Missouri Football Players Strike, Call For School President To Leave
Via Deadspin:
The University of Missouri’s Legion of Black Collegians released a statement tonight from the collective athletes of color on the Tigers football team stating they are on strike from football-related activities until the school president steps down in the wake of several racist acts on campus.
Many Missouri students believe school president Tim Wolfe has failed to act in response to several months’ worth of alleged racism on the Columbia campus—the most recent and controversial of which was a swastika of human feces found in a residence hall. The debate is mostly happening over on Facebook, where views both nuanced and not can be found under the #concernedstudent1950 hashtag.
A graduate student has also embarked on a hunger strike.
The coach supports the decision:
The Mizzou Family stands as one. We are united. We are behind our players. #ConcernedStudent1950 GP pic.twitter.com/fMHbPPTTKl
— Coach Gary Pinkel (@GaryPinkel) November 8, 2015
That seems like a big deal. And now the faculty is organizing a walk-out:
COLUMBIA — MU Faculty plan to walk out of class Monday and Tuesday in support of student activists.
[…]
“We, the concerned faculty of the University of Missouri, stand in solidarity with Mizzou student activists who are advocating for racial justice on our campus and urge all MU faculty to demonstrate their support by walking out on Monday, Nov. 9, and Tuesday, Nov. 10,” the statement, sent out by Associate Professor Elisa Glick, said.
“Faculty will meet at the Carnahan Quadrangle starting at 10 a.m. and will be present throughout the day to respond to student questions in the form of a teach in,” the statement said.
I’m interested in seeing how this works out.
Now let’s talk about the School President, Tim Wolfe. First, watch the video below.
saw this last night but didn’t have context. the system president. presented without comment. pic.twitter.com/KVGvf30vQp
— El Flaco (@bomani_jones) November 8, 2015
Hey, the guy did say he’d give an answer that he was sure the questioners would consider the wrong answer, and boy, did he. Tim Wolfe defines systematic oppression as: “Systematic oppression is that you don’t believe that you have the equal opportunity of success…” See? He warned everyone that he’d give the wrong answer! Love his word choice – believe. That pretty much sums up his views on this issue.
Yeah, I’m seeing a problem with this guy. He did release a statement:
It is clear to all of us that change is needed, and we appreciate the thoughtfulness and passion which have gone into the sharing of concerns. My administration has been meeting around the clock and has been doing a tremendous amount of reflection on how to address these complex matters.
Clearly, we are open to listening to all sides, and are confident that we can come together to improve the student experience on our campuses. We want to find the best way to get everyone around the table and create the safe space for a meaningful conversation that promotes change. We will share next steps as soon as they are confirmed.
In conjunction with campus representatives, the university began work on a systemwide diversity and inclusion strategy, plan and metrics for the University of Missouri System as part of my strategic goals (see 1.4.i of the System Strategic Plan) as approved by the Board of Curators in summer 2015.
Our due date for announcing the strategy was April 2016, having allowed for multiple stakeholders (e.g., faculty, staff, students, consultants) across the system to provide input into the plan.
The majority of items listed on the Concerned Student 1950 List of Demands were already included in the draft of the strategy. While the student list provides more detail and more specific metrics than had been established in the UM System plan, we had anticipated providing specificity and detail to the plan over the coming months.
In the meantime, I am dedicated to ongoing dialogue to address these very complex, societal issues as they affect our campus community.
First, his plan to address the racist incidents, that have been going on for months, is April 2016? What should students do in the meantime?
Second, take a look at this line in his statement: “Clearly, we are open to listening to all sides, and are confident that we can come together to improve the student experience on our campuses.” All sides? Is he going to listen to the side of the swastika of human feces artist? Is he going to listen to the side of the people who hurled racial slurs? What does that statement even mean? What is the other side?
Yeah, I’m thinking the School President needs to go. He’s obviously not up to the job.
Tags: Football, Missouri University, racism
I’m actually pretty impressed to see a college, albeit only part of it, actually put something above football for once.
BREAKING: Wolfe announces he’s resigning.
Good.
And that, boys and girls, is how racism in America was ended.
yes, progressive totalitarians: the answer has to be exactly the one you demand, word for word if possible. in fact, the students do believe that they lack opportunity. he acknowledged that. how is the word “believe” wrong? i would not have used it; it could suggest to a certain type of sensitive soul that he doesn’t take them seriously. so his tone was not exactly perfect: boo frickin hoo. if he makes a good-faith effort to minimize the admittedly improper racist slurs on campus, then let him get on with it. or maybe he should be fired for reasons other than this (i don’t know). it’s not like he said quit your whining, there’s no racism here. it’s like the far left really doesn’t want allies. send everyone who’s not an extreme progressive to re-education camps. that’s the kind of thinking that made stalin such a hero to champions of free thought.
Which isn’t remotely the point, Geezer.
anonymous. you make the mistake of thinking those who against intolerance are going to tolerate it. This isnt a “accept everyone’s words and thoughts” thing. This is a “if your words and thought target other people for things they cannont help, you are wrong and will be made to feel wrong. As many people as possible will know how wrong you are and if possible, your public image will be attacked until you stop being wrong, or you are destroyed.” thing. So your comment, while probably meant to make “liberals” think ” oh yeah, here we are being intolerant of racism… we’re just as bad as the KKK”.. instead i say “damn right” If a person in a place to make a change chooses not to, they will be changed.
“..send everyone who’s not an extreme progressive to re-education camps.”
Do you happen to have the address of that camp? I’d like to send Wolfe a note to thank him for acting after months of dragging his feet.
