​Taking (real) steps forward

As reluctant as Duke students may be to admit it, the visceral act of hate last Friday is simply the most recent in a string of aggravating episodes. In yesterday’s editorial, we discussed Duke’s racial history and the responsibility the University has to create a campus that not only includes but also values people of color. Today we evaluate the University’s response to this incident and provide steps forward.

After the Black Student Alliance organized a gathering on the Chapel steps, Vice President of Student Affairs Larry Moneta released a statement condemning the vandalism, quoting an earlier email of his about Duke’s desire to be more inclusive. Moneta’s message was needed but ineffective, reiterating his stance on racism without providing solutions to our community’s problem.

If “acting in the face of hatred” is one of the University’s priorities, it must have clear and consistent policies to condemn acts of hate and respond to those in conflict with this goal—current conduct policies do not mention an official response to harassment based on race, national origin, sexual orientation or other characteristics. The A-Z Policies, which cover everything from academic dishonesty to weapons, do include a short section condemning harassment but only has procedures written for sex and gender harassment. The recourse for acts of racial discrimination do not fall under current conduct policies and is dealt with by a non-punitive Bias Response Advisory Committee, which responds to incidents with recommendations to “promote campus dialogue” and “provide mediation.”

Given our campus’s penchant for macro and microaggressive incidents and our University’s place in the South, an advisory committee that parrots what students have been demanding for years is not enough to combat racism. Other colleges, including those in the University of California system, provide students, faculty and staff with the means to report “Hate or Bias Motivated Incidents” online. UC Santa Cruz’s policy on such incidents is as clear as the words on this page—and those printed in its student handbooks—and should be used as a model for Duke.

Because other incidences have been committed by students who cite ignorance as their excuse, the University must also do more to educate students of the racial history of our school, state and region. During this year’s Orientation Week, first-years could attend an optional session on “worldwide diversity,” but the closest thing to a talk about race was the inaugural and equally optional “Black Convocation” after the start of classes. Again, these programs are needed but far from enough.

In response to last semester’s noose incident, the BSA created a list of demands intended to reduce racism at Duke. These demands included a call for an orientation program for all incoming students that “meaningfully addresses the gravity of race, gender, sexuality, class and religion,” a pre-orientation program for black students, a Social Justice Fellowship and greater transparency in how incidents of bias are reported. While DSG has allocated $6,000 toward a fellowship, the call for public incident reports has been blocked by administration on account of FERPA and other demands are “in progress.” DSG must be commended for its quick response in tandem with BSA last Spring, but our student government can and must do more to make sure these and other demands come to fruition as the institutional conduit between students and administration.

Calls to “act in the face of hatred” in the wake of racist incidents are well-intentioned but not sufficient. We must stay on top of things and take real action if we are to become the welcoming and inclusive campus we so desperately wish to be.