On Race at Cornell, Dodging the Bullet

By Tia Hicks and Zachary Murray

The discussion has shifted and now we’re talking about “intellectual diversity.” We’re talking about providing “robust discussion” instead of preventing bigotry; we’re talking about the politics of diversity instead of outlining concrete efforts to achieve diversity and equality; we’re talking about how the University can protect itself from being criticized instead of responding to groups that alienate and denigrate.

The issues that minority students face at Cornell transcend the racism of articles by The Cornell Review, whether people have the right of free speech and expression, and the feelings of conservatives that they have no voice on this campus.

In broader society, conservatives dominate the political discourse in all arenas from abortion to gay marriage to national security. So for Rachel Quigley in her article (“Bleeding Hearts, Closed Minds?” Opinion, Sept. 26) to equate the experiences of historically oppressed groups with the experience of conservatives at Cornell University is ridiculous and offensive. The issue is not what political ideology has a dominant voice on campus. Racism is not a political ideology. The issue here is racism and Cornell’s desire to evade it.

President Skorton’s article (Opinion, Sept. 29) is a perfect example of Cornell dodging the bullet. Skorton never once makes mention of racism or inequality, instead framing the issue as one of “offensive speech.” With that stated, let’s bring the conversation back:

• The population of African Americans has declined from 6 percent in the class of 2010 to 4 percent in the class of 2012. However, blacks represent 12 percent of the national population and 16 percent of the population of New York State.

• The Office of Minority Educational Affairs is expected to adhere to the needs of all minority students but continues to operate on a limited budget and staff.

• Program houses are continuously attacked as dorms that promote “self-segregation” yet the administration fails to come to their defense.

• Asian students have been fighting to establish an Asian Community Center, yet the administration has slowed down the process.

• Diversity in faculty and staff at Cornell remains static.

• Programs of public service that benefit minority communities (i.e. Cornell Urban Mentoring Initiative) are on the chopping block.

These are just some of the bullets that the University continues to dodge. These bullets are the manifestations of racism on campus.

The Sun, in its editorial “Scene of the Crime,” (Opinion, Sept. 24) states: “Americans take every available opportunity to engage in open conversation about race, and about why we continue to feel the underlying discord that we do.” Well what conversations are you talking about? Oh, you must mean the one where we discuss Barack Obama as a viable black candidate. Or maybe you were talking about the discussion surrounding the fact that there were two black coaches competing against each other in the Super Bowl two years ago. Too bad there was never a conversation about the viability of the 43 other presidents as white candidates or of the significance of white coaches competing for the prior 41 years. In this country, the discussion of race is always in the context of people of color but never in the context of whites. If The Sun is correct, then the issues outlined above should not exist.

The problem with Americans is that we talk about race. We do not engage in conversations about racism. In fact, we avoid it altogether. We do not like to talk about how this country enslaved people for 350 years, and treated those same people as second-class citizens for another 100 years. We do not like to talk about why the prison population is 50 percent African American and why black students only make up 5 percent of the population at Cornell. And we certainly do not like to talk about why white people enjoy privileges because of the racist foundation of this country. Talking about these issues makes people feel uncomfortable or guilty.

And if we do talk about these issues, the blame is placed on the victim; it’s not institutionalized racism that is at fault for more black men being in jail then in college, it’s the fault of black men themselves. They didn’t work hard enough. They’re too lazy, and violent.

Well, these arguments leave out 95.5 percent of the problem: racism. Racism in this country is viewed as being rooted in individuals, not institutions like Cornell. Racism in this country is viewed as something in the past and not something in the present. There is no acknowledgement of it and in many ways the University perpetuates it by belittling the issue to a matter of “freedom of speech.”

President Skorton, consider your privilege. As a white male, you have the privilege of determining what is racist or what is simply “offensive speech”. By labeling it as such, you downplay the racism in these hurtful caricatures. We have spoken to individuals who have left Cornell because "it was intolerably racist." This “offensive speech” has actually driven people away from Cornell. Minorities leaving is the most severe instance of “denying entities free expression." If this does not amount to silencing voices, we don't know what does. Clearly, racism as a perspective and its proponents should not be welcome on this campus.

Tia Hicks and Zachary Murray are sophomores in the College of Architecture, Art and Planning. They are the campus liaisons for Black Students United. Guest Room appears periodically. Send questions, comments, letters and responses to opinion@cornellsun.com [1].

Hicks and Murray can be contacted at tmh76@cornell.edu [2] and zxm2@cornell.edu