The Strike’s Lack of Open Discussion Undermines Community Trust

26 thoughts on “The Strike’s Lack of Open Discussion Undermines Community Trust”

1. Hi Adrian — I appreciate your thoughtful reply. Alas, many of your peers don’t have the same privilege and opportunities as you and others might have to take “two weeks off of school.” Families make incredible financial sacrifices to get and keep their kids at HC. Students’ future professional development (which allows them to one day be powerful actors in the outside real world for the forces of good) is very much put at risk. Just ask the Bio majors. It is fortunate for everyone that the strikers decided to end it when they did.

   I think you (collectively) underestimate your own power here and also underestimate the administration’s open-hearted willingness to work with you, bumbling as they may appear at times. The HC admin are not your enemy. Believe me! They are some of the best allies you could have. Getting HC to commit to a timeline for some improvements and telling off the administration could have been done in earnest while attending classes too.

   I know your heart is in the right place and the goal is awesome. Just remember that outside the walls of the College today, people don’t have the luxury of two weeks off anything. Even in “normal” times, your Haverford degree will be like a lifesaver around you in a very dark sea. I promise you. Good luck!

2. The issues listed by the strikers are a great opportunity for us all to learn together about how to make the College work for everyone in the context of today. But, shutting down academics indefinitely and shaming people who disagree with the platform or the methods is not the way to do it. The strikers reveal themselves more with every comment above as passionate narcissists, using the cloak of social justice to claim all moral authority for themselves. I get it, it is fun to feel like you occupy moral high ground, but thinking you own it to the exclusion of dialogue is just counterproductive to all.

   HC might not be completely “woke” but it is not “broke” either. It is a work in progress that will never be done. Passionate strikers, build a consensus for your ideas among the students and then present them to the admin. It is clear that consensus has not yet been reached. I’m personally astonished at how much time the admin is putting into this, but that is their judgement to make.

   In the meantime, attend your classes and get your education. It is a tough world out here and you will need every ounce of Haverford learning you can get. Seriously, it is a unique place and you will REALLY need it.

   1. I think a big point of the strike is that it makes the need for change urgent. In less than two weeks, the strike has already brought so much legitimate and concrete change to the table. Quite frankly, I think that other methods of activism–those that allow things to “continue as normal” for those that don’t want to participate–don’t force that kind of urgency. And let’s be clear here, the changes that the strike calls for are urgent to the Haverford community. A strike forces admin to listen to the organizer’s demands without doing what institutions usually do when confronted with uncomfortable change: delaying it and making vague promises.

      If you are sure that this isn’t “the right way to do it,” then what is? If not this way, then how? If not now, then when? No activist movement will be be perfect, but this is one that has a chance to make Haverford a better place for many of its most marginalized students. So why do we feel the need to tell organizers that they’re doing things the wrong way?

      “I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to “order” than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: ‘I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action’; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man’s freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a ‘more convenient season.’ Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.” – Martin Luther King, Jr., “Letter from Birmingham Jail”

      1. I appreciate your ardent desire for certainty (exactly when?? how?) but those are things that emerge through dialogue with other people. If an idea is right, the change should hopefully be fast — but no one person can force the timetable. Respectfully, the only “concrete change” I have seen so far here is a school suddenly failing in its mission to educate and lead through this “teachable moment.”

         I wouldn’t suggest “continue as normal” is you say 🙂 I suggested consensus before swift action as the right course. What that means as far as an outcome (when? how? what?) is not up to me, so my opinion is moot here and you don’t need to waste time trying to divine where I stand (except to say the strikers document was an eye-opener and I glad to learn from it). Consensus doesn’t work in the “real world” but it sure does at HC. I saw it myself in action during my time there and it is a maddeningly magical thing about the place.

