- EphBlog - http://ephblog.com -

CARE Now Activist Says “I Want Anger.” 1 of 5

CARE Now activists at Williams College have participated in the heart-warming chant: “I love you, I love me, I love us, I love we.” They may need to change it after two of them unloaded their vile hatred on an unsuspecting group of white liberal students. Williams College president, Maud Mandel, may soon hear a new, more accurate chant: “I hate you, I hate me, I hate us, I hate we.”

To better understand the dysfunctional culture of Williams College, I thought it would helpful to review a transcript of the anti-white rant delivered by two prominent black student leaders at the April 9, 2019 College Council meeting. The title of this series refers to a comment made by a student activist who responds to the tears of the victims by saying, “Don’t look at us with tears. I don’t want that. I want anger.”

Alarmingly, one of these students serves on a college search committee for the next Director of Dining Services.

Although the details of this controversial video have so far eluded The Williams Record, they have been reported on and discussed at a number of on-line sites including  Anonymous Political Scientist, Big League Politics, Campus WatchEphblog, Free RepublicInstapundit, Legal InsurrectionTea Party and the national-level, student-reported The College Fix.

The Williams College Council attempted to suppress access to this disturbing video by taking it off of their Facebook page. Thankfully, alert students preserved a copy and posted it on YouTube. I have adjusted the start of this video so that it aligns with the transcript presented below. I’ll add in my commentary, as appropriate, over the course of the next five days.

I’ll start by saying that the female black activist creeps me out with her controlling, manipulative behavior. When I taught at Williams one of my area of focus was child abuse and neglect. I’m hypersensitive to verbal abuse. In the following exchange, SO calls the white students d***heads. Under normal circumstances, I would think one of the co-presidents should have warned her about her inappropriate language. If she persisted, they should have asked the sergeant-at-arms to escort her out of the meeting. Instead, the co-presidents allow her to verbally abuse the white students.

Start – 50:28

SO: And that’s valid too. Like, if you want to talk, you can talk. But seems like you’all…you…you had a lot to say. So where is it now?

WH: Thank you, guys. You should have gotten your money. You got money. Then I’m very happy if you got your money.

IB: Wow. Wow. That’s crazy.

SO: Say it to me.

Student Representative: I’m sorry this is so hard for you guys. I was just at the end. You know. (PAUSE) I don’t know what to say.

At this point, I can only assume that some of the white students in the room were tearing up as a consequence of the abusive language coming from IB and SO. The speakers apparently notice the tears and use the white student’s display of emotion to further their humiliation.

SO: This is white liberal s***.

IB: This is the s***, the tears…

SO: Because nobody wants to talk. Because you had a lot of questions. You had a lot of questions. And I’ve had classes with you. I know what kind of d***heads you are. I’ve had political science with you. It’s s*** that opens up all a yo white moderate f***ing liberal bullshit. I know the type of person you are. So what do you want to say?

WH: I haven’t taken a poly sci class here.

SO: I wasn’t talking to you.

WH: I’m sorry.

I like the way the white student, WH, pushes back on SO for making an inaccurate generalization. Her d***head comment is consistent with the suggestion that CARE Now activists are attempting rule Williams College through fear and intimidation. It will be interesting to see how, if at all, the Dean of the College or the Honor Committee take action to discipline these students. Even a modest sanction might improve what Maud Mandel has identified as a culture of open antagonism. At the very least, I don’t think either of these students should have a role in the hiring process at the school.

Facebooktwitter
12 Comments (Open | Close)

12 Comments To "CARE Now Activist Says “I Want Anger.” 1 of 5"

#1 Comment By JCDTranslator On April 27, 2019 @ 2:06 pm

Free speech is good but only until Black people speak in a way that I don’t like. Then we should sanction the students for acting uppity and ungrateful.

#2 Comment By John Drew On April 27, 2019 @ 2:37 pm

Really?

One of those students sits on the search committee for the next director of dining services.

How would you like to be a white applicant for that job?

At the very least, I think we can all agree that this student should be dismissed from the search committee.

#3 Comment By JCDTranslator On April 27, 2019 @ 3:30 pm

Yes I agree, let’s dismiss students from committee positions for saying things we don’t like. Free speech is good until I feel scandalized. Indeed, only speech I like should go unpunished. Unlike race realism, this is drivel. No doubt that all the applicants for dining services will feel attacked, given their presence in all CC meetings.

#4 Comment By John Drew On April 27, 2019 @ 3:48 pm

It seems likely to me that white job applicants, at the very least, will see a potential for reverse discrimination in the hiring process.

By the way, the video of the student rant is all over the internet now. The full length video has almost 10,000 views.

I would think that leaving this student on a search committee might also call into question the fairness of the hiring process for other positions too.

#5 Comment By JCDTranslator On April 27, 2019 @ 4:01 pm

So yes, we should take actions against students who say things we don’t like because the speech might make people afraid and uncomfortable. The grift is showing.

#6 Comment By John Drew On April 27, 2019 @ 4:17 pm

The video is powerful evidence of black racism, at least if we define racism as hatred for people of a particular race.

I can’t believe any serious person would think that these two students would be perceived as fair interviewers or resume readers by white job applicants for the Director of Dining Services position.

The language above is actually quite tame in relation to the language that follows later on.

