This is the proper form used to file Title VI complaints.

Notice of Complainant and Interviewee Rights and Privileges

It looks like the crucial issue is whether or not you’ve been treated differently from other people.

Facebooktwitter
Print  •  Email

A source passed on this complaint (doc):

I am writing to file a complaint against Williams College for discrimination against Jewish students in violation of Title VI and related Department of Education regulations.

My allegations, supported by an account in the Williams College student newspaper, available here, https://williamsrecord.com/2019/05/cc-rejects-williams-initiative-for-israel/ are as follows:

Williams College is an institution of higher education that receives federal funds, and is subject to Title VI.

Williams College has a student government known as the College Council (hereinafter, CC).

As an official arm of the college, actions by the CC are covered by Title VI.

And so on.

1) Any lawyers prepared to opine?

2) Am I correct that Ken Marcus ’88, the Assistant Secretary of Education for Civil Rights, is the official to which this complaint will ultimately flow? If so, is that connection good or bad for Williams?

It might be good in that Ken is well-disposed toward Williams and won’t want to see us embarrassed. If you agree with CC’s decision, it might be bad because Ken is someone who is highly unlikely to be sympathetic to CC.

This complaint might be very good if you are Maud Mandel. You now have the perfect excuse! Just say, “On advice of counsel, and with respect to the Title VI complaint, Williams has decided to remove student organization recognition authority from College Council. All student groups will, henceforth, be recognized, or not, by Williams itself.” Problem solved!

Facebooktwitter
Print  •  Email

Most newly graduating classes at Williams have 30 or 40 class agents. Older classes often have fewer. This is a mistake. Williams would be much more successful in raising money (both in percentage and dollar terms) and in maintaining connections if we encouraged classes to have 100 agents.

First, it is very hard to recruit class agents after graduation. (Ask any Head Class Agent ever.) If you don’t recruit a 100 agents now, you will always, always struggle to have enough volunteers in later years.

Second, although it may seem like 40 agents provide good coverage for your class, that will change dramatically over the next 5 to 10 years. People scatter. Relationships fade.

Third, the biggest problem that class agents face is not in keeping in contact with the 300 or so members of every class that are the most committed to Williams. They are the easy ones! The problem comes with the 200 Ephs who are not, the ones who have a more standoffish relationship with the College, the ones who had a few close friends, rather than a wide network, the ones who never really clicked with a specific professor or class. Those 200 are the ones that you will have difficulty reaching in the years to come. This happens to every class, which is why alumni giving rates are only at 55%, and falling.

The only way to do better than 55%, the only way to get Person X to give if she is otherwise disinclined to give, is to have someone who knows her very well — someone that she is close friends with, someone she doesn’t want to say No to — do the asking.

The solution is to find many more agents now, while you have a chance, especially agents who are a part of small, isolated, social circles. You know those four women who lived together every year and don’t hang out much with other people? Make one of them a class agent now. You know those 6 male hockey players who loved Williams hockey but didn’t participate much in campus life outside their sport? One of them needs to be a class agent.

The beauty of having 100 class agents is that each agent is only responsible for 5 or so people. So, you have the manpower to connect with all sorts of people who, in other classes, don’t give to the College.

Recruiting 100 agents is hard, but identifying them should be easy. You want one from every entry. You want one from every sports team. You want one from every campus organization. (Of course, many agents will fulfill multiple rolls.) Most importantly, you want to identify the 200 people in your class who are least connected to Williams on graduation day. You want to recruit a roommate or close friend of these people now.

Many of these recruits will hesitate. They are busy. They don’t know that many people. So sell them! Point out that you need them to just cover these four or five people, just their best buddies. No need for them to reach out to strangers.

Organizing 100 class agents is hard as well. (And, weirdly, the Alumni Office does not recognize what a great idea this is.) You might try a single head class agent (a one year position), 10 associate agents (who would stay for five years, one of those years as head agent), and 100 or so regular class agents. Each of the 10 associate agents might be responsible for 10 regular agents, but each regular agent would only need to worry about 5 or so classmates.

But the exact organization does not matter much. The key is getting 100 class agents now, while you still can. Older classes should do the same, but the best time to start is senior spring.

Facebooktwitter
Print  •  Email

1. WIFI Discrimination Scandal. The news about the Williams College Council’s decision to deny WIFI’s request for RSO status continues to ignite protests. Ironically, Maud Mandel has become both a hero and a villain in this matter.

Jewish Journal: StandWithUs Calls on Williams College to Formally Recognize Pro-Israel Group

Letter: Academic Engagement Network’s Complains to Maud Mandel

Breitbart: Williams College President Blasts Student Government for Rejecting Pro-Israel Group

The Berkshire Eagle: Mark G. Yudof, Michael Atkins and Miriam F. Elman: Williams must accept pro-Israel student group

The College Fix: Williams College tolerates ‘de facto discrimination’ against pro-Israel student group

Fire: Williams College Council denies recognition to pro-Israel student group

Forward: Williams College Council Votes Against Recognizing Pro-Israel Student Club

Letter: Zionist Organization of America

Campus Reform: Mass. college council rejects pro-Israel student group

The Times of Israel: College president ‘disappointed’ after student council rejects pro-Israel group

Inside Higher Ed: Pro-Israel Student Group ‘Silenced’ at Williams

Hotair: Student Government At Williams College Refused To Recognize A Pro-Israel Group

2. Affinity Housing. Andrew Sullivan chimes in on the April 9 rant and the new segregation movement at Williams. Look for the second segment of this article. Jerry Coyne, a biologist at the University of Chicago, is also maintaining a focus on the antics of Williams.

Andrew Sullivan: The Deeper Risk of Radical Multiculturalism

Jerry Coyne: Black students at Williams College favor self-segregated housing

3. Free Speech. Professor Luana Maroja’s concerns about her ability to teach biology on a woke campus inspire additional comments, again from the prolific Jerry Coyne.

Jerry Coyne: A Williams College professor describes her school’s fight against free speech

4. Fighting Professors.  Katie Kent and Dorothy Wang got into a public dispute about racism. One students was so traumatized that they think about the altercation in the middle of the night.

College Fix: Two professors got in an argument in a hallway. Student activists want the white one fired for ‘violence.’

Jerry Coyne: Williams College melts down in a big way

5. CSS Fights for Redemption. Nancy MacCauley, a black campus safety and security (CSS) officer, pushes back against the CARE Now leaders who are offended when CSS does its job.

Jerry Coyne: Williams College melts down in a big way

Facebooktwitter
Print  •  Email

There is so much going on at Williams that I am losing the ability to follow it all. Apologies to all our readers!

1) The above screen shot is from this flyer (pdf) that went up in Paresky last week. Does anyone have a higher quality version?

2) The College Council minutes (doc) are also filled with interesting material. Pick out your favorite parts and leave them in the comments. Example:

There are a lot of real concerns about equity here given the fact that there are sites like Canary Mission that was not at all mentioned in Lance’s first minute notes. That website was mentioned a variety of times specifically because its a giant website that a current student at Williams is on. Someone reported her due to her Jewish Voices for Peace activism. She is now on there. She can no longer enter the country of Israel because of that. When she is looked up by employers there is a website that says she is anti-semetic even though she is Jewish. It is a tricky situation here when one side of the debate is being attacked and surveilled and being nationally seen in this way.