         I like your MLK quote and appreciate that perspective — I don’t see my words as being in opposition to it. Consensus building is anything but “orderly” and “peaceful” 🙂 I’ll leave you with a quote from the Quaker Elizabeth Fry: “I give myself this advice: Do not fear truth, let it be ever so contrary to inclination and feeling. Never give up the search after it; and let me take courage, and try from the bottom of my heart to do that which I believe truth dictates, if it lead me to be a Quaker or not…”

         1. I would note that, in coordination with strike organizers, many faculty have been hosting “teach-ins” that are not part of their classes’ formal syllabi but which focus on social justice issues related to their fields. These really should have been in the curricula to begin with, as they’re extremely relevant to operating within a “Haverfordian” moral framework while on the job. In this sense, I suppose you could say that the institution of the college is “failing in its mission to educate and lead,” but the community certainly isn’t. If students have stopped learning, it is because they are completely tuned out to the education that’s still being offered, not because it’s unavailable.

            Two weeks off of school is going to do fairly little to hamper anyone’s professional development, even if they’re taking foundational courses. COVID-19 has done and will continue to do much of the work there already, contrary to what the college would like to advertise. To the point of the strike, the institutional racism that many students face leads to many more instances of stunted academic growth than any missed classes have—many departments are lacking in diversity and accessibility for BIPOC/FGLI students, particularly in STEM. This quality on its own actively prohibits learning; it just happens to be in a format that’s less visible than a strike, and therefore harder to criticize.

            My impression is that significantly more institutional awareness and accountability in regard to BIPOC/FGLI concerns has been achieved in these 13 days than in the past however many years. Obviously, because many of the strike demands are medium- or long-term, the “concrete changes” we’ve seen so far are in their planning phases. But the formation of these new committees and whatnot with very specific accountability measures in place (including timelines and budgets) is an indication of genuine institutional evolution. Because of the strike, the administration is focused on racial justice in a way that they never would have been through a plenary resolution or a few emails.

3. Khalil, thank you for airing your concerns and sharing your perspective. I admire your courage. I am sorry for the insulting language that has been directed your way. Please know that there are those of us who not only support your ability to air your concerns without fear of harassment, but also share your opinions on this strike. Take care

4. Suggested reading for the ‘dissenters’: https://medium.com/national-equity-project/what-if-we-dont-return-to-school-as-usual-4aceb5227df5

5. Can I just ask: what specific criticisms do you have with the strike? Do you actually have any, or are you just obsessed with the idea of “spirited debate and thoughtful discourse”? This is like every plenary free speech argument all over again….

   Please, for once, try to step back and listen before immediately criticizing and playing the victim.

   I’m just so tired of people saying “I want change too!!” and then immediately criticizing and questioning every movement that has an actual chance to create real change.

6. Wow, as a professor at Bryn Mawr, I am deeply troubled by many of the responses here.

   Khalil Walker brings up an important point: the strikers are purporting to speak for all students of color on our campuses, yet at least some students of color disagree with the strike. This is not surprising since people of color are people with diverse views on a range of issues. Clearly the strike organizers are not elected representatives of all students of color on this campus, and we should stop identifying their views with the views of the students of color on our campuses.

   In response, several of you suggest that Khalil is actually racist, or maybe not “authentically” Black. Others respond by chastising Khalil for not capitalizing words as you see fit or supposedly misunderstanding “colorism.”

   I hate to break it to you, but being Black does *not* require people to accept some set of views or values. Black people do get to disagree with the strike organizers without being racist or not authentically black. The racial essentialism that many of you espouse is itself racist.

7. Another case of “Black people should ask nicely for basic human rights.” FUCK THAT!! “Respectful discourse” has never worked when it comes to dismantling inherently racist institutions. If it had, we wouldn’t be here in the first place.

   Black people have never been trusted, concerned for, or respected in the entire history of the US. Haverford is no different. That’s just the truth. The reason we are striking is so that we can start to change that. Signing this document as if you actually cared about Black people is hypocritical.

   You want respectful discourse? Try respecting BIPOC people first. And stop playing the victim. It’s pathetic.