Notice the similarity between those who think what happened in Missouri isn’t a big deal, or worthwhile? What do these people have in common, besides never having had to deal with these racial, bigoted statements/actions/threats? Basically, they can’t see, or care about, what they’ve never experienced.
And Anonymous, I do not want you on my side. That would mean I was wrong.
What is the point?
The point is, people in power… CEOs, University presidents, etc… will see that they can no longer try to appease the racists. They are on notice and will get “Wolfed” if they fail to address hateful and racist actions within their institutions.
Geezer is correct. This is the typical university campus witch hunt which solves exactly zero. It does make for a great headline and a very empty “progressive” “victory.”
When all these students venture off campus into their adult lives in the broader (real) world and experience the vile, rampant racism we see literally all day, every day I wonder who they’ll demand resigns? Wait till they get of load of the real shit out here. Talk about a rude fucking awakening…
What does it all mean? Will the new “PC Principal” University President be some sort of anti-racism superhero? Is that “the point”? Install a person who really, really understands? Perhaps the next Mizzou president will convene anti racism militias to stalk the campus for vandals and the transphobic. She or he will definitely make sure public statements are thoroughly proofread now anyhow.
Maybe this guy deserves to go. Maybe he’s slow to act and insensitive and inept. But if anyone really believes this means very much I suggest you perhaps get off the internet for the day and reflect on our history in silent meditation. This isn’t progress… This is a joke.
ben: do you have evidence he failed to address the racist actions? or did he just not do it exactly the way you’d want him to?
or are you just sad because people can be so darned mean and you can’t snap your fingers and make that go away all at once.
jason: i’m glad some progressives still have a sense of humor. that address might be delawareliberal.net — insisting on its moral superiority for, what, 10 years now. but still putting out the most interesting blog in town.
Ben – This works only on campus. Let’s not pretend this kind of thing works elsewhere in our culture or is some harbinger of protest and boycott. We can barely put small town police chiefs on notice.
I do appreciate your optimism though. Some has to remain sanguine I suppose.
You know, this is an issue of safety. Students shouldn’t have to worry about their safety. Because this crap escalates, and having a University President that refuses to address the situation gives this ugliness cover. He really didn’t have to do much. Too bad he couldn’t even fake concern.
And yeah, using racial, sexist, bigoted slurs or symbols in corporate America won’t get you into trouble. LMAO at that one.
No one has said, or is saying, that the point was to end racism. The point was not tolerating the behavior as a university and dismissing the behavior as no big deal. Just live with it, says white men – who have never experienced this crap. It is incessant.
#YesAllWomen
#YesAllBlackPeople
#YesAllMuslims
#YesAllHispanics
#YesAllGays
I could keep going…
^ seriously. Yelling the N-word… or any slur in a professional workplace will get you bounced out faster than you can say “right-to-work-state”.
If anyone needs a lesson about the real-world, it’s the good-ol-boys in their pickemup truck who will see their job prospects evaporate when they realize there are consequences to hate speech. Institutional executives are learning a lesson as well. Welcome to the 21st century, everyone. Grand-pappy’s views on “the blacks” are no longer endearing and old-timey. They are unacceptable and will hopefully die with him.
Maybe I missed something, sincerely. Did the president or a university employee call someone a slur? Did a student? Have any of the culprits been identified (either the yellers or the vandals)?
DG, what do you say about the civil rights movements in the 60s and 70s and the role of college campuses and student populations then? It seems you think college activism has no ability to make a difference. Is that true?
The president of the University showed he didn’t understand, or take seriously, the concerns of a persecuted population on his campus. He was the head of the institution and that institution was failing it’s members horribly. He is but a small egg in this omelet. The Millennial trend of wanting instant gratification is, in many cases, unrealistic and annoying (computer games, food, etc) But when that urgency and unwillingness to be told to “wait” is applied to social justice and the stamping out of racism… I consider it one of my generations highest virtues.
Students supported civil rights work that was already established and organised off campuses. That’s my very basic understanding.
The real grass roots student activism of the 60s was the anti-war/Peace movement. That was by nearly all accounts a complete failure. I don’t know anyone would thinks otherwise actually… Maybe some older folks can share their views on that.
I think college activism like this on its own does almost nothing, yes. Again, the president is gone but all we have as a “victory” is this abstract idea that the next one will be more aggressive on these issues or more sensitive or something, is that it?
Have you watched the South Park satire this season?
I have. and I love it. But that is a cartoon.
These are actual people, actually being threatened by actual racists. In a world where white men are shooting up school and campuses every couple of weeks, It must be horrifying to be a historically targeted ethnic minority getting abused at school. When the school administration doesn’t aggressively try to stop that, they have failed and must be removed.
I would also say that no one is “declaring victory’ over this. This is the first domino, not the last one.
Ben – Best of luck and godspeed. As I said I admire your optimism. If you really believe running this guy out on a rail for basically not taking this seriously enough accomplished anything then that’s super. You did it.
I’ve mentioned before, I’ve been out in the street. I’ve protested. Shut down businesses. Held signs. Chanted. Lied down in the street. So I get it. Something needs to be done. This is hardly what needs to be done. This is its own domino, not near any others, that will fall in the woods by itself.
What DOES need to be done? I have a feeling there are people who have been trying it one way for a while. But that way, in their opinion (which, by the way is one i do not have the experience to validate/invalidate) hasn’t worked. Maybe it’s time for a new way.
You want it to be one way… but it’s not. It’s the other way.
Interesting thread. My sense is that this kind of scalp taking happens when other (possibly more productive) actions have been taken off the table.