Indeed, it is much more dangerous, at least from a career-perspective, to voice anti-Isreali positions than anti-Palestinian positions. Why would that be?

3) The WIFI controversy reminded me of this Claiming Williams session:

Unpacking Jewish Identity

This workshop for faculty and staff will provide participants with an opportunity to begin examining their Jewish identity and their Jewish privilege in a supportive environment that focuses on their own experiences. It will be one small step toward increasing effective dialogue about race, practicing allyship, and interrupting racism. Workshop facilitators will guide participants through a process of reflection that includes writing and small-group discussion with the goal of understanding racism in structural terms, and formulating some practical steps for more insightful living.

Does “Jewish privilege” strike readers as nonsense? Williams regularly features discussions of “white privilege.” Indeed, any successful group is, in this day and age, almost certainly benefiting from some sort of privilege.

4) The bad press caused by College Council refusing recognition to WIFI continues:

Scarborough has 2.5 million followers. Has a negative tweet about Williams ever been so broadly broadcast?

By the way, I made up one of the 4 points above. Can you guess which one without looking? And how many years before it turns into a reality?

Facebooktwitter
Print  •  Email

For decades, the College has sought, somewhat unsuccessfully, to mold student character and to improve the campus community. The College would prefer that students drink less (and especially less to excess); that students be more intellectual, spending more time outside of class on great books and less time on Netflix; that students be kinder to each other, especially to those most outside the mainstream of College life; that students be more diverse in their friend groups, less likely to only associate with peers that are “like” them; and that students be more involved in the community, more likely to volunteer at the local elementary school or retirement home. How can the College make its students more sober, intellectual, kind, ecumenical and charitable (than they already are)? Simple: Expand the First Days program into First Month, and focus that month on character development and community commitment.

Shaping character and nurturing community are difficult problems, so we should look for inspiration to those with a track record of success. The most relevant examples are military and religious organizations like the Marine Corps and the Mormon Church. What lessons do they have for us?
(more…)

Facebooktwitter
Print  •  Email

In other news today, Maud Mandel defended the students who sought to establish a new pro-Israel student organization Williams Initiative for Israel (WIFI).

The Williams College Council turned down their application by a vote of 13-8-1 on April 23, 2019. The result was dismaying to pro-Israel factions on campus, in part, because it is nearly the only club to be denied status as a recognized student organization over the last decade. During that meeting, the founders of WIFI were also hammered with at least two anti-Semitic comments. These comments were observed by the parliamentarian, but not entered into the meeting minutes.

In a message today, Maud defended the club and appears to agree that the founders of the club were improperly treated by the College Council. She pulls no punches:

The transcript of the debate and vote indicate that the decision was made on political grounds.

In doing so, Council departed from its own process for reviewing student groups, which at no point identifies a proposed group’s politics as a criterion for review. The decision also seems to be in tension with CC bylaws, especially Article V, Section 3: “Prohibition Against Discrimination in Student Organizations.”

In her statement, Maud appeared to follow the lead of the WIFI students who condemned the outcome of the meeting and asserted in a Williams Record op-ed that their club “was denied official status on purely political grounds, as CC members and guests fought to silence us and effectively turned the meeting into a referendum on Israeli-Palestinian politics.” This unprecedented, politically motivated decision has attracted condemnation off campus too.

The Algemeiner – Williams College Student Leaders Deny Recognition to ‘Pro-Israel’ Group, Prompting Calls for Inquiry

Tammi Rossman-Benjamin, head of the campus antisemitism monitor AMCHA Initiative, called the incident “a case of blatant discrimination and shameless intolerance.”

Yael Lerman, legal director at the Israel education and advocacy organization StandWithUs, likewise called on the university to investigate the CC’s vote.

Commentary – At Williams College, Zionists Need Not Apply: The Hall of Shame

Jonathan Marks, professor of politics at Ursinus College, “When much of the faculty at Williams signed a petition to adopt the University of Chicago’s powerful statement on free expression, which has been a model for more than fifty schools, some student protesters claimed the faculty was trying to kill them. In response to the controversy, President Maud Mandel put together a committee to “develop policies and an overarching philosophy about campus speakers and free expression.” It is perhaps too much to hope that this committee, whose report is expected this month, will attend to discrimination against pro-Israel speech at Williams.”

Jewish Journal – Williams College Pro-Israel Group Denied Recognition

Rabbi Abraham Cooper, Simon Wiesenthal Center associate dean and director of the Simon Wiesenthal Center’s Global Action Agenda, said in a statement to the Journal that the council’s decision was “anti-Semitism on full display at Williams College. Apparently [there’s] no room for lovers of Zion and Israel among the bigots who control the vote. Where are the adults in the room?”

The College Fix – Williams College president blasts student government for refusing to recognize pro-Israel group

Academic Engagement Network, which opposes the anti-Israel boycott, divestment and sanctions movement, wrote a letter to President Mandel to urge her “to take immediate action to reverse the decision of the CC and to give WIFI the RSO recognition that it deserves.”

A former Williams professor, KC Johnson, tweeted this decision is an embarrassment for the institution.

Pamela Geller tweeted: “Out and out Jew hatred. Plain and simple. Terror-tied groups like SJP (Students for Justice in Palestine) run amok on campuses. There is a plague afoot.”

Joe Scarborough tweeted: “Given the growing antisemitic attacks in the US, and the historical hostility of many elite colleges toward the Jewish state created following the Holocaust, this is deeply disturbing. Mika and I love @WilliamsCollege⁩. We hope this is investigated.”

Full text of Maud Mandel’s statement after the break.

(more…)

Facebooktwitter
Print  •  Email

Following up on Frank’s request, Alison Swain, the incredibly successful former coach of the Williams women’s tennis team, is off to great things at USC:

THIS WEEK
The USC women’s tennis team has secured yet another trip to the NCAA tournament by locking down the No. 13 seed. The Women of Troy (18-7) will be participating in their 36th appearance in the NCAA tournament and will host the First and Second Rounds at Marks Stadium on May 4-5. If the Trojans should advance, they will participate in a Super Regional for the Round of 16 next weekend (May 10-11). The Round of 8 and beyond, in addition to the NCAA Individual Championships, will be held in Orlando, Fla. from May 17-19. Under the tutelage of head coach Alison Swain, USC will face Illinois State (20-6) on Saturday (May 4) at 12 p.m. Should the Trojans defeat the Redbirds, USC will take on the winner of the First Round match up between UNLV and Texas Tech on Sunday (May 5) at 1 p.m.

In her second season as the USC women’s tennis head coach, Alison Swain has brought the Trojans back into national recognition and prepared them for a championship run to bring home the team’s third NCAA team title.

I’m far from an expert on USC tennis, but this sounds like a successful start for Coach Swain!

