Protests for progress

Once again, Duke’s campus is embroiled in outraged protest. This current flare up of tensions on campus seems perfectly in rhythm with semesters past. On Friday, students began a sit-in at the Allen building demanding a litany of administrative action including the removal of Executive Vice President Tallman Trask and other key administrators, as well as the resolution of institutional inequities in Duke’s Parking and Transportation Services. The protesters’ demands followed a two-part Chronicle investigative series that revealed that Trask had committed a hit-and-run on campus and that PTS, indirectly overseen by him, was home to a racially hostile workplace.

We initially commend the protesters for taking action. It is a break from Duke’s typical apathy, where public political engagement is usually relegated to the vapid monotony of copy-pasted Facebook posts. The protesters are heeding Dean Nowicki’s call from the Class of 2019’s Convocation to “question authority”—a mandate quintessential to the liberal arts education. They have learned to apply the words not only intellectually, but in practice; for that, they should be lauded.

There are, however, flaws with the protests. First—timing: while it is true that the administration should have spoken up on issues much sooner, the incident involving Trask is now currently in litigation. It would be inappropriate for the University to take action while the wheels of due process are still turning at least with respect to issues that the case pertains to. As such, protesters should focus their attentions on the broader problems identified in PTS. This is a tangible issue they can impel the University to directly respond to in the present moment.

This protest has also unhelpfully turned into a catch-all for people frustrated with the University and its administrators. While those frustrations are often understandable, allowing a protest with very specific grievances and very significant stakes to turn into a hodgepodge of complaints risks rendering it contradictory, superficial and more easily discredited. Platitudes like “Duke, you are guilty” or “#DismantleDukePlantation” have little to do do with the particular issues—and solutions—at hand. Mixing in such speech risks obfuscating discussion of the specific issues that most merit protest and require university action.

Despite flaws in the protests, we urge students to engage those involved. While there is reason to be skeptical of some of the protesters’ demands and calls for amnesty, supporting them and engaging in political discussion does not force one to submit to the entirety of their demands. In fact, it promotes thoughtful examination and questioning in turn.

We continue to ask, “what next?” We asked it after the noose incident as well as after the community forums. We know there exists no panacea to these cultural ills, but we remain hopeful that Duke can do better than before. The ongoing protest offers the the chance to reveal the best in all of the factions of our community. In order for that to happen though, students must participate by challenging their own ideas and promoting debate in the community. They must ask what, in this protest, is sound and fury, and discuss the grievances that resonate with them.

The engagement, not of a few protesters, but of all of us, will determine what comes next—if anything. It could help us break out of our sad, repetitive cycles. It could make sure the slow interaction of the countervailing forces all trying to move toward a better Duke is not simply cemented in intractable inertia. The weight of responsibility for evolution rests with us. Our attention has been commanded yet again; let’s all listen and respond this time.