This guy was unpopular to begin with. He’s a business guy, with no educational background, who was brought in to get the finances “under control.” A hatchet man, basically. Why anyone would expect sensitivity about racial matters from such a person is a valid question.
I found this article an interesting explanation the ongoing shift to a new moral paradigm, in which victimhood is the highest moral position:
http://righteousmind.com/where-microaggressions-really-come-from/
I’m working my way through that article, Geezer, but so far I find it not appropriate to this story. In fact, I’m having trouble applying what I’ve read so far to everyday life – at least the life of minority groups.
Has everyone not noticed what’s been happening since Obama was elected? That’s an actual trigger. Racists, sexists, bigots, homophobes have come out of the woodwork. Yes, they were always there, but they’ve become brazen and proud of their words and actions.
As far as the University President… what does his job consist of? Surely more than just cutting costs, and if that was his only responsibility then the hiring committee failed. He was responsible for far more than crunching numbers. He was the public face of the university, and he was bad at it.
Colleges and universities are interesting examples. They are not “real” life because students are clients, most of whom are paying a lot to attend. As clients/customers they have a right to a safe, non-threatening experience. We wouldn’t tolerate a hotel or restaurant allowing this sort of behavior when it came to us. Of course, checking out of a hotel or leaving a restaurant is far easier (and immediate) than transferring colleges.
Back to the linked article, what “some” people consider microaggressions aren’t small to the person on the receiving end – the daily volume can be quite overwhelming. And labeling people that deal with these “microaggressions” as victims is really just more of the same nonsense. It’s right up there with, “Geez, it was just a joke. Lighten up.” Please notice that whenever this phrase is uttered the joke was never at the joke teller’s expense. In fact, the people using these “jokes” or slurs or “whocouldhaveknown that was upsetting” and labeling them as harmless, or microaggressions, tend to look an awful lot alike. Just sayin
“The fight at the University of Missouri reveals that the football team even at a less-lucrative school can exert significant political power. Which should make the administrations at those more-lucrative schools awfully nervous.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/11/09/missouri-football-players-and-the-untapped-political-power-of-the-college-student-athlete/
So the thesis of Geezer’s article is that all of the people who are suffering from discrimination and incidents of racism need to STFU and suffer their indignities in silence, so that white people can maintain their own personal moral authority. The point of telling someone that they are imposing their shit on you (or telling someone to stop dropping their trash on your sidewalk) is to get them to stop it. Suffering their bullshit in silence (oops, sorry, *dignity*) is a call to stop imposing on the privileged who would rather not hear that they (and their children) still have issues.
Not suffering in silence is the birthright of every American. There isn’t a single civil liberty enjoyed here that came about by some polite dignity. It is past silly to ask others to take a path that no one else had to.
so when the next university president is in office and students are still racist, then what?
It isn’t that the students are racist, but that the President tolerates a racist culture. No one eliminates racism, but you can certainly not tolerate it as the price of doing business.
Ooh, I love this BS argument of this not stopping racism. Let’s expand that, shall we? Raising the minimum wage won’t end poverty, so let’s not do it. The willful ignorance surrounding this topic (and others like it) is quite revealing.
Raising the minimum wage would put many millions of dollars in hundreds of thousands of pockets.
Forcing the Missouri president to resign will…?
@Cassandra: It’s not “my” article. It was sent to me by someone who agrees with you, trying to explain to me why I don’t get it.
I thought the idea that there’s a paradigm shift that’s happening right now was spot on, and it does explain why I — and lots of others — don’t get it.
@JM: Damn straight. We didn’t know a thing about this unless and until football revenue was threatened.
This piece by a journalism prof indicates racist incidents of the sort described by the student body president are disgustingly common on this campus:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cynthia-frisby/my-experiences-racism-at-the-university-of-missouri_b_8512166.html
Forcing the Missouri president to resign says that inaction on this issue will be addressed. Do you really think that the University of Missouri won’t take this incident into consideration when hiring a new president?
Protesting is a fundamental part of this country, and yet, when it comes to social issues, we’re always told we’re doing it wrong. What the hell do you guys want people dealing with this stuff to do? Flip cars, burn buildings? Oh no, that’s doing it wrong, too. Boycott? March? Hunger strike? Nope, not that either. It’s all useless. Keep the status quo? Sit down, shut up and wait for the powers that be to do the right thing? That’s beginning to look like the right answer.
When a Penn State coach molested boys over more than a decade with what appears to have been the knowledge (or willful lack of same by many people in moderate to high places), thousands of people said the penalties (which are all gone now) were too tough.
When UNC has just hired Margaret Spelling, who has refused to say (publicly, on three occasions) whether she will enforce UNC’s existing policy of non-discrimination based on sexual orientation, I hear a lot of people saying it is a ridiculous question rather than demanding she answer.
The situation at Missouri is complex because it is about (at least) three different but interrelated issues:
(1) that University Presidents cannot refuse to be personally responsible for what occurs on their watch and how they deal with it, and that this applies even to the current run of “outsider” presidents who claim it as a virtue that they’ve never been connected with academia before;
(2) that many people are refusing to accept business as usual with respect to racism or sexism or LGBT prejudice–they are going to confront it and act against it. Sometimes they are going over-react, or even fight what you think are the wrong battles, but the message is pretty simple–they are no longer going to accept your authority to constrain their reactions. (And I think that’s a good thing.)
(3) and on college campuses the President sets the tone for the entire administration. If these events are occurring with regularity it is in fact because the President and his senior staff have not considered them important enough to address. It really is that simple: what the President believes is important gets done, what he doesn’t is ignored. If there are ongoing racial incidents on this campus, I can guarantee you (based on three decades of working in public universities) that nobody in the administration made them a priority until the news broke nationally.