You can read more here: https://usctrojans.com/news/2019/5/2/no-13-usc-womens-tennis-begins-pursuit-of-ncaa-championship.aspx?path=wten.

Facebooktwitter
Print  •  Email

I had a chance to review Maud’s response to CARE Now. I didn’t notice much that was new or unusual in it. As best I can tell, she is trying to quell the protesters by dumping tons of disorganized facts on them regarding every little thing the school does, substantively or symbolically, to meet their professed demands.

The good news, I suppose, is she won’t be handing the school and its vast resources over to what’s left of the Mohican Nation.

One of the themes that did catch my attention was her willingness to rebuke those who wage vicious personal attacks on their political opponents. I have no doubt she followed up on this theme in reaction to the substantial visibility of the anti-white bigotry displayed by CARE Now leaders at the April 9, 2019 College Council meeting.

As to the issue of engagement across difference, this has also been a year in which people tried to make their views known to each other on a range of complex issues, from free speech to racism to geopolitics. Such debates are always happening at schools like Williams, and should happen: it’s one of the hallmarks of the liberal arts that we’re constantly exploring and testing new ideas and relating them to what we see in the world. But changes in our political environment are making it feel like the stakes for such debates are now especially high. It’s clear that we need to do more to teach and uphold principles for such engagements, so that people can debate issues vigorously without devolving into personal attacks.

As far as I know, this is her first presidential message which comes out against personal attacks. Her comments go so far as to assert that unless this changes the school will be in great trouble. This, I take it, means Williams College will become another Evergreen State University. She writes:

I believe deeply in the importance of process and consensus-building in a campus community. To reach our shared goals, we must exchange ideas, agree and disagree, and come to a common understanding of how to move the institution forward, one step at a time. I’m committed to this effort and hope that the many members of our community will join me in articulating and living these principles.

With such principles in place for a robust, respectful and inclusive intellectual community, Williams will thrive. Without them, we’re unlikely to progress on any other work, no matter how important.

She has a point. I don’t see how you can operate a modern college if you allow it to be the scene of nearly constant, unabated, anti-white bigotry.

Nevertheless, Maud does come to the defense of the student activists on the topic of affinity housing. Conservative media outlets have pointed out that the demand for black affinity housing is basically a request for segregation. It is a demand, I assume, that would not be considered if white students asked for white only housing. She adds:

We do want to pause and recognize that, at the time of writing, some students involved in the affinity housing and other efforts are being subjected to unduly harsh media and social media attention that misrepresents affinity housing as “segregation.”

In this instance, I believe she is referring, primarily to criticism of the idea of affinity housing offered by conservative news outlets including Breitbart and The College Fix.

As she mentions above, the issues being addressed on campus are heightened because the stakes are higher now. One of the changes in our political environment that is making the stakes higher is conservative students on campus now have outlets like Breitbart, The College Fix, and Campus Watch which they can rely on to bring national attention to the way conservative students and faculty are facing discrimination and suppression at places like Williams College.

Full text below the break:
(more…)

Facebooktwitter
Print  •  Email

The Record editorialized in favor of “affinity housing,” one of the demands made by CARE Now to both President Mandel (pdf) and the trustees. This means, more or less, reserving/restricting specific houses for/to black/Hispanic/Asian students. I have some small acquaintance with the history/politics/propaganda of Williams housing, so let’s dive in. Day 3.

From the letter to Mandel:

While ​de facto​ affinity housing has existed at Williams for a considerable amount of time in the form of off-campus housing on Hoxsey Street,these are predominantly taken by athletes and wealthy students who can afford the penalty for signing leases early.

I am sympathetic to this complaint. (And recall our 5-part series on the BSU Town Hall which, on many dimensions, was the starting point for CARE Now.)

The second biggest change in student life may have been the ever-increasing isolation of athletes from other parts of the student community. For example, members of the lacrosse team are much more likely to live with each other now, including off-campus, then they were back in the day.

There are about 100 recruited athletes in every Williams class. I think almost every one of them, after first year, lives in a rooming group with at least one other member of their team. I think a large percentage (a majority?) might live only with members of their team. The Record should do some reporting about this.

The issue of athletes living together in Gladden is different than the issue of them living together on Hoxsey Street.

What might be done? A goofy alum wrote to the Record:

To the editor:

The Record’s editorial of April 17, 2019 (“On the need for affinity housing”) argues that Williams students should have more control over whom they live with. I agree. I have discovered a truly remarkable plan which this letter is too small to contain. Summary: The best housing policy would involve three major structures. First, a Student Housing Committee – modeled on the Junior Advisor Selection Committee – should run most aspects of the housing process. The more that students have responsibility for managing their own lives, the more they will learn from the process and the better the outcomes will be.

Second, students should, as much as possible, live in houses with other members of their Williams class: sophomores in the Berkshire Quad; juniors in Greylock; seniors in row houses and co-ops.

Third, non-senior rooming groups should be as large as possible and of fixed size, but subject to diversity constraints. For example, sophomore rooming groups would be any number less than five or exactly equal to 15, with restrictions on both gender balance and organization membership. Allowing students to group themselves has two main advantages: It creates genuine house community and it provides major incentives for large groups to “pick up” less popular students. The more that students sort themselves into houses and the more incentives they have for being both diverse and inclusive, the better the housing experience for everyone.

The best first step would be to change the co-op process so that groups have to be large enough to fill a house. This would allow experiments with “affinity housing” in all but name.

Did any Record reader notice the math joke in the 3rd sentence . . .

Facebooktwitter
Print  •  Email

The Williams College Baseball team took on Hamilton College in the final two games of the three-part series. After the first game yesterday, the Ephs were looking to complete their sweep in today’s action.

As they stood coming into the game, the Ephs record is 19-7 overall and 4-3 in conference. On the other side, Hamilton College sits at 14-15 overall with 4-6 in conference.

After a series of long delays and consistently poor weather, it ended in favor of the Ephs at 2-1. While both games were low scoring, they included all the excitement of a typical split series.

With this weekend’s baseball completed, the Ephs are entering the later portion of their season. Only five regular games separate the Ephs from a postseason run. Two of these games are out of conference, while the final three will be in conference against Wesleyan. The rescheduled series could factor in importantly for how the Ephs complete the regular season. Their next chance at competition will be a home game against Dean College. The Boomers have an 11-23 overall record and a 6-6 conference record. That game will take place on Tuesday 4/30 at 4:00 pm.

Source: https://ephsports.williams.edu/sports/bsb/2018-19/releases/20190428u9rm1u

Facebooktwitter
Print  •  Email

What a news day for Williams… Over at Commentary, a new post examines the highly unusual nature of the College Council’s decision to deny an application to establish a pro-Zionist student organization called Williams Initiative for Israel (WIFI).

This largely unprecedented decision was carried out at the April 23 meeting which was blacked out and not broadcast on livestream. Even worse, the College Council made the minutes anonymous. The full article may be accessed through Facebook.

Jonathan Marks, a contributor to Commentary’s blog, is professor of politics at Ursinus College.