   1. Regardless of how important you may think academic leniency, expanded access to LGBTQ+ therapists, or expanded funding for BIPOC and Latinx cultural centers are, none of the things being demanded by the strike are “basic human rights.” Only listening to BIPOC students with a certain point of view and accusing the rest of internalized racism is not respectful, and neither is uncritically accepting what a person says because you view them as a representative of their race.

   2. Quite frankly I can’t speak to what others believe but I didn’t come to haverford to fight the bigger systems and institutions of the world good or bad. I came for an education and the current strike is now inhibiting my ability and others to go to school. There is truth that even if your a black or a person of color doesn’t mean you can’t be racist or engage in colorism. I’ve been a target of both in my life and I don’t find myself to engage in ether presently or in my past. I will say some leaders of this movement have engaged in colorist behavior towards me because I have different views, claiming I’m not a black man. I’m from what once was traditionally called the “hood” in Brooklyn New York. My home or the place I used to call home for many years has changed a lot since then and become gentrified. I’ve been a member of the system and fought through the system my whole life going thru two different programs known as a better chance, and prep for prep in order to go to the private schools I’ve attended. Hours and months of studying was a majority of my childhood in order to get to the place I am today. When I was younger I hated not only my life but myself due to the lack of fun, friends, and opportunity. This is almost entirely due to the system this strike is aimed at. I hate the system, I hate how black lives can be taken by people who claim to be the authority of our society daily and those authority figures aren’t punished justly. To say I don’t support or even want to delegitimize the importance of changing the system we have all grown up within is false and incredibly wrong. The methods used and the way that the Bipoc have made such broad generalizations and assumptions towards not only me but the institution upsets me greatly. Education and knowledge presents opportunity. The haverford education presented to me today I have sacrificed so much and suffered for only to have it taken away from me from my bipoc peers who refuse to hear me out. That is my biggest issue with this strike. It has become personal for me because you all say I “gaslight you” but in truth you all have never listened or attempted to converse. (With the exception of a select few who are not leading this strike)I’ve read what you all say, it’s inconsiderate of you to generalize the experiences of all black lives and what should be valued above other things. My education is what keeps me off the streets and what helps lower the chance of me getting shot on the street and that’s the truth of that matter. My education is what defends me and allows me opportunities that I understand a lot of my other bipoc peers at home don’t have. I’ve fought and sacrificed a lot to get to where I am today. I am privileged to a degree but I have also just worked very hard and given up a lot of things in order to be where I am today. In a system that pits POC against eachother I have prevailed to have the opportunity to attend haverford and quite frankly your taking that away from others like me colored or not. We’ve all made sacrifices. I’m sure this all sounds super selfish and what not but I do care about black lives and the shootings. The leader’s delegitimizing others opinions and or methods for changing the reality of people of color in this country with this strike and in fact inhibiting. The strike should end because not only does a majority of the haverford community care and support the betterment of black lives now but I’m sure when many of us have jobs or come into positions of power we will instill change and give back to the communities we not only have become aware of but communities that some of us have been members of. I feel at this point the strike is just holding campus hostage because the message has been spread and it’s clear that people should not only value underrepresented colored lives but also how they can give back. Fighting the college isn’t helping black lives at this point it’s just hurting them. President Raymond and Bylander are actively working on many of the grievances and to say they won’t follow through on their word is essentially calling them racist and liars which isn’t representative of our President or Dean who is a women of color herself. Thank you for reading this and hearing what I have to say!

      1. Hi Khalil,

         I read through two of your responses thoroughly, and I have to politely disagree with most of the topics that you discuss.

         Before I begin this rebuttal I would like to state that we are at a time where we are diverging from the term African-American, to categorize people of African descent, and replacing it with the term Black. Therefore, please capitalize Black if you are describing a racial group.