The idea that this man tolerated a racist culture is not supported by evidence. Here’s the time line of all the incidents & protests & responses & etc. I encourage you to review it:
http://www.themaneater.com/special-sections/mu-fall-2015/
I count three racial incidents. Did I miss any?
We have the truckload of rednecks yelling slurs
We have the drunk bro yelling slurs at protesters
We have the shit swastikas in the shower
Everything else is cuts in grad student & health services benefits, ham handed responses to protests, equivocating type language, etc.
If you believe the president of a university has some sort of administrative control over or responsibility for some racist pigs in a pickup truck, I can’t help you sort this out. You’re on your own.
The episodes are indeed hateful & ugly. For the record, again, I have no problem protesting these issues (not just the racial ones either, all of them), but the mania & feeding frenzy & hysteria around this place specifically & this man in particular is broadline embarrassing. Like this really gets to the root of some real issue. In the grander scheme it’s a joke because the real problem escapes absolutely unscathed.
DG you have me at one disadvantage and I need to be quite clear about it because it makes my position effectively weaker in this forum. I have seen the AAUP report on conditions and incidents at Missouri over the past year, and the faculty concerns on far more than three occasions that the university administration did not consider them significant. Quite simply, however, while that report informs my thinking on the subject, I have seen it under terms that do not allow me to quote it directly or link to it. I find it convincing, but I cannot expect you to do so since you have not seen it.
And this, DG, is where we differ: If you believe the president of a university has some sort of administrative control over or responsibility for some racist pigs in a pickup truck, I can’t help you sort this out.
Actually, he has a lot of control. He sets the standards for security and policing. He impacts what is acceptable in the community. He is responsible for how the university responds to it. One of the reasons my twins attend the university they attend is because its campus security is rated as among the top 25 in the nation. What happened at Missouri either couldn’t happen there, or there would be a new president within two weeks. Presidents are both accountable for what happens (even when it is effectively beyond their control–Obama and Benghazi?) and even more so for how they respond. He didn’t. Not in any meaningful way. Unlike most people here I’ve spent time working for effective and ineffective university presidents. This guy was ineffective at managing the situation, and that’s the only standard that exists at that level.
And let’s not forget that not all incidents are reported.
And if it isn’t the school’s president’s job to address these situations on his school’s campus, then whose job is it? I’m assuming he’s in the top position for some reason. So who should students/faculty hold accountable?
“We have the shit swastikas in the shower”
I am not taking this particular story at face value. I have no doubt the shit swastikas were real, but how they got there is another question. I’m sure nobody had the stomach to investigate.
Are all the known instances of racism just speech (for example, using racial slurs)?
Edit: Forget about the stomach to investigate a feces swastika. Who has the stomach to make one? Did Hitler touch his upper lip after making his?
Prof Newton – I trust you that the AAUP report paints a more detailed picture. Fair enough. I just have a hard time cheering the torch & pitchfork routine based on some number of “unreported” incidents & some quasi secret report only university professors & administrators are privy to.
Serious question, why don’t you guys believe (or feel is exaggerated) what people say has happened? This is eerily familiar to threads on women issues.
It has nothing to do with believing anybody. When our political opponents go out with the torches & pitchforks and call for someone’s head on a pike we hold them to an extremely high standard. As well we should. When liberal university students pull that move it’s no questions asked. Double standards. It makes us look like the left wing Tea Party (& it landed Jann Wenner in hot water). Someone went on a hunger strike based on quote-microaggressions-unquote.
We’ve lost the plot.
pandora: nobody has said anything has happened except various forms of speech. the speech was odious, but this is a free society (at least for now). if the pitchforks were out for murdering cops, that’s a whole different story. reasonable people can see the difference. if you can’t, expect your side to lose the support of reasonable people.
and by the way, the people who responded to pressure at missouri are not on your side. they’re on the side of money.
Dorian, I am trying to follow you. What exactly would you have these students do to rectify the situation?
Anonymous, how is the student protesting the “odious” speech any less a right than those using “odious” speech? Freedom of speech doesn’t mean freedom from criticism.
“Serious question, why don’t you guys believe (or feel is exaggerated) what people say has happened? This is eerily familiar to threads on women issues.”
Yes, the hunger strike does have eerie similarities with Mattress Girl’s stunt “performance art”, or UVa Jackie’ story, or…. Not that there isn’t a problem overall, but the extreme cases are often dubious. Serious question: Why are these far-out stories given instant credibility in certain quarters? It seems the more outrageous the story is, the more I am supposed to believe it.
“We have the truckload of rednecks yelling slurs
We have the drunk bro yelling slurs at protesters
We have the shit swastikas in the shower”
Have they found the individuals who were responsible for the above incidents?
Were they students?
Where did yelling occur?
Is it a police issue or truly a University issue?
Let me reiterate tnat my skepticism is aimed at the swastika incident. I don’t doubt that there is racism in the South or its institutions, which I am sure the next comment will accuse me of.
the 8:12 anonymous is not the one who has been posting, but he/she points out the only things we know happened. plus the president’s refusal to get out of the car to confront protesters, which seems to have hurt their feelings.
pandora: the students were over-reacting, calling for firings (more than words) over matters far less serious than cops murdering blacks. has the “boy who cried wolf” story been banned by the pc police?
now students are banning the media from covering the situation. i prefer a messy free society to a totalitarian one with a carefully structured image of itself that can’t be questioned.