 

Facebooktwitter
Print  •  Email

The College Fix has a new article up regarding the comments of Williams College biology professor Luana Maroja regarding the suppression of free speech at Williams College.

This is a form of intimidation meant to shut down debate. Further, we are told to “accept grievances from professors of color without question.”

As a scientist, I have learned not to accept assertions without evidence. But this intimidation method seems to have worked: Few dissenters want to risk opprobrium from aggrieved students.

I think the article is worth reading in full. It shows the frustrations of a liberal professor who is facing down the same sort of mob mentality which tore apart Evergreen State College.

Facebooktwitter
Print  •  Email

The women’s tennis team finished their regular season out with a win!  My sense is that NESCACs will be somewhat more of a test this year than normal, and I do not know if Williams has locked up a spot in NCAAs yet.

In their last matchup of the regular season, the Williams College women’s tennis team defeated the Bates College Bobcats 6-3. After sweeping doubles today, the Ephs will be going into the NESCAC tournament in the coming weeks, facing familiar faces from other schools.

“Time to recover and then get to work in the final push before NESCACs,” said head coach Anik Cepeda. “Congrats to our seniors Leah and Kori for all their hard work and dedication to our program!”

Source:https://ephsports.williams.edu/sports/wten/2018-19/releases/20190428w7575o

Facebooktwitter
Print  •  Email

Near the end of the rant, the black CARE Now students provide us with one of the greatest ironies in this appalling video; They reveal they think greater visibility of this conflict will work in their favor.

Amazingly, they threaten to create a video about their unhappy encounter with the white male students on the College Council. As far as I can tell, even their cowed victims seem to agree with their take.

I think this erroneous assumption helps explain why the College Council didn’t think it mattered if it posted this video on their Facebook page. They must have sincerely thought it made the white male liberal students look bad. The College Council only removed the video from Facebook after it generated negative attention and thousands of disapproving comments on various on-line sites. So far, the video has been featured at Anonymous Political Scientist, Big League Politics, Campus WatchEphblog, Free RepublicInstapundit, Legal InsurrectionThe College Fix, and Tea Party.

Start – 59:53

IB: Oh, you want to make it all illusion. Why do you have to tell them what it’s like? What?! (PAUSE) This is what it’s like. We’ll make sure to tell them that this is how it was.

SO: Definitely!

IB: We’ll make sure.

SO: I’m going be text messaging…one or two.

IB: We’ll make some videos out of that shit. Because its wow.

SO: Best f***ing movie.

IB: I just can’t…believe it.

Finally, this tag team of anti-white bigots rounds off their evening with the most embarrassing moments of all – the not so subtle humiliation of the black/minority students in the room. The aim, as far as I can tell, is to shame the minority students for not being as aggressive, antagonistic and woke as them. The controlling nature of this final exchange is cringe-worthy. Even IB seems to realize that he has gone way too far.

IB: You have anything to say Cleveland?  Or, or Shane? Cause you know ni***ers never get to say anything?

SB: I’ve said everything I felt I needed to say (Unintelligible) sometimes…the nature of council is just kind of (Unintelligible) questionable.

IB: Shane, why aren’t you president? Why didn’t you run president again? Why didn’t you run for that other shit?

Shane: I wasn’t… (Unintelligible)

IB: Cleveland, you got something to say? (PAUSE) No. No. Okay, because of you… anyone?… you’all got something to say? Does the minority coalition in the minority cove? Because that’s what you’all look like over here. (LONG PAUSE) That’s all right. We want to make sure we open this space. We never get to be heard. (PAUSE) I’m done. You done?

SO: I am.

IB: Okay. I hope you have a great day. Goodnight. (SLAMS DOOR)

The self-righteous CARE Now activists were so proud of their outburst that they planned to prolong their indignation by staging demonstration. According to a report in the Williams Record, they called off the demonstration after this video was shared on other platforms. “A larger protest had been planned,” the Williams Record says, “but cancelled because of student fears about safety after last week’s meeting livestream was distributed by several online sites.”

I think it is more likely the protest was called off because the student’s parents learned about their children’s behavior and told them to “knock the f***ing s*** off you dumb a** f***ing d***heads.”

Epilogue

Maud Mandel issued a letter to the community on April 22, 2019 in which she wrote:

I’m hearing from people throughout our community, representing a wide range of backgrounds and viewpoints, who are upset by some breakdowns in campus relations. Their perspectives are diverse: some are concerned about racism, others about a culture of open antagonism, and many about both of these and other issues, as well. The one thing many people seem to share is the sense that we have a problem at Williams.

A week later, the College Council met again – minus many of the white male students. It was so bad the College Council had a hard time establishing a quorum.

At this meeting, Bilal Ansari, the school’s first Muslim Chaplain and now the acting director of the Davis Center, addressed the student representatives. Reading between the lines, it was clear to me he knows Williams College would have been better off if these two black students had worked through existing black- or minority-run campus groups instead of striking off on their own.

To his credit, he indicated – to the white males who were not there – that he was there for them too. Bilal Ansari added, as far as I can tell, they had every right to push back whenever they are targeted with racially charged verbal abuse.

The article in The College Fix first linked to the original video on the Facebook page on April 19, 2129. As of today, an unedited YouTube video featuring the meeting has gathered over 12,200 views.

 

Facebooktwitter
Print  •  Email

Angela Venus-Yu ’20 is a filmmaker studying away at Harvard College this year. Her autobiographical film “Other Side of the Glass (隔着玻璃)” will screen tomorrow, Thursday at 7pm at the Harvard Film Archive alongside other student films. Her film pieces together about 12 years of moving between opposite ends of the world.

She would love to invite any fellow Ephs in the Boston/Cambridge area to attend the screening. Do say hi or drop a line if you do! Her email is ay4@williams.edu. If you would like to be frequently updated, feel free to follow her @ave.yu on instagram.

Facebooktwitter
Print  •  Email

As DDF noted in a previous post, the subhead of the Record article editorializing in favor of affinity housing read:

Creating space for minoritized students

This is also the same language used in the CARE Now petition:

We demand increased support and safety for minoritized students on campus, which include students with disabilities, students of color, low-income students, queer students.

I suspect similarly to David that the intent of this word is to demonstrate this identity is something imposed upon the individual. It echoes the view that all ideas and language were socially constructed by those in power (probably the white man) to further establish that power hierarchy. This social constructivism thesis has a few important steps. It first presupposes that these ideas and identities are socially constructed (this is trivial; almost everything is socially constructed), then moves to claim that this construction serves external some purpose. Philosopher of science Ian Hacking handily describes this as a construction’s “extra-theoretical function.” In the case of “minority,” the word is perceived to have some purpose outside of its perceived meaning–namely, to assert power over the groups it describes. The notion of purpose, however, necessarily presupposes that there is an architect behind this construction, since purpose requires a rational agent. This is how we move from the fairly modest claim that the “minority” identity is, at least in part, socially constructed, to the claim that these identities were constructed by privileged parties to assert their power. Hence comes the need to reinvent the word “minority” to reflect its “true” significance as an identity forced upon a group.

