In response to Doug Cloud's piece in the May 11 edition of The Post, BRAVO! I think he has written about everything I've been talking about since the beginning of this campaign. In order for the issue presented on this ballot to be taken seriously, the student body must come out and vote. The lack of turnout at the forums was a great concern of mine, and I feared that the lack of turnout to these forums would lead to another substandard turnout come election time.
The one point I would raise is the lack of proof of systematic racism regarding this issue. I have found that the language described in the article was only in the public sphere on Facebook; the rest of the time it is found in private conversations. I believe many of the discussions using this harmful language is found only in bathroom stalls and other out of the way places. I know that, based on the article, if one doesn't see it more pervasive on campus, a lack of hard
fast and quantifiable proof would allow you to believe there is not a deeper problem. I would argue that the type of proof you are looking for would most likely not exist in the format you seek. I have denounced the language used in some of the Facebook posts, and it must remain out of the civil discourse regarding the ballot issue.
Finally, I would suggest that this is an issue of race, but not in the way it has been decontextualized on both sides. Some have used this language; however, this language has degraded the main reason for the vote of confidence against President McDavis. The original concern brought forth by this issue was the policies of President McDavis and some other high-ranking personnel within the university (i.e. Kirby Hocutt and William Decatur). This discussion must remain a civil discourse. Otherwise, it lowers the entire discussion to the point of the rabble.
Shane Tilton is a graduate student and candidate for Student Senate president. 17
Archives
Letter to the Editor