I said I have no issue with the protests. However, I think demanding the president’s resignation is dumb and solves nothing. Hence celebrating it is also silly. The protesters demands were misdirected and hysterical relative to the issues I am aware of. I named the three unquestionably racist episodes that are 100% public. How does this guy’s dismissal address any of those? More diversity training and respect for “safe spaces” (whatever those are)…
This is a university campus phenomenon that has very little resonance to the outside world.
There have been incidents on this campus – some reported, some not. The minority community and many of the faculty at this school are in agreement of this. They say it’s become a big problem and needs to be addressed, but, for some reason, that isn’t enough. And don’t think I haven’t noticed, yet again, how no one is answering my questions. Here they are:
1. Forcing the Missouri president to resign says that inaction on this issue will be addressed. Do you really think that the University of Missouri won’t take this incident into consideration when hiring a new president?
2. And if it isn’t the school’s president’s job to address these situations on his school’s campus, then whose job is it? I’m assuming he’s in the top position for some reason. So who should students/faculty hold accountable?
3. Protesting is a fundamental part of this country, and yet, when it comes to social issues, we’re always told we’re doing it wrong. What the hell do you guys want people dealing with this stuff to do? AND What exactly would you have these students do to rectify the situation?
Please answer the questions.
And the idea that these kids (belonging to minority groups) don’t understand the “real” world is laughable. They know the “real” world because they’ve lived in it their entire life, unlike most of the people criticizing them… unless people believe racism, sexism and bigotry only touched these kids lives when they entered college. Yep, I’d say they know the “real” world far better than the rest of us.
Perhaps somebody could go out today and protest this:
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/15pdf/14-1143_f20h.pdf
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/sotomayor-supreme-court-cop-violence_563cee79e4b0307f2cad466a
Maybe demand some of the justices resign?
Like Geezer and I wrote yesterday, if you really believe the things you wrote than congratulations, you did it! Who am I to ruin the victory parade. I’m sure the next Mizzou president will clean all that right up. And even the “unreported incidents” too…
Hmm… you didn’t answer my questions.
Also, one of the strongest arguments to vote for a Dem in the Presidential is to change the Supreme Court (or at least stop it from becoming more conservative) – a for life position. But I’m fine with calling for them to resign. But the Court isn’t set up that way, for good and bad reasons. But if your point is that there are more “important” things to worry about, we get that you feel that way. Which is fine. I just don’t understand why we can’t focus on more than one thing at a time.
Let me come back and clear something up. I’m happy the students did what they did. They created a scene and stirred the shit that’s good. I really don’t care that the uni president took the brunt of it either. Seems like he was an insensitive “hatchet-man” (as mentioned).
My beef is that all the good liberals all over the country are suppose to dance and celebrate over this. I’m not. For all the reasons I said. I don’t think it means anything in the grand scheme and I absolutely don’t think uni students know anything much about the society and broader culture off campus. I think pretending they do is very, very dangerous.
Who is saying that you have to dance and celebrate? Let me get this straight. A group of students had a problem. They addressed the problem and set a goal. They achieved their stated goal (with a major assist from the football team – which I think is a great thing. It’s awesome that the football team recognized and used their power. I hope this becomes a trend) and now they shouldn’t be happy and celebrate? Are they doing this wrong, too?
You still haven’t answered my questions. (Altho, I’ve noticed that you’re the only one still commenting. Thanks for that.)
And are you really saying that you know more about society and the broader culture than minorities? That you know more about the issues minorities face, or will face?
Do you really think that the University of Missouri won’t take this incident into consideration when hiring a new president?
Yes, but they might hire someone for the wrong reason to be PC. That would not be good for the University.
And if it isn’t the school’s president’s job to address these situations on his school’s campus, then whose job is it? I’m assuming he’s in the top position for some reason. So who should students/faculty hold accountable?
There is a hierarchy or chain of command within any organization. Did they take those steps?
What the hell do you guys want people dealing with this stuff to do? AND What exactly would you have these students do to rectify the situation?
Again, let’s look at the University of DE as an example: did the racial slur occur or Main Street? Then it would be a Police matter, if on Campus, then again it would be a U of DE Police matter.
The person that did a swastika on the bathroom wall, how many non-students has access to that bathroom. There are a number of questions not answered.
I have no problem with what the students did, and as I expected this was something that was brewing for a lot longer than the past two months. Or, if you prefer, they did what they were supposed to do.
Like DG, I don’t think this will change the atmosphere there as much as you might hope, and I don’t see why people who knew nothing beyond the initial headline reacted as if they won a victory. You’re confusing a mile marker with the finish line.
@anonymous: The answers to your questions are readily available online.
No, I’m not confusing a mile marker with a finish line. That’s what you, Dorian and Anonymous are doing. I haven’t made any of the claims you’re attributing to me. I haven’t claimed this would end racism or automatically change the atmosphere. These are your guys claims, not mine.
Then what’s the disagreement? Over whether this is a big deal or not? Wolfe sounds like a guy who should never have gotten the job, but I think it’s ironic if he loses it mainly because he’s tone-deaf.
If you think it’s a triumph for student protesters, wake up. This succeeded because the football team got involved.
The winners here are student-athletes all over the country, who should now realize how much power they have despite their peonage. And frankly, I’m a lot more interested in and invested in ending the American educational-athletic-industrial complex than in stopping the use of the N-word in Columbia, Mo.
Do you even read what I write? I pointed out the impact the football team had.
And stating your goal, getting other people (ahem, football players) to agree and fight with you and then succeed is a triumph. I’m not the one saying, “OMG! This changes everything!” It’s you guys that are saying, “This won’t end racism.” You guys set up this strawman, not me.