The problem with the social constructivism thesis that, as I see it, lies behind this change in lexicon, is that it makes an unwarranted jump from acknowledging that ideas are in part socially molded to assuming that they were intentionally forged this way by malevolent beings of power. Is it not possible that the word “minority” serves the objective, mathematical purpose of describing a group that represents a small percentage of a population? It is absurd to subvert objective language used to assert mathematical facts with biased sociological analyses.

Perhaps this has all been a little tangential to most events on campus. Though confusing, it is ultimately not a problem if a group of students sometimes chooses to use a fancy invented word over a commonplace one. What is a problem is that these students embed a narrative into the semantics of every conversation they have, fundamentally redefining the logical playing field in which these discussions occur. This is a narrative of the oppressor and the oppressed, of the good and the bad. Choosing not to adopt this language may be perceived as insensitive and even unacademic, but ultimately it is an issue of supreme ideological importance.

Facebooktwitter
Print  •  Email

It’s another good year for the men’s tennis team.

After dropping the first match of the weekend against Bowdoin, the Williams College Ephs (ranked #9 in NCAA DIII) bounced back to defeat the Bates College Bobcats (unranked in NCAA DIII), 7-2.

The Ephs controlled both singles and doubles play, losing only one match in each to snap their three-match losing streak. The victory brought Williams to 7-7 (.500) to finish off the regular season, including a 5-3 record against NESCAC opponents.

This Friday, the Ephs travel to Middlebury College to kick off the NESCAC championships. The championships will take place on Friday, Saturday, and Sunday (May 3, 4, and 5).

Source: https://ephsports.williams.edu/sports/mten/2018-19/releases/20190428u0bo29

 

Facebooktwitter
Print  •  Email

By this point in the video, I assume more of the white male representatives are tearing up. Normally, these tears should humanize them in the eyes of their abusers. In this case, however, they only enrage SO and IB. I believe it is fairly common for abusers to think they have the right, the authority, and even the righteous responsibility to tell others how they should react. That’s exactly what we see in this next portion of the video. FYI: You can also see how SO and IB interacted with each other for dramatic effect.

Start – 56:17

IB: What’s wrong with you?

SO: And do not look at…don’t look at us with tears.

IB: I don’t want your tears.

SO: I don’t want that. I want anger. You should all be f***ing angry. I…I sat there and I had to f***ing listen to every single person. While I was siting there like my voice is not f***ing…I could not f***ing speak! I WANTED SO BAD TO TELL HIM TO F*** YOURSELF. F*** YOURSELF. F***. ALL OF YA SHOULD ALL F*** YOURSELF.

IB: You had to be real nice.

SO: But I had to be real nice to get some f***ing money. So all you had to say was f***ing motion, I approve. What the f***. You should be f***ing angry.

IB: You just told me ‘You got the money so you should be quiet.’ That’s f***ing crazy, son. (HITS DESK) I can’t believe this man said that to me in my face. You got your money so you should be quiet. What the f***?! That’s what they say. Right. You got your financial aid, shut the f*** up. Right?! You got your little house. Right. You got your little food. Right. Shut the f*** up. You don’t need nothing else. You got your job at the best institution in the f***ing school So you shouldn’t ask for nothing else. Right? We made it number one. You couldn’t be number one without me. Period. So what’s the word?! Every time we ask for something, you’all grant it, your rating stays up. So what the hell is the part of the equation. I don’t get it, son. You only go to the number one liberal arts school because I’m here, n***er. Period

If we weren’t here could you possibly be? Or would you be some white exclusionary school who can’t do diversity. What?! So when we…try. What do you think we do when we do black previews? We retain pre-frosh. Fool! What’s wrong with you people?! I just don’t get it. You just said ‘You got your money. Stop talking. Why did you come back?’ Because you thought we had no honor. You said you got to come. You sucked it up. (SPAGHETTI SUCKING SOUND) What are we here for? To vomit it back out. We tired, son. I’m sorry. We couldn’t do it this time. You love it when we swallow. We couldn’t do it. Can’t believe that we just got told that to our face. That’s the level of respect that you have for me. Just in case you was confused with what you said to me.

When I heard IB make that spaghetti sucking sound on the video it reminded me of that moment in Silence of the Lambs where Hannibal Lecter tells Agent Starling that he once got a questionnaire from a census taker and reacted by killing him, cooking up his liver, and eating it with fava beans and a nice Chianti. (SPAGHETTI SUCKING SOUND)

It is clear that IB believes he is contributing to the U.S. News & World Report ratings of the school. I am guessing these thoughts are not original to him. They are most likely repeated among those who believe that their primary contribution to the school is that they provide evidence of diversity. In truth, these high ratings are more accurately seen as a consequence of the Williams College endowment. This endowment, and the school’s rural location, allow it to provide a high quality education at a lower than market price. The U.S. News & World Report rating gives Williams College an advantage, in part, because it is a comparative bargain.

IB: When you said you got your money and so you should be quiet. I don’t even remember what you said. Because you know you all look like you. That’s that’s that’s what happened. Because when I get angry and enraged and stuff like that I don’t have the time to give you the dignity…no, in fact, I have the time to give you the dignity you gave to me. Because that’s what it looks like. That’s what it looks like. It’s crazy, son.

He just said, ‘Yo. Yo. I got somewhere to go. Can you please stop?’ What?! I had somewhere to go two hours ago. I missed work…to plan this shit. I missed…I missed everything…to plan it. What could I possibly be doing that I have to go and do all these other things? What could possibly be taking up my time? Why I can’t do my homework? He came for my job. He said, ‘Why aren’t you at work right now?’ What? It almost drives me crazy. Why am I not at work? Why am I not sleeping at night? Why do I have? What?

So I can take out time during my middle of my day to not do homework next Wednesday, so we can create space for black frosh’s. You ain’t creating it. You were going to create it? You were going to create minority previews? You was going to do it? Or the black woman who always got to do the God damn thing going to come in this space and create it. You was going to create minority previews, right? Right. God damn.

I think that the conventional wisdom is that the abusive behavior illustrated in this controversial video is a result of the mistreatment the  black activist speakers have suffered earlier in their lives at the hands of the white majority. I’m not so sure. I know enough about verbal and physical abusers to recall that rage and controlling behavior can also be a side effect of drug and alcohol abuse. Inappropriate behavior is also more likely if you have gone without food or sleep…two issues mentioned by the verbally abusive students. If I was sitting in Maud Mandel‘s office, I would send both students to anger management classes. If either of them seeks counseling, I’m confident the therapist will ask what, if anything else, caused them to become “…angry and enraged and stuff like that.”

Facebooktwitter
Print  •  Email

Sadly, the extraordinary scholarly excellence which initially attracted me to teach at Williams has been replaced by an intolerable level of bullying and indoctrination. As a student at Middlebury College, Dominic Aiello ’22, observed we are in a new era “…when students are encouraged to experience campus life as one long sequence of ideologically-inflicted psychic traumas.”