         I would like to take some time to add some rebuttals to your most recent comment. First of all, I believe that you have colorism misunderstood. Colorism is the act of discrimination within the same racial/ethnic group because of the complexion of their skin. White supremacy is a prominent factor that drives colorism. As a result, people in the same racial/ethnic group who are of darker complexion are usually impacted by the most harmful effects of colorism. What you have just described, where your peers are saying that you are not “Black enough” because you do not support the strike is not colorism. That’s a completely different topic that strives to dismantle the idea that there is no one way to be ‘Black’. Therefore, in this context, you have not been a victim of colorism. Rather, you have been subject to gatekeeping, but not colorism. Please learn the meaning of colorism and use it correctly.

         You described that you are a Black man who has been subjected to systemic violence. Thus, you see your education as one way towards ‘upward mobility’ and as one way to deter from the violence that you have seen has unjustly taken the lives of many Black people, like yourself.

         However, it is also imperative that we discuss ‘respectability politics’ within this conversation. The social, political, and economic status of a Black person does not deter them from anti-Black racism and discrimination. It does not matter what degree that is affiliated with your name, it does not matter how much money one has, and it does not matter how hard you work to get from point A to point B. The first thing that people will see about you is that you’re Black. You are a Black man, before anything else. Your degree from Haverford College is not the first thing that the police will see when they shoot you. Your degree from Haverford College is not the first thing that someone will see when they call the cops on “a suspicious man walking in their neighborhood”. Your degree from Haverford College is not the first thing that someone will see when they urgently cross the street as you mindlessly walk in the opposite direction from them. Please, for the sake of your clarity and awareness, do not naively believe that the education at Haverford College will be a one way ticket towards liberation.

         Also for the love of God, do *not* use ‘colored’ when referencing non-white people, especially Black people. I can clearly see why your peers have been disowning you from the collectivity of Blackness. Your ancestors are rolling in their grave.

         Lastly, I understand that you see the education that Haverford College offers as one way for Black people to escape the violence that they have been subjected to. In fact, towards the end of your statement you state, “Fighting the college isn’t helping black lives at this point it’s just hurting them” (Again, my man, *capitalize* Black when referring to a race of people).

         Did you consider how the structures and systems embedded in Haverford College is actually another system of violence that further marginalizes Black people? Did you consider that the same institution that you argue that people enroll at to escape violence is, in fact, another system of violence?

         Haverford College was built off of the ideologies of white supremacy and patriarchal beliefs. Do not fool yourself, Khalil, Haverford College was not made for you, nor was it made for any person who was not the cis-white male. It was made for your white male friends who you most likely give permission to say the n-word when a rap song comes on because “it’s not that big of a deal, it’s just a song.” The structures and systems at Haverford College that continues to uphold white supremacy and disrupt the lives of the Black people on campus- *especially* the lives of Black trans, non-binary, and women on campus- is a system that exacaberated the current strike that is occurring on Haverford’s campus. Thus, dismantling the racist, ableist, classist, xenophobic, and patriarchal structures of Haverford College is, in fact, not harming Black lives, but it is rather, attempting to facilitate access to resources and opportunities to aid in the success that Black students are destined to have at Haverford College. Your peers are doing the labor to establish an anti-racist system that Haverford College has neglected to keep its promises on. And once Black people are liberated- more particularly, once Black women are liberated- then *everyone* becomes liberated.

         Also, Dean Bylander is a Black woman. Please refer to her as a Black woman before referring to her as a woman of color. When you refer to Dean Byladner as a woman of color, you are erasing the importance of her role as a Black woman in a conversation that is a continuation of the BlackLivesMatter Movement.

         There is no one way to combat systemic oppression. Please diverge from the idea that there is a “correct way to fight racism”. Just as you state that being Black, or BIPOC, is not one monolithic experience, there is no monolithic mechanism to protest.

         1. Hello,

            Thank you for your response. It has given me time to do something productive.

            Firstly the notion that because “You are a Black man, before anything else” and therefore must be in support of the strike or be socially ostracized and bullied by others online is the fundamental problem with the strike.