Yet all I did was point out that it won’t end racism, in what I intended as a sardonic way. I’m not defending Wolfe’s racism or his non-reaction to it, or criticizing the students, who were smart to get the football team involved.
My point about the celebration is more about the liberal blogosphere in general, not you in particular.
@G “Yet all I did was point out that it won’t end racism,…”
And firing Michael Brown ( “Brownie, you’re doing a heck of a job” ) did not end natural disasters, but it was still the thing to do.
Take a look at this article.
Diminishing the problems facing today’s younger generation by making fun of them, or reducing their concerns to Halloween costumes and trigger warnings is straight out of the Conservative playbook… you know, slut pills, young bucks buying steaks on food stamps, selling baby parts.
A few weeks ago someone said to me, “The hardest part is offering a solution to a problem.” I said, “No, the hardest part is getting people to admit there is a problem.” See, if people don’t admit there’s a problem (or that the problem is silly or unimportant) then they don’t have to give up behavior they are quite comfortable with.
I agree that we may be seeing the birth of a generational politics and praxis that is not at all deferential to the existing political order. And I think that’s what so grates on a lot of people.
Personally, I like it.
Me too. Every generation has to stretch its wings like this to learn its power. This one will learn the limits of that power in due time.
But again, all I offered was a single smart-ass comment. This outburst of defensiveness says a lot more about pandora and the other the hand-wringers than it does about me.
“Diminishing the problems facing today’s younger generation by making fun of them, or reducing their concerns to Halloween costumes and trigger warnings is straight out of the Conservative playbook”
Bullshit. You make fun of and reduce the concerns of those with whom you disagree all the time; we all do, regardless of political bent. Trigger warnings on a college campus deserve our contempt, whether you think they do or not.
@LE: More to the point, firing Mike Brown did not return the poor of New Orleans to their former homes. It was still the right thing to do, and yet, those people still don’t live in New Orleans and most never will again.
I have to agree on with Geezer on the Mike Brown comment; while it was the right thing to do, it also convinced way too many people that the problem had thereby been solved.
Some day watch the movie “The Axe in the Attic” to get a good picture of how badly the problem was never solved.
@Steve: Your point about generational politics was, I think, the point of that article I linked to. Just as the honor code-oriented conservatives can’t process the dignity-centered viewpoint of older liberals, some of us older liberals are having a hard time processing the new morality.
the anonymous at 10:21 is, again, not the first anonymous (no offense intended to that one). i know nobody cares but me, but i’m kind of an order muppet. i should use a real (screen) name, but i’m afraid pandora will try to send me to re-education camp.
i don’t know how to link, either. but if i did i’d send you to conor friedersdorf’s “the new intolerance of student activism” at atlantic.com.
The other Anonymous with a capital “A”
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/11/the-new-intolerance-of-student-activism-at-yale/414810/
See, I don’t agree with these guys at all. Here’s a good article from The Nation on some takeaways from the whole affair:
http://www.thenation.com/article/3-lessons-from-university-of-missouri-president-tim-wolfes-resignation/
The linked Atlantic article includes this priceless quote:
–This beggars belief. Yale students told to talk to each other if they find a peer’s costume offensive helplessly declare that they’re unable to do so without an authority figure specifying “any modes or means to facilitate these discussions,” as if they’re Martians unfamiliar with a concept as rudimentary as disagreeing in conversation, even as they publish an open letter that is, itself, a mode of facilitating discussion.–
This is a perfect illustration of the morality shift my earlier linked article discusses. As that article notes, the new morality depends on the intervention of a powerful third party — and there the Yalie student does just that.
It’s just a ploy to dis-empower white men. I heard so on talk radio
All D’s on the school board – appointed by a D Governor…
Tells us something..
Man is the Misery thing funny. Missouri is run by Liberal Democrats and the University Board is run by liberal Democrats appointed by a liberal democrate Governor. Not a Republican in the whole story.
These students brought a large powerful public institution to its shameful knees in front of the entire country. There was no compromise suggested only resignation. Empty victory indeed!!! It is interesting to note that Missouri was 7.5% African American and the U of Del is the same 5% that it was 5 years ago. The search committee for the new president might want to call Missouri’s resigned President.He would appear to fit right into the white out of state philosophy that the u of del has been moving toward
The tally:
1. Loss of leadership at the university.
2. No consensus on process for replacing the leadership, which will beget…
3. a protracted and contentious search for new leadership.
4. Disrupted campus and classes impacting people’s education, perhaps causing…
5. financial impacts to the students or their parents.
6. Dissension and strife on the campus resulting in…
7. loss of potential new students (anybody want to send their child there now?).
8. No clear path or vision to resolving ameliorating the causes of the strife.
In short, a pyrrhic victory at best.
In systems theory we are taught that if change is to be successful, first we must fully understand the system and it’s complexities before we start making changes. We are also taught that we need to comprehend the specific desired outcomes to ensure that the changes we make will result in those outcomes.
Macbeth:
…a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more: it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.
(“told by an idiot” is spoken by Macbeth and should not be construed as a disparaging remark by me towards any person or groups)
I don’t believe there is a single liberal Democrat in the entire state of Missouri. If there is, he or she has hidden it well. They are Dixiecrats, not Democrats.
…and now they don’t want the press.
To take Dave’s points seriatem:
The tally:
1. Loss of leadership at the university.
There remains a Board, a Provost, a Chief Financial Officer; evidence suggests that there had been very little leadership by this President over his tenure.
2. No consensus on process for replacing the leadership, which will beget…
The process is established in existing regulations; the question is whether Missouri will expand stakeholder input or not. If the Board is listening, they will.