#7 Comment By JCDTranslator On April 27, 2019 @ 4:27 pm

If only your bar for “black racism” was applied to anything else you spout on about.

#8 Comment By John Drew On April 27, 2019 @ 5:29 pm

I checked out the school’s code of conduct rules. The rant in the video looks like it meets the requirements for social misconduct in the category of harassment.

Any verbal, physical, or written act, directed at an individual, that might reasonably be construed to intimidate, coerce, or create a hostile environment for the individual and, in turn, prevent them from receiving the educational benefits of the college. Rude or impolite behavior or speech—whether inside or outside the classroom—is not necessarily in itself a violation.

The fact that a number of the white students who were verbally abused failed to show up at the next College Council meeting would be evidence, in my view, that the abusers created a “hostile environment.”

According to the code of conduct: “Accepting membership in this community entails an obligation to behave with courtesy to others whose beliefs and behavior differ from one’s own; all members and guests of this community must be free of disturbance or harassment, including racial and sexual harassment.”

#9 Comment By Dal On April 27, 2019 @ 5:39 pm

I’d say that WHAT the activists said in the CC meeting is not the main problem here. Though obviously it does not reflect well on them, their high schools, families, etc.. When you read the transcript, it’s a simple and inarticulate argument, mostly profanity.

The problem is HOW they said it. The mob style shout down filled with religious fervor just does not work in civilized society.

Clearly that’s not the world they’re coming from.

Whoever is teaching these kids that this is how you carry yourself in public interactions is doing them a huge disservice for later life.

Very few professional career avenues are going to be open to the shouting guy in the video.

Except maybe being a prof at Williams in one of the grievance studies.

#10 Comment By David Dudley Field ’25 On April 27, 2019 @ 7:06 pm

JCD: Thanks for taking the time to provide this valuable service. I look forward to reading more.

However, I hope you will be more precise going forward. You describe the CC visitors as “two prominent black student leaders.” I think this is false.

First, one is a first year and one a sophomore. Hard to get prominent so quickly.

Second, I don’t think these folks hold leadership positions in any campus organizations, including BSU and MinCo.

Corrections welcome!

Dal writes:

Whoever is teaching these kids that this is how you carry yourself in public interactions is doing them a huge disservice for later life.

Exactly right! But note what happened to Dean Dave when he tried to educate a different student last year. He lost the role, Dean of First Years, that he had excelled at for decades.

If I were an untenured white faculty member or staff, I would never try to explain to these students why their behavior will result in disaster after Williams. Would you?

Nishant: This was the week of posts you asked for!

#11 Comment By John Drew On April 27, 2019 @ 10:16 pm

DDF: It sort of depends on how you define leadership, doesn’t it?

As far as I can tell, IB is a leader of Coalition Against Racist Education Now (CARE Now). He was one of the organizers of the 200 strong “March for the Damned” on February 21, 2019. He was the speaker at the protest who got the most press attention in the Williams Record.

IB was also part of the effort to create the memorial for Dr. Green and Dr. Love that was determined to be a fire hazard by Keith McPartland, associate professor of philosophy and chair of the Schapiro-Hollander users committee. He is shown in a photo published by the Williams Record as one of the students to “rebuild the memorial in Hollander Hall after the original one was deconstructed by a faculty member.”

“We made this memorial to remind everyone to love your home. Your home is your body,” Blake said. “As we saw last week, Black love is a fire hazard. It’s passion, it’s painful, it scares people, it takes up space, it’s a little too salty, it’s a little too spicy… it’s too loud.”

IB is actually quite famous on campus. As I have mentioned earlier, he is one of the students who sits on the search committee for the Director of Student Dining Services.

There is less information available on SO. During a discussion of free speech conducted by the Society for Conservative Thought, she is one of the students cited by the Williams Record who asks questions regarding the diversity of the speakers. She also gets into a head to head conflict with Prof. Maroja.

The discussion shifted toward the decision by McPartland to dismantle the memorial in Hollander. “Whose free speech do you believe in?” SO asked the panel, highlighting both McPartland’s free speech advocacy and his removal of the memorial.

Maroja responded to the question, stating that “he was acting as the building committee chair,” and told the audience that McPartland was in contact with the fire marshal and security.

The Record has not been able to verify the claim that McPartland contacted the fire marshal prior to his removal of the memorial.

SO disagreed with this assessment, telling Maroja, “That was false because he had not contacted the fire department.” Mohamed further questioned the panel, “Why was it so easy for [McPartland] to rip apart that shrine if he is so for free speech?”

“There [is] a definition of free speech in which you are able to put [up] signs along as it doesn’t disturb things,” Maroja told the audience, “You are not able, under free speech, to stop traffic. You will actually go to jail if you stop traffic to protest something.” Maroja also cited the materials that were posted on McPartland’s door as symbolic of his dedication to freedom of expression. “It’s an unfortunate event,” Maroja said.

“Everything you said was false,” SO told Maroja, citing Maroja’s description of McPartland’s actions. “He did not remove [the memorial]. He destroyed it.”

If you review recent articles about social conflict at Williams College, I think you’ll see that IB and SO are at the heart of it.

#12 Comment By David Dudley Field ’25 On April 27, 2019 @ 10:36 pm

Hmmm. I stand corrected.