            People within the strike are fostering discriminatory views towards others by not seeing people as people who can make decisions for themselves but as pawns in a game of chess who must strategically align with their ideals or be shut out. This “with us or against us” mentality force feeds certain truths that a group of people hold over others and limits discourse and discussion. The collective picture of rights and freedoms are being examined in this fight for BIPOC students without care or understanding for the individual’s opinions, especially if that individual is a BIPOC student. I find that very contradictory and disturbing.

            Look, the hearts of everyone participating in this strike are in the right place. As we all know, civil disobedience serves us as the catalyst for change. Thinking of many countries such as India who have used this form of protest to obtain freedoms and liberties their forefathers could only dream of under British rule shows us that by rallying under one banner as a nation, group of students and professors, or group of workers, we can combat the oppressor and demand reforms.

            But as a union and family of students and professors, we must be able to have the right to voice our opinions on the strike without fear of being socially ostracized or bullied by others. Otherwise, there really isn’t any difference between the oppressor and the organizer for the strike since they share similar beliefs in silencing others and promoting their dominant history. For example, the decision for others to shut down classes was not something that I had the freedom to choose. It was forced upon me by others, and doing homework or asking for help on labs by the professor or other students is now seen as socially unacceptable. Regardless of how noble the cause a group of people are fighting for, who gets to decide how much to limit my access to education?

            Let’s think of the producer-customer analogy someone previously mentioned. I agree that we, the students, are customers paying for a service. However, just because a group of customers are having issues doesn’t mean everyone is having issues with the business. It does not give those customers the right to limit the ability for other customers to access that particular business’s services regardless of how moral the cause is.

            I have no problem with discussion. Like many, I too am disturbed by the events that have been unfolding this year with police brutality and understand that there are certain gates inhibiting low-income BIPOC students from pursuing certain majors, especially in the hard sciences at Haverford. I am willing to discuss with professors and other students ways to improve the system for these students, knowing that they have the best interest in my education and others. I am not willing to abruptly come to a conclusion that disrupts the lives of many living on campus, practically throwing away tens of thousands of dollars that people earned just so that they could have an education.

            For those who pretend to be anti-racist in this discussion thread, I beg you to see people as people not as ideas that should support a movement based on the color of their skin.

            1. First, I’d just like to say that this strike was started *because* the exact kind of conversations and discussions about racism at Haverford that you are “willing to discuss”, which have been happening for an extremely long time, weren’t getting us anywhere nearly fast enough. These conversations not having enough impact, from my understanding, was exactly the thing that pushed many BIPOC students over the edge. Can you imagine what it might feel like to have a bunch of people (who are probably a lot more privileged than you) sit around a table and discuss whether or not it’s worth the trouble to enact a policy which might alleviate some injustice you face? Please understand that this strike didn’t happen because people are unwilling to have conversations. It’s because these conversations weren’t working.

               Also, to go back to the customer-seller analogy which so many people like. I find comparisons very irritating sometimes, so I’m not trying to say that this is the same situation in any way, but I think some things can be illuminated by thinking through it. Say I (a straight person) were buying a wedding cake, and I found out the place where I was planning to purchase it discriminates against and doesn’t sell cakes to gay couples. I personally would join any boycott of that bakery that might be taking place because I don’t think it’s right to discriminate, and I wouldn’t want to support a business which engages in such practices. I would also not think extremely highly of anyone who knowingly purchased cakes from that store. Of course this is a different situation, but just because the college works for you, (just because straight couples can buy cakes at the shop no problem) doesn’t mean there isn’t something wrong with the college that needs to be changed so that some students can get as good an education as you are so fortunate to receive. Nobody is saying you have to strike, but it is understandable from my perspective that some people would find it insensitive and wrong of you to not participate in the strike. Social pressure is *not* the same thing as being forced or bullied. 🙂

8. If you want to express your concerns with the movement, go to one of the town halls or office hours organized by the strike leaders instead of publishing an anonymous letter. Stop acting like there are no platforms or opportunities for “open discussion” when the organizers worked hard to provide just that.