3. a protracted and contentious search for new leadership.
Roughly 25% of all major university presidents across the nation either resign over a controversy or are booted by their Boards. That’s the new normal, and you can thank corporate revolving-door CEOs for that. It should be a protracted search, and whether or not it is contentious is up to the people handling it. If you look around the country–say Margaret Spellings’ appointment at UNC–protracted and contentious is the name of the game these days.
4. Disrupted campus and classes impacting people’s education, perhaps causing…
Other than the walk-outs and protests lasting roughly one week, the evidence suggests that the failure to address the racial climate was far more disruptive over the long term. Other than this week, I doubt you will find a disruption of classes or a serious impact on anybody’s education. Having worked at a university that went through three successive searches to find a president over an 18-month period, I can tell you that nobody failed to get their degree, no classes got canceled; the impacts were strategic rather than ongoing daily operational.
5. financial impacts to the students or their parents.
Highly unlikely; I doubt that at Missouri you will be able to find a dozen students whose graduation time was impacted by this in the slightest. I suspect that in most of those cases it will be a useful fiction to cover up other issues going on with the student.
6. Dissension and strife on the campus resulting in…
Really? Universities used to pride themselves on dissension, and other than one incident with an idiot Mass Comm professor I’m looking hard for strife. Unless the dissension and strife you want to avoid is people complaining about racism.
7. loss of potential new students (anybody want to send their child there now?).
Not likely. Mizzou is a well entrenched institution that turns away thousands of qualified applicants each year. I notice that the Joe Paterno mess didn’t stop people from applying to PSU.
8. No clear path or vision to resolving ameliorating the causes of the strife.
There wasn’t one before, and the President showed no signs of developing one in the near future. Status quo ante and status quo post seem the same in this regard. The difference is that any presidential candidates coming in will actually have to arrive with a plan, or at least a concept of a plan as the price of getting the post.
The reality here is that your arguments for a pyrrhic victory are overblown and not justified by the track record of what has happened in other places of similar size and circumstance.
dave your model of social change is at best naive. I have always been of the mind that most social change is the consequence of social conflict which in many cases occurs violently and unplanned or at least unstructured. Conflict necessary to effect significant social change takes time, produces many unintended consequences.and by definition a great deal of disruption, dislocation and unintended consequences that result in dissatisfaction and unhappiness usually for long periods of time. Your inventory of what you deem negative outcomes at the univ of Missouri presumes a level of control and rationality that rarely occurs in these situations and gives short shrift to what I hope will result in cleansing racist values and actions in Missouri and hopefully provide a spark to ignite changes and reforms to other racially backward and recalcitrant universities around the country.With respect to your macbeth quote, whether it be in the context of shakespeare or the NFL there is no hope for stopping unwarranted victory dances
@Dave “In short, a pyrrhic victory at best.”
Hardly. Read this and understand something important…
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/opinion-la/la-ol-would-university-of-missouri-students-protest-jewish-20151110-story.html
…that things will finally be right when this is how communities deal with all overt racism.
“that things will finally be right when this is how communities deal with all overt racism.”
I have no argument with opinion in the article. However, you articulated a desired change or outcome (how communities deal with overt racism). The question is, will the events (i.e. Wolfe’s resignation) lead to that outcome? If you are certain the answer is yes then the action is a beneficial change. My opinion is that the best one can say is that it lays bare the problem. Which is beneficial but it’s not an outcome. To declare victory is ignoring the fact that nothing has changed. It’s sort of like saying “yippee we won” and then have someone rain on your parade by asking “Really? What did you win?” Communities do not routinely deal with overt racism in that manner and that method of dealing with it is not even necessarily useful or appropriate for some communities (e.g. elementary schools).
Declaring victory over the ouster of a university president is fine if that was your desired change.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9IEFD_JVYd0
It’s getting really ugly out there.
No, Anonymous, it’s not, but we all notice where your concern lies. And if you think one person proves your point, then be prepared to be held to that standard. You are a prime example.
Here’s my question… what exactly do people want these college kids to do to address this situation? Not kidding. How should they be handling racism on campus?
these yalies are not exactly being targeted by the kkk. instead of whining to “mom and dad” on campus about a few halloween costumes why not go about getting the ivy league diploma that will let them join the other masters of the universe.
the stuff at missouri is more complicated. the yale stuff is bullshit.
So your standard is the KKK. Got it. Not surprised.
(And that wasn’t what they were arguing about.)
the missouri students are reacting to real things, even if they’re over-reacting in a way that might cost them allies (people who still believe in a free press, for instance). the yale students are reacting mainly to their own sense of self-importance.
Really? Remind me who sent out the letter at Yale? Hint: It wasn’t the students.
And you think these kids are overreacting? Guess that’s the last word. You are the arbiter of what’s important to people.
I’m listening to the radio right now and the host just summed this up as these kids saying, “Hep me, hep me.” An interesting take on Help me, no?
The truth is, most people claiming these kids are “overreacting” are white males who have never had to deal with this crap. Of course it’s silly to them. It’s never impacted them.
If these kids make you guys uncomfortable… Good.
And I do not want you on my side.
well, pandora, i’m not on your side. i’m a liberal who opposes fascism. you guys on the very far left will find yourselves way out on your own tiny island.
and i think your spelling of overreacting is the correct one.
LOL! Given your comment history, you are not a liberal.
And yet, here we are, with no one offering up another way for racism on campus to be addressed. It’s just more of, “You’re doing it wrong!”
So, please, tell me the “right” way for students to address these situations. I’m all ears.
pandora: a liberal believes in free speech, discussion of ideas, tolerance and rationality. don’t see much of that in your views.