In this next section of the video, we get to see raw bigotry in action. According to Merriam-Webster, a bigot is “a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially: one who regards or treats the members of a group (such as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance.” The transcript is particularly alarming because IB is demanding more space and more resources and more autonomy to live out his abhorrent ideology. Here, he addresses the issue of segregation. First by noticing it inside the room. Later by asking for more of it outside the room.

Start – 53:10

IB: I’m just so confused. Because I did the same comment. I did the same and I don’t care or understand how the logic. I just don’t get it. The critical thing of the room is on the ground. I just don’t get it. Could you dare? How? Are we witnessing this? Am I here today? Because I can’t believe this. The room is literally segregated.  Do you notice that?! Did you notice that? Because I noticed that from being here three seconds.

SO: Me too.

IB: What the hell! I just don’t understand it. Like how could you be so blind? I don’t know. Silence. Everyone goes back to talk to their fathers and their f***ing friends and all these God damn s*** and nothing gets to resolve. We just lose our breath. Right?

SO: Right? This is not a f***ing show.

IB:  I’m not f***ing performing for you. This is not a monologue we created. We didn’t practice the lines before we came here. This is the lines of life. We do this s*** every day. I was talking to my father. I was living my life. I had essays and labs. Leave things behind. But here I am. You didn’t have to do that today. You get to catch up on your homework. Don’t tell me you’all have hard work. Don’t tell me you tired. I’m sick and tired of white people telling me they’ve got f***ing s*** to do. Because this wasn’t in their schedule today and damn, it wasn’t in mine.

SO: Not in my schedule.

IB: But, yet. Here I am wasting time, energy and life. And what do I got to do? You know what I have to do after this? You know what we have to do after this? We gotta find a space and time and community to heal and resist. It looks something like…black previews. And then when we ask for point four of a budget, we get asked to f***ing include you. What the f***?! After we done dealt with this s***.

And we say I just want a little bit of a break. I just want a little bit of an affinity house. I just want a little bit of a not having to speak to Charles Derbyshire time. I just want to have to deal with all these things. And then to come back and get asked: ‘Can it, can it be everyone else?’ What the f***? Everyone else isn’t here right now. It’s just us. We had to leave the meeting just to be here…with you. With ya’all. It’s your job. It is your job right there. And your job right there. And your job right there to be doing the work. We tired!

At this point, it looks like more black students have arrived to support the CARE Now activists. As far as I can tell, SO addressed the room on her own earlier. She then contacted IB and requested that he come and defend her. She or IB may have also sent messages to other black students to join them at the College Council meeting. Ironically, this example of piling on illustrates one of the dangers John Derbyshire discussed in “The Talk: Nonblack Version” where he suggests things about blacks that white parents should warn their children about. Derbyshire cautions it is best to leave an area if a large number of blacks suddenly dominate a public space. IB recognizes the arrival of other black students and explains this show of force is a hallmark of black community.

IB: Another one. You see when you call community they come. That’s what community looks like. Not some minority black guy. What are you talking about? Community looks like…if I call YOU SHOW UP because we’re getting eviscerated, embarrassed in this space. We having to suck d*** and then tell you we don’t like the way it tastes.

That’s what’s happening today. Sure we got the money. But we sick and tired of having to beg, steal, barter, go into every f***ing office, suck some more d*** just to ask for some shit. That’s crazy! Just so that we can get more community. We didn’t ask to interrupt this space. But you have some way of intruding in ours. We didn’t ask for none of that and yet here…we…are. What’s wrong with you?

For me, the comments above represent an earthier, perhaps more accurate, expression of one of the core demands of CARE Now, the demand for affinity housing. As you may remember, the editorial board of the Williams Record was criticized by both The College Fix and Breitbart when it endorsed a CARE Now proposal which would essentially establish segregated housing on campus. This proposal was part of a larger a list of demands “calling upon the College’s trustees to fulfill their ‘obligation to the well-being and safety of its students, faculty and staff’,” according to The Williams Record.

As Maud Mandel noted in her recent letter, many schools are dealing with the conflict between affinity housing and integration. Given the video above, I cannot imagine a worse decision than to give more power and resources to verbally abusive students. It seems particularly dangerous to empower them while also leaving them more isolated, insular, and unaccountable to others.

Facebooktwitter
Print  •  Email

All in all, I’m most impressed with the bearing and peacemaking of TW. After reviewing the video, he looks like both the strongest and most gracious person in the room. When too many of his fellow students absorbed the CARE Now speakers’ verbal abuse without comment, TW stood up to these bigots. Maud Mandel should give him some sort of award.

Start – 51:18

TW: When you were sitting here and you were in discussion, I observed the regular order and I gave you a certain parliamentary respect that we do, and I would just ask in your conversation with me that you preserve that same respect.  Now, the first thing…the first thing, when you referred to what I was writing. What I was writing down was in reference to what you were saying…it was a note of sort. And, you mentioned that why isn’t black previews called minority previews? And that was something that was said in here. That was something that I found problematic. It was, it was, it was never suggested in here that black previews be called minority previews. I think that’s where, kind of…

SO: This is on?! You’all wanna to run it back? Actually how many people remember me?

WH: I’ll respond to that. I, I was the person who said that.

SO: Oh. You have the minutes?

WH: I can respond. I was the person who said that. That was just a comment about the inclusive nature. I think that what you said and what other people in this room said resolved my, all of my concerns about the inclusive nature of your event.

SO: How long did that take? How long did that take? Very f***ing long. For you. For you, your problems to get resolved. I had to f***ing sit here. I had practice at 8:00 o’clock. I did not have time for ya n***ers.

IB: Have you eaten today?

SO: I have not f***ing eaten today! BECAUSE YA DUMB ASS N***ERS WANTA F***ING TALK! Inclusion. Inclusion. FUCK YOUR INCLUSION! (HITS TABLE) BECAUSE I’M F***ING EXCLUDED. How many people look like you in this f***ing room right now?! How many people?!

WH: One!

This was the only, mercifully comic moment in the video. You cannot deny the sheer logic of WH’s surprising response. After all, he doesn’t have a twin brother in the room. I think the culture of open antagonism at Williams would improve if more white students showed this sort of quick thinking and courage.

Williams College student confronts white College Council representatives on April 9, 2019. She asks: “How many people in this room look like you?”

Next, one of the things that strikes me as extremely odd about this bigoted tirade is the way the black student activists repeatedly address the white student representatives as n***ers. I have never seen that before. The only explanation that makes sense to me is that this is another way that black activist students lord their power over their vulnerable liberal white peers. Since white students are socially prohibited from using the word “n***ers,” the black students are taunting them with the fact that only they can use this offensive language. I wonder if conversations about race at Williams might be improved if there was a new social compact where a white person can call a black person a n***er, but only if the black person called the white person a n***er first?

SO: What the…? ARE YOU BLIND, MY N***ER? WHAT DO YOU MEAN ONE?! YOU’RE A WHITE MAN! I can count f***ing how many? Literally this f***ing row. They look like you! Who is the black woman who look like me?

IB: You look like her?

WH: No.

IB: Oh, okay. What the hell!