   1. The letter isn’t anonymous. The signature link is at the end. Are they “open discussions” or do the “strike activists” simply reiterate their positions failing to modify them upon input?

      1. The original letter that they printed and scattered all over campus when the strike first started was anonymous. They were too scared to publish it under their own names, so this time they gathered a list of names to hide behind. Cowards.

         1. The people who signed this letter are not representative of the people who printed an anonymous letter under the pseudonym “Publius”. You’re falling into the strike organizers’ trap of conflating anyone who dares question the strike. I am proud to have signed this letter, despite the social consequences, and am not hiding it at all, so don’t call me a coward.

            1. I appreciate your honesty. But no matter which way you look at it, this document was written with the same intention as the anonymous letter, to undermine the strike. The wording may be different, but the goal is the same. “Publius” (whose identities are known to many at this point) are the ones who started this whole thing, and they’re trying to garner support from the community so they don’t have to face the consequences. They are the cowards. Not you.

9. This is really bad and shows the level of ignorance that has enabled institutions like Haverford to neglect their BIPOC students. There is no more time for discourse and there is nothing to “debate” when some of your peers feel unsupported and unprotected by their college. We have to remember that the College serves it’s students, and grown adults get paid to make decisions that can improve the quality of education for hundreds of their students. The college administration must have a sense of urgency when hundreds of students collectively strike. But they need to listen to the students, especially those that have been most marginalized by predominantly white institutions like Haverford.

   In other words, this opinion piece is trash, and any attempt to criticize such a powerful movement is in opposition of BIPOC liberation in all PWIs. Instead of criticizing your peers on how they protest, you should put that same energy in demanding that Haverford agree with their demands. If you don’t agree, your privilege and ignorance has shadowed that the reality for other students is not your personal lived experience, and this is a collective movement to advocate for changes to a system that has failed so many BIPOC students, and that is something worth advocating for.

   1. For starters, some of us are actually People of Color and we identify as such. The current bi-poc community has actually been ignorant of that and decided that we should not have any conversations or say in the decisions they’ve made up to this date.
      As far as the College you couldn’t be more wrong. Colleges and other private educational institutions don’t serve students at all. We serve the college in truth and what we pay for tuition only factors into a fraction of the overall operating cost and payments for employee’s. The College each and everyone of us through admissions because they assess who will be the most successful not only at the institution but in life. It is the alumni and trustees that serve the college and direct it so it can operate. The College doesn’t need you or anyone else that attends and the College wasn’t designed to Cater to my or your needs. The luxuries presented by the college to us are to not only make the institution more attractive to people applying but to also try to make sure people are happy well perusing academic excellence. It’s a luxury what the college gives us not a given. The college itself is a business and we work for it in order to not only make sure it operates but to also maintain a certain standard of student leaving Haverford.
      The current movements and strikes are not only disrupting students lives but also the mission of the institutions of Haverford and Bryn Mawr which at their core are to give students a wealth of knowledge thought education. To say that ether college is representative of systematic racism is not only foolish but also immature. If you talk to alumni or even look at any other schools in the country the Haverford and BrynMawr education system are incredibly progressive and accessible to all people of color, creed, religion, and gender. The sights of these protest are wrongfully aimed and horribly timed and thought through. Not to mention they are hypocritical because they don’t recognize the voices they claim to protect and in fact attempt to delegitimize them. I hope you truly understand who you are supporting, what you are supporting, and why you choose not someone else chooses to support it. Thank you!

      1. I’m disappointed that your stance hasn’t changed since this summer. I don’t know if you heard, but POCs can be racist too. Identifying as a person of color does not absolve you from being racist. And as the document says, BIPOC people are not monoliths. Maybe the strike organizers can’t speak for you, but you can’t speak for them either. And you cannot, by any means, speak about how the College runs as an institution. You’ve only been here for one year. What would you know, other than what the Admissions Office has projected to make the College look good? If you’re so concerned that your life and your education is being affected by the strike, then take this time to study some history before you start telling people how to feel.