If you think the letter sent out at Yale was offensive, you are part of the problem.
If you’re that over-sensitive, I suggest retreating to a safe space.
Ooh, someone isn’t a liberal! What a cutting insult!
If you insist on making white men the enemy, fine. No problem here. In fact, fuck you.
Oh my. Are you guys upset over a micro-aggression? Calling out specific groups is “keeping it real” until your group is called out?
FYI: I’ve been deliberately calling out white men to show you guys how it (sorta, not really) feels. It doesn’t feel so great, does it?
And if we reacted in the way of which you approve, we’d run to the site administration to complain about harassment.
Read that article I posted several days again over again, and see if you understand it this time.
Pandora:.
First of all, the young women in the video needs to take a heart pill. If she uses that language and attitude in the business world, she is going to be shown the door real fast.
Secondly, your always pointing fingers. Answer your own questions:
“What exactly do people want these college kids to do to address this situation? Not kidding. How should they be handling racism on campus?”
Pandora has answered that question…. She approves how how they handled it, you do not. so what is YOUR solution a-nony-nony?
Since I had some free time, I read both the letter from the Intercultural Affairs Committee and the response email sent by Ms. Christakis, the associate master (whatever position that is).
I thought the letter by the committee was a thoughtful expression and reminder to the students to be sensitive and empathetic towards the diverse student population. I also thought that Ms. Christakis’ email posed interesting questions that were appropriate in an environment where critical thinking should be the penultimate core value.
Unfortunately, (in my opinion) it appears that the intended audience for both missives were children, who have yet to acquire the knowledge, skills, and abilities that would trigger thought provoking and meaningful discussion about boundaries, sensitivity and empathy. Instead they acted..well like the children they are. The committee and Ms. Christakis erred in treating them as adults and expecting adult behavior.
Although there is no exact age, there is scientific consensus that critical parts of the brain involved in decision-making are not fully developed until at least age 25, and possibly until the 30s. We often forget that. And obviously, children are pretty adamant about not accepting the science in the belief that they know just about everything worth knowing.
Perhaps in a few days they will recognize the reason they are in school is that they don’t know everything. Question everything. Challenge people. But do it in a manner that celebrates what they wish to become, not what they are. Their intolerance is not becoming in the least.
Ben:
Let Pandora answer it herself.
From Bill Maher, this is what we don’t need!!
“So, on the political front, Ben Carson now the absolute frontrunner and getting the scrutiny that the frontrunner gets. And the more we find out how crazy he is, the more the base loves this guy. They love their black friend. Sarah Palin said, “Liberals just don’t get it. Real Americans have always loved Ben ever since his face was on the box of rice.” – See more at: http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/brad-wilmouth/2015/11/08/maher-hits-carson-uncle-bens-white-addicts-trump-gopers-cheat-lot#sthash.BRkXAJF8.dpuf
Ben is correct. I have made my position clear. I am fine with the protests. They are as American as apple pie. (If you aren’t familiar with some of our past violent protests I’m sure Professor Newton can enlighten you.) Not much has changed in this country without protest or rebellion. Unless, we think that things like civil rights, voting rights, etc. would have happened without marches, protests, etc.? I’m sure those in charge at the time were working on those issues and the people speaking out and protesting didn’t impact change, right?
I didn’t write a post on the Yale incident – altho it seems like there are problems on that campus that extend beyond those emails. Many times the thing that sets things off is simply the tipping point.
And the idea that you can simply approach someone and point out their racism/bad behavior is/can be risky. Have you attended a Red Clay board meeting about the Conrad mascot? There was a guy who spoke during the public comment session. He was in favor of changing the name. He was yelled at by the crowd as he spoke, called a liar, and told to go to hell. He also received a police escort to his car and when he asked why he was told it was for his safety. So I’m not sure approaching a stranger to tell them why they’re being offensive is wise.
All that being said, the question still remains. How should have the UM students addressed the situation?
pandora: by “situation,” do you mean they do not want any racist comment ever uttered again in the whole world, now and forever? goals should be realistic. rational, you might say. naivete might be a condition of youth, but a college education is designed to get them past that. adults who cater to this naiveté are not helping them in the long run. it’s unseemly.
Of course I don’t mean that. I’m not the one on this thread who has claimed that. Can we please stop with the strawman arguments?
I’ll just place this passage here:
mlk had bigger fish to fry than micro-aggressions against overly sensitive students. you trivialize the achievements of civil rights workers who had more serious battles to fight. any reasonable person would have supported what dr. king wanted.
This is how you take care of business:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2015/11/11/some-at-u-of-missouri-on-edge-after-social-media-threats-of-violence/75559034/
The threats were reported, they were investigated, and arrests were made.
puck: that works. actual threats of violence, against the law, arrest that sucker. this is good.
Let the cops handle it after a threat is made/ violence is done? something tells me there will be people who arent too trilled about that approach.
Yes, the racists will HATE that approach.
I’ve never understood why universities have so much latitude regarding crimes. I told my children that if the witness a crime or are a victim to call the police not their RA or the reigning provost that runs student tribunals who treat such things as violations of the honor code or something for which the perpetrator is subject to tongue lashing on the student quad.
You know what we used to call micro-aggressions?
Slights. As in, “an insult caused by a failure to show someone proper respect or attention.”
I think the old word is more accurate.
http://www.ijreview.com/2015/11/469710-the-future-of-american-education-in-one-disturbing-video-that-shows-what-is-happening-to-our-kids/?author=kb&utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=owned&utm_campaign=education&utm_term=ijamerica