous and intolerant organization should not come off as a surprise following such a decision. Argue your first-amendment rights until your face turns "Cameron Crazy" blue, but some will still call a spade a spade; gentlemen, you endorsed a racist action hiding behind the First Amendment. Live with your choice and accept the outcome that some will perceive you as racists.
What upset me the most at that time were the subsequent events that took place at a Duke Student Government meeting, in which several members of current Young Trustee Jordan Bazinsky's cabinet tried to pass a DSG resolution directing students not to take their anger about the matter out on The Chronicle. As a cabinet member at the time, I felt "ashamed" to have been a part of DSG. Had it not been for a freshman girl who called for a roll call vote perhaps the resolution would have passed. I vividly remember several DSG hotshots, including then Vice President of Academic Affairs Jason Bergsman "abstaining" under the pressure of a live vote. Duke University, may I present to you your elected "student" representatives and "student" daily newspaper!
This newest incident differs in context, but not in character. Again, The Chronicle editors legally, but ignorantly chose to publish a highly inflammatory and tasteless statement. I will give the current editor credit for having the chutzpah to apologize for and admit to the chauvinistic remark. Unlike Greg Pessin, who jumped on the "First Amendment, leave me alone!" bandwagon, The Chronicle's current editor quickly acted, but the questions remains: has it been enough?
The prestigious law firm Dewey Ballantine recently had to deal with a racist email that had circulated around its office. In response to an e-mail asking if anyone wanted to adopt a dog, one of the partners replied back to all something along the lines of keeping the dog away from a Chinese restaurant or else it would become dinner. Dewey Ballantine has been apologetic, and has also broadcasted that it will have its employees undergo "sensitivity training and awareness" to rectify the problem. That sounds great, but in all honesty it does not address the problem because it's taking place after the matter, and a guy gets away with making a racist comment with no action taken against him.
Some will say "so what?" he expressed his opinion. Others may argue, "He was joking; he is not a racist, he made a stupid mistake." Ignorant, yeah, I'll buy that. However, I also believe that with ignorance comes racism. It shows a lack of understanding, appreciation, acceptance, and tolerance of others who come from different backgrounds. Sensitivity classes after the fact will not solve this problem. Regardless if they acted ignorantly or bigotedly, I do not want a stupid or racist person writing or editing for my daily newspaper. Pick the worse of two evils, ignorance and racism, and you end up with the same result. The Chronicle needs to do more than just bring in some overpriced sensitivity speaker and issue an apology. This type of condoning has gone on for too long. Actions have always spoken louder than words, and The Chronicle has not yet acted on this matter, but it still has a chance.
To the editors of The Chronicle: do not feel as if you are buckling under the pressure from the public or not adhering to your constitutional first amendment rights, but see it more as doing the right thing. Say that again: "doing the right thing." Put pride aside and cut the cancer off before it spreads. You have a greater duty to your student body than you do to two students. Let them go. Let them go. Let them go.
David Nefouse is a second year law student. His column appears every other Friday.
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.