      2. Khalil, I respect your individuality and your right to express your opinion but I completely disagree with what you have said here. I’ll try to keep this briefish because I just want to respond to what you said about the college.
         1) colleges and private educational institutions do in fact serve us. This is even more the case because they are private and not public so we pay for the education. The college should serve us and not the other way around because we are supposed to become the best versions of ourselves by the time we leave, not the best pawn for the college. I do agree that it is a partnership because we represent the college, but that makes it even more important that the college serves us. We don’t owe it anything unless it provides us with what we need.
         2) The college is NOT a business. However, if you want to take that approach, we would be the customers not the employees. We pay for a service and therefore should be able to criticize the producers of that service if we believe it is not up to our standard.
         3) And because we are the consumers… the college is literally designed to cater to our needs which is incidentally because
         4) the alumni and trustees that operate and fund it on a higher level used to be students and only choose to help the college after graduation because they had a good experience here which
         5) proves that the college actually does need each of us. Every student is here for a reason and is an investment by this college. The college believes that each of us will be special and hopes to god that we won’t forget it when we succeed so we in turn will donate and tell everyone how great it is (and become the alumni and trustees). The admissions process is to filter out people who they don’t think can accomplish that or will choose a different place. We are all important which is why the college cares so much about retention rates and graduation rates. Our job is not to maintain a “certain standard of student” but actually to maintain a certain standard of college for us as students because the college won’t do it themselves. Now that I’ve established my right to criticize the service I’m paying for on your scale, I shall indeed do so.
         6) The college is not “representative of systematic racism”, it just has systematic racism built into it. I’m not saying Wendy instituted systematic racism or that she’s not better than her predecessors, I’m just saying she operates within the system. Just because they try to be progressive and equitable does not mean they are or that they cannot improve upon what they have already accomplished. Progressive basically just means better than before and looking to be better which actually means that our criticisms and suggestions for making it more progressive should be embraced because we are helping improve the college for ourselves and the people who come after us. Plus, the college is already trying to do that so we’re helping even though it isn’t our job because we’re customers, not employees. It’s called feedback. Businesses frequently ask for this because they understand they need the input of their customers to improve their product. And the irony of the situation is that when you say you’re asking alumni what they think they will of course say it’s progressive. Why? Because they were once students who dealt with worse conditions. Soon enough, we will be saying the same thing as them when conditions improve from when we were here for the students that come after us. But does that mean they’re good conditions? No. It just means they’re better than they were previously.
         7) Strikes are never timed well because they are naturally an inconvenience to literally everyone. This is especially true because they protest the system that your daily life operates around. Therefore, you are bound to be uncomfortable with the timing of them as they actually briefly ruin your life with the expectation that it will make your life better within that system in the long run. Therefore I disagree that this strike is horribly timed and thought through. That should be judged on the success and length of the strike, not the level of discomfort you feel about the existence of the strike.

   2. Justin, Joseph Stalin would be proud of you. You show an utter focus on an objective and recognize that any opposition is to be crushed and thrown aside if it cannot be easily subjugated. After all, only one side can be right thus everyone else must be wrong and eliminated. Its such a warm and fuzzy to know that totalitarians like you are around. By the way, “a system that has failed so many BIPOC students”…they’ve been admitted haven’t they? They are getting an education? They will have a Haverford degree (if they ever attend class though I’m beginning to think Haverford will waive that onerous violet requirement). As you carve your totalitarian path in life replete with perceived grievances and injustices (Emmitt Till and James Meredith your group is not), you will find that life is much less forgiving and indulgent than the Haverford administration. My advice is learn to persuade and influence.

      1. Is it wrong to have a focus on BASIC HUMAN RIGHTS and “recognize that any opposition is to be crushed and thrown aside if it cannot be easily subjugated?” Btw, Joseph Stalin’s regime oversaw genocide, mass executions, and multiple famines that killed between 5-8 million people. If anything, he was against basic human rights, so your argument is invalid. Thank you.