SO: Great. At least you know something. Now I know why you got to Williams.

At this point, I would think the students representatives would begin to wonder about the inclusiveness of the black preview event being planned by CARE Now. If this is how CARE Now leaders treat elected student representatives, then how much more vile might they be to a white man who stops by to get a taste of the free fried chicken? A week later, at the April 16 College Council meeting, many of the white men who were verbally abused by these CARE Now leaders decided not to show up. It was so bad the College Council struggled to attract the minimum number of representatives needed to start the meeting and conduct their business.

If student leaders like TW or WH feel unwelcome at the College Council meetings, then I think it is time to rethink those meetings. The campus needs more people like them, not less.

Facebooktwitter
Print  •  Email

The final demand of the CARE Now Petition is “the establishment of enrollment options and teaching fellowships in Native Studies, Trans Studies, Disability Studies, and Fat Studies.” Their reasoning goes as follows:

These fields have historically been underrepresented and are absent from intellectual discourse at Williams and beyond. The current political climate on campus attests to student demand for interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary studies challenging the hegemony of traditional systems of knowledge. The Interdisciplinary Studies program at Williams must provide greater tangible support for courses and faculty research that fall outside the backing of departmental programs. The creation of new enrollment options and teaching fellowships in Native, Trans, Disability, and Fat Studies comprises a crucial step toward legitimizing scholars participating in marginalized fields of inquiry and creating experimental epistemologies, as well as providing perspectives benefitting the subjects of those disciplines.

A year ago, a group of three professors dubbed these identity studies “grievance studies” after they famously got a number of bogus papers published in highly regarded journals in social sciences, gender studies, and sexuality studies. One of these papers posited that dog humping at a Portland dog park was evidence of rape culture. Another rewrote a portion of Mein Kampf in the language of intersectionality. The YouTube video series chronicling this hoax is very entertaining; I encourage all to watch.

These three professors sought to show these fields are politically rather than intellectually charged. Beginning from premises such as “whiteness is evil,” it becomes easy to reach absolutely absurd conclusions, and any number of arguments can be encoded in the elite language of these areas of study. The question then arises, If these fields cannot distinguish real scholarship from bullshit, what is their value?

Interestingly, the crux of CARE Now’s demand for teaching fellowships in these departments is not that they have any established intellectual value or success. At best these are “experimental” fields of inquiry, a phrase which could describe just about any discipline ever conceived. Rather, they claim the reason the college should embrace these fields is simply because there is a “student demand” for them. While this is not altogether a bad argument, it does redefine the purpose of the university: Rather than a place of genuine scholarship, under these demands, Williams College merely exists to cater to the interests of its student body.

I would argue that there must exist some external criterion of scholarship that must be met for a field to be recognized by the college. Perhaps one could be, Can genuine scholarship be distinguished from bogus scholarship in this field? Or rather, are the ends of a given field to pursue a real line of inquiry, or to reinforce a preconceived political philosophy?

Of course, subjects can be valuable for other reasons (namely, vocational)–music and business come to mind as examples. And if the proposed subjects truly are experimental epistemologies sincerely interested in unbiased inquiry, then I welcome them. I merely suggest that the premises of these fields be addressed with greater scrutiny. Ultimately, however, the demand for enrollment options in native studies, trans studies, fat studies, and disability studies is unrealistic at this time for Williams. There are already greater demands for more enrollment options in pre-established fields of study on campus–for example, the expansion of the computer science department or revitalization of the linguistics department. Currently, CARE Now’s demand is not in the best interest of the student body or the college’s legacy, and if administration appeases this group (which is doubtful), it will create a dangerous precedent for how college resources are allocated.

Facebooktwitter
Print  •  Email

More from the sports desk:

Though they fought hard, NYU could not catch the Williams Ephs during the second day of the Vassar Invitational. The Ephs held a comfortable nine stroke lead over the Bobcats going into today’s round but nine strokes among four counting scores is only a little over two strokes per player to make up. The Ephs still had to post a solid second day score to clinch the victory. NYU battled hard to post a 305 today, five strokes better than their first day score of 310. The Ephs lost some ground with a 308 today but were still able to hold onto the lead by six strokes. The Ephs won the tournament with a two-day total of 609, NYU placed second with 615, and Wellesley rounded up the top three with 639.

Source: https://ephsports.williams.edu/sports/wgolf/2018-19/releases/20190421rmr8ed.

I don’t know how good NYU is at golf, but it’s always impressive to hear about Eph wins, especially over larger schools!

Facebooktwitter
Print  •  Email

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
Print  •  Email

The College Council provides a solid archive of meeting notes, going back to 2009. Still, I am very sad that it does not go back further. Who else remembers the glorious notes of Jonathan Landsman ’05?

Sadly, CC refuses (?) to make the notes for current meetings publicly available, even to alumni and local residents. Pathetic. Fortunately, we have our sources!

The April 16 minutes are available to students. The central debate about WIFI is covered fairly well.

The April 23 minutes are not available for download, even to students. But our sources are clever, so they provided some screen shots. See below the break. Example:

A full zip archive of meeting notes since 2016 is here.

Key points:

1) It was stupid for the Falk administration to change the rules and force student groups to seek recognition from College Council even if they were not seeking funding. (Falk and Co did this to make life more difficult for dissident groups like Uncomfortable Learning.) Student organizations can be trusted with many important decisions — selecting JAs, distributing funding — but not with this one.

2) Excessive student powers will be used against all unpopular groups, not just those unpopular with the Administration. By the way, BDS has yet to hit Williams in a big way. What happens when it does?

3) If Maud is smart, she will change the Student Handbook this summer to allow any student group to be created by simply submitting a form with the Dean’s Office. This will allow the group access to all the basic tools — like room reservations — that it needs to function. CC does not need to fund it, but they can’t ban it.

4) There are plenty of rich Jewish alumni that Maud will try to raise money from over the next few years. What do you think their views are on this topic?

5) College Council should just make its meeting notes and livestream public. The truth will come out anyway and, perhaps more important, a public livestream encourages better behavior from your guests.

Screen shots of minutes for April 23:

(more…)

Facebooktwitter
Print  •  Email

I had a chance to review the video of the April 16, 2019 College Council meeting. It looked like a bomb crater. Many of the young white men who were verbally abused by black student leaders at the April 9, 2019 meeting were notably absent. Without them, the College Council could not establish a quorum.

Williams College Council April 16, 2019

Their best idea? Reach out to the wounded members and let them know it was safe to come back? No. Not at all.

Instead, the representatives in the room jokingly recruited other students to serve as “proxies” for the missing white students. This, as any high school student would know, is not how proxies work. This scheme became even more problematic when they realized the students who have volunteered to be proxies are also the same people who will be asking for money – a clear conflict of interest.

NOTE: The Williams College Council has deleted the livestream of the appalling April 9, 2019 meeting. I’ve made a copy of the April 16, 2019 meeting. It would be great if someone would upload that to YouTube too along with a proper explanation of what is going on in it.

What was most troubling to me is there was absolutely no acknowledgement of the damage done. I saw no sense of corporate responsibility for the fact white students were basically boycotting the meeting.

