More than 800 students thus far have pledged their signatures to "The Real Social Disaster," an appeal authored by senior Stephen Miller, executive director of the Duke Conservative Union. The petitioners "DEMAND AN APOLOGY FROM THE GROUP OF 88" for "the original 'Social Disaster' advertisement" of last April and urge President Richard Brodhead "TO FINALLY STAND UP FOR HIS STUDENTS" in view of "the assaults launched by his own faculty."
I have rejected an invitation to sign this ad, and students who have joined the Facebook group generating its signatures, at bare minimum, should reconsider their decision.
"In disregard for due process," this ad charges, "our own professors projected guilt onto our peers on the lacrosse team." The ad then asks Brodhead, who supposedly "has yet to come forward," to shield his students from such "reckless disregard for fairness, justice and jurisprudence." Brodhead, however, already has come forward. In my view, he is an honorary signatory of the ad and its references to student-identified problems of racism, sexual coercion and social inequality at Duke. "If faculty members talked about those underlying issues," he told The Chronicle in January, "that is their right. Quite a number of people have assured me that the ad said the students were guilty, but if you go back and look, that's not what the ad says."
Indeed, the April ad's social commentary transcends the very dimensions of the lacrosse case. Publishing student experiences is not merely the object of "political and social agendas," as the new ad suggests, but is instead an extension of the University's educational interests. Eighty-eight faculty members recognized that providing a safe environment in which students can work and grow is their first concern as educators. Consistent with-better, imperative to-this mission is a sustained awareness of social ills that obstruct academic growth. So entered, "What does a Social Disaster Sound Like?"
Miller claims the 88 "[levied] baseless accusations of racism against our student body." This sharply polarizing language acknowledges only two roles in the 88's critique, positioning professors against students without noting that the "accusations" were in fact issued by students. Those whom the professors quoted directly are ignored. Those actually subjected to racism fade from the dialogue, their acquiescence advancing a culture of silence where discussion is sorely needed.
At Monday's "Shut Up and Teach?" forum, senior Anita Petite-Homme underscored this very point while addressing the firestorm surrounding the 88: "I'm afraid, and nobody even knows me.. If my professors are attacked standing up for students now, will I be attacked, as a student, for pointing out racism at Duke?"
Let's assume, though, that you recognize the slumbering issues in the lap of this campus but still disapprove that the original ad was released during a "time of intense emotions and enormous stakes," as the new ad laments. Bear in mind, however, as I noted in my last column, a wholesale condemnation of the 88 based on that reasoning implies that the students quoted in April are, at best, less important than the lacrosse players and are, at worst, irrelevant.
Now enters "The Real Social Disaster," which claims that the 88, through their ad alone, "took a course of action which escalated tensions, spurred divisions along lines of race and class and brought our community into greater turmoil. [undermining] the legal process and most likely [emboldening] a rogue district attorney."
That is quite the narrative for an advertisement that barely made a flutter on campus the day of its release. There was no outcry against the April 6 ad from students, professors or administrators. For months, when the facts of the lacrosse scandal were murky at best, this campus hardly batted an eye at the "Gang of 88." It is only now, in attempting to relive the ad and reconstruct its impact, that critics ascribe so much raw, destructive power to its words. As senior Malik Burnett, president of the Black Student Alliance, explained, this community's "scapegoat mentality" allows many to direct anger and frustration, deserving of an unsympathetic media and an unscrupulous district attorney, toward well-intentioned professors whose records demonstrate tireless service to student development.
Having spoken with more than 15 students who plan to sign the final copy of Miller's petition, I say with pride that all are individuals who care deeply about this University and are disturbed by the lacrosse team's victimization. I ask then, as you and other students prepare to sign a document calling professors "reckless," impugning a university president's courage and potentially undermining dialogue between you and other students for years to come-what are you fighting for?
In signing "The Real Social Disaster," you are not signing on to a response to the Group of 88. You are signing on to an edifice-designed to tear down rather than to build up this community we have come to protect fiercely. Recall the message encouraging students to sign the ad: Miller harkens back to "our abiding belief in fairness and justice." Carefully read over the language of this petition, and ask yourself if you believe all the words are fair and just. As 88 professors can attest, you will be held accountable for all of them.
Samson Mesele is a Trinity sophomore. His column runs every other Thursday.
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.