One of the most cringe-worthy spectacles occurred when Bilal Ansari, the school’s first Muslim Chaplain and now the acting director of the Davis Center, addressed the students. Reading between the lines, it was clear to me that he knows Williams College would have been better off if the two black students vomiting out anti-white bigotry had worked through existing black- or minority-run campus groups instead of trying to create their own black preview events.

Ansari said that he understood the root causes of the student’s offensive tirade(s).

Nevertheless, he indicated (to the young white males who were not present) that he was there for them too. Bilal Ansari even added, as far as I can tell, they had every right to push back whenever they are targeted with racially charged verbal abuse.

I suppose that this should give well-meaning observers some comfort. If the school’s first Muslim Chaplain says it is okay for whites to resist anti-white hate speech, then perhaps no one should put up with it again.

Facebooktwitter
Print  •  Email

A student reports that “Apparently there was huge commotion at CC last [Tuesday] night. I expect this to be picked up by national news outlets as the details of what happened are revealed.” From the Record:

Last night, College Council (CC) voted 13–8 with one abstention to reject a request from the Williams Initiative for Israel (WIFI) to become a registered student organization. The vote came a week after the club’s request was tabled at a previous CC meeting, and the meeting involved nearly two hours of protracted and heated debate among both CC members and a large number of guests attending.

Before the debate began, numerous members and guests expressed concerns that publicly revealing the names of those speaking, as CC has previously done to some extent through livestreams on its Facebook page and published minutes accessible to students at the College, would make students feel unsafe and prevent them from fully expressing their opinions. Several members and guests cited national news coverage of College events in recent weeks, including cases where specific students were mentioned by name, as justification for these concerns. CC ultimately decided to publish anonymous minutes accessible only to students with College emails.

This is a developing story, occurring exceptionally close to our print deadline.

The minutes are here, but inaccessible to me. Could someone post them in a comment?

The video for last week has some interesting discussion starting at the 25 minute mark . . .

“The state of Israel, at least if it’s not completely illegal . . .”

It is one thing for leftist students on campus to attack random WASPs, especially WASPs who might be Republican. But when they go after mainstream (?) Jewish organizations, they may be treated very differently . . .

Facebooktwitter
Print  •  Email

The Record editorialized in favor of “affinity housing,” one of the demands made by CARE Now to both President Mandel (pdf) and the trustees. This means, more or less, reserving/restricting specific houses for/to black/Hispanic/Asian students. I have some small acquaintance with the history/politics/propaganda of Williams housing, so let’s dive in. Day 2.

Note the subhead of the Record editorial:

Creating space for minoritized students

“[M]inoritized” is not a word that I recall from 10 or even 5 years ago. When did it first become common usage at Williams? For (at least) the last 50 years, before the Great Awokening, this would have been phrased: “Creating space for minority students.” Why the change?

My guess: “minoritized” is now preferred to “minority” because a minority is what you are while being “minoritized” is something that is done to you. (Contrary opinions welcome!)

The longevity of this issue demonstrates that the call for affinity housing will not extinguish over time, so long as the College fails to address the residential needs of the marginalized members of its community.

This is the opposite of the truth. That the College has successfully resisted calls for black-only housing for 50 years indicates that it is likely to be able to do so forever. Moreover, the primary purpose of Neighborhood Housing, instituted more than a decade ago and then abandoned, was to prevent student self-segregation, primarily of African-Americans and male helmet-sport athletes. Williams does not care if black students constantly campaign for affinity housing. It has successfully stymied their preferences for five decades!

Furthermore, affinity housing has successfully been implemented by many of the College’s peer institutions, including Amherst, Bates and Wesleyan.

Evidence? If only Williams had a competent student paper which might, you know, report on what is happening at other schools. If the Amherst theme houses are so successful, then why are students only allowed to live in them for 2 years?

Facebooktwitter
Print  •  Email

New Eph Parent? says:

As a parent whose child will decide this week whether to accept Williams’ offer of admission, I’d like to be encouraged by this letter, but President Mandel’s appeal to mutual respect seems like an attempt to turn back the clock. Respect is appropriate when people of good will have differences of opinion; that’s the old liberal model that those of us in Maud’s generation grew up with. But what is its place when power, oppression and “discursive violence” are at stake? If someone’s views are oppressing or harming me, why should I extend them respect? Why should I even tolerate their membership in the community?

If discourse is understood as a communal journey toward the truth, it can be respectful. If it is understood as a struggle for power it will be “intolerant and harsh.” The tone this letter laments follows naturally from what is being taught in the classroom.

Good questions!

I hope that your child chooses Williams and that you join us as an author at EphBlog!

Facebooktwitter
Print  •  Email

The Record editorialized in favor of “affinity housing,” one of the demands made by CARE Now to both President Mandel (pdf) and the trustees. This means, more or less, reserving/restricting specific houses for/to black/Hispanic/Asian students. No one knows more about the history/politics/propaganda of Williams housing than I do, so let’s dive in. Day 1.

Start with the Record:

Affinity housing, the third of CARE Now’s 12 demands, has been advocated for by students as early as 1969, when the Afro-American Society, which occupied Hopkins Hall in demonstration, named affinity housing as one of its demands.

Has anyone at the Record talked to someone who could explain this history? I doubt it! Although I occasionally hold out hope for individual reporters, like Arrington Luck, the Record, as an organization, is positively amateurish in its refusal to seek out knowledgeable sources. It is true that, for 50 years, students have wanted racial segregation in housing and the College has refused to provide it. Does that tell you something? It should!

The College did not respond to the Afro-American Society’s demands and has continually ignored such demands.

How stupid is the Record? The College has “respond[ed]” to these demands over and over and over again. The answer is always the same: No! If you choose to come to Williams, you are going to live in a building with students of a different race. Don’t want that? Go elsewhere.

We at the Record wholeheartedly support establishing affinity housing at the College.

Doesn’t the Record understand how Williams works? If you want actual change — as opposed to the childish pleasure of virtue-signalling on the front page — you support the creation of a high-profile committee.

[W]e must recognize that the College is a predominantly white institution in which students of color often feel tokenized, both in their residences and more broadly on campus.

Is the College really a “predominantly white institution” and, if so, how long will this continue? Whites, in the latest class at Harvard, are a minority. There are more Asian-Americans than whites, in raw numbers, at the highest levels of high school academic achievement. An actual news organization might, you know, do some reporting on this topic, might point out that, in the Williams class of 2022 (pdf), only 263 of the 533 students are white, non-Hispanic Americans. That is only 49%. White Americans are already a numerical minority among Williams first years.

The reason that black/Hispanic students “often feel tokenized” is, first, because the people that run Williams are, on this dimension at least, not very good at their jobs and, second, because these students often are, precisely, “tokens.” At least 50% (probably closer to 90%) of the black/Hispanic students at Williams would not have been accepted if they did not check that box.

Complete Record editorial and CARE Now demands below:
(more…)

Facebooktwitter
Print  •  Email

« Newer PostsOlder Posts »