Georgetown University’s Newspaper of Record since 1920

The Hoya

Georgetown University’s Newspaper of Record since 1920

The Hoya

Georgetown University’s Newspaper of Record since 1920

The Hoya

VIEWPOINT: Promote Political Discourse

VIEWPOINT%3A+Promote+Political+Discourse

This month, a post from a student’s personal blog began circulating in the Georgetown University community. The piece expressed the author’s opposition to the Black Lives Matter political movement and his view that systemic racism is not a problem today. On July 6, the Georgetown University Student Association Senate passed a resolution condemning the article’s message and called for the university to consider disciplinary action against the student.

As the chairs of the Georgetown University College Democrats and Georgetown University College Republicans on campus, we embrace the prospect of civil debate on the important and highly sensitive topics this article discusses. Yet, we also found GUSA’s actions in response to be highly inappropriate. The resolution used the institutional power of student government to clearly target a student for expressing his point of view, an action antithetical to the ideals in the free speech and expression policy and culture outlined by the university. Furthermore, GUSA sought disciplinary consequences on the basis of the political content of his speech, a move that puts the university in the untenable position of policing the political opinions of its student body. Simply put, this was legislative malpractice. GUSA can and should do much better. They owe it to the student body.

To be clear, individual students are well within their rights to criticize and condemn the article. While we, as the chairs of GUCD and GUCR, disagree on some of the article’s points, we agree that the majority of commentators are simply utilizing their own rights to free speech to offer criticism of an argument made in a public forum. However, some students have responded to the blog post with targeted harassment and even death threats, which are unacceptable and must be condemned. Vitriolic bullying and harassment achieve nothing productive and conflict with our values on a fundamental level.

Our organizations see the validity of many of the critiques offered. We recognize the reality that racism is a persistent problem in the present day, and we affirm the truth that Black lives matter. We both believe that the mission for a more just and equitable society is far from over, and we stand in solidarity with Black leaders who are working to eliminate the deepest injustices in our criminal justice system and beyond. Though our beliefs on how best to address these problems often differ, we are united in our recognition of racism’s severity, and we applaud recent bipartisan steps toward criminal justice reform.

Progress toward racial justice requires open and honest conversation with people who hold different opinions. Our reaffirmation of the importance of free speech is not only based on principle, but also on a joint acknowledgment that good-faith conversations are essential to the practical implementation of the goals we seek. Bipartisan politics — like public service — is built on something more fundamental than policy. It is built on the mutual recognition of good intentions, and it is anchored in desire for dialogue. GUCD and GUCR will always commit to this principle of politics and public service.

As we approach the November elections, we seek to highlight our shared values as Georgetown students. Much of the fall will be spent fighting in zero-sum electoral contests, and we predict there will be many moments that will test our ability to approach our differences with level heads and open minds. As leaders from GUCD and GUCR, we strive to make our political community — and our Georgetown community — a more inclusive and tolerant space for discourse. Using institutional power to banish opinions from our discourse that are deemed problematic is not the way to move our goals forward. We are committed to fostering the kinds of conversations that will.

Henry Dai is a junior in the School of Foreign Service, the chair of Georgetown University College Republicans and a GUSA Senator. Ajayan Williamson is a senior in the College and the chair of Georgetown University College Democrats.

View Comments (6)
More to Discover

Comments (6)

All The Hoya Picks Reader Picks Sort: Newest

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  • H

    Hoya SaxaOct 12, 2020 at 5:21 pm

    Good on the GU Dems and Republicans for coming together in the name of free speech. It’s shameful that the GUSA would look to suppress a political opinion they don’t agree with. The GUSA should be disbanded for this lunacy. Makes me embarrassed to be a Hoya.

    Reply
  • A

    Alexandra Glasser SFS 86Aug 5, 2020 at 3:58 pm

    Thank you https://www.realcleareducation.com/ for making my day and bringing this Hoya article to my attention.

    Glad to see that Georgetown students value freedom of speech. I don’t know what the original condemned blog said, but regardless of what was said the student should not have been censured. Georgetown and all universities exist to promote the exchange of ideas, lets keep it that way. Father Schall would be proud.

    Thanks, GUCD and GUCR.

    Reply
  • S

    SeanJul 29, 2020 at 10:14 am

    Yup, there it is. Muh racisms.

    Reply
  • S

    S. Elliott (L'07)Jul 28, 2020 at 10:49 am

    This is great to see. While I may disagree with the student’s perspective on racism, I disagree more strongly with GUSA’s proposed action.

    Students at Georgetown and other elite colleges may speak multiple languages, opine on great matters of international affairs, or calculate partial derivatives. We may be very educated but, on matters of life experience, woefully ignorant.

    We mostly come from privilege: financially comfortable families, nice neighborhoods, private or top ranked public high schools, Ivy league colleges and grad school. We are sheltered from the poverty, racism and suffering that many experience. And, crucially, most of the current students are young.

    When I was the same age as the student in question I would have said exactly the same things. But I was wrong, and it took me a lot of time to recognize my own blind spots.

    Partly, it was experience. Just like it took white Americans getting gassed and beaten to understand what a lot of black and brown Americans have been saying for decades.

    But mostly it was through relationships. I got there because well meaning people shared their experiences and challenged my assumptions. Or, to put it in a more Jesuit way, I recognized my sin and found redemption. If I had been attacked, and “cancelled” I would have hardened my prejudices.

    And, even if you don’t care about individual growth and redemption, do you care about the future leadership of this nation? When the students and faculty at Duke tried to cancel the lacrosse team in the name of fighting society’s ills, they ignored the fact that the students were innocent. A young Duke student made his name in the counter-reaction and rode the notoriety all the way to the current White House. His name: Stephen Miller. Lets not create more.

    Reply
  • J

    John HoyaJul 26, 2020 at 12:05 am

    The hoya is intrinsically racist and has a history (even recently) of publishing articles against brown/black/bipoc folks. this is insane that the hoya thinks they can publish this

    Reply
  • M

    Manuel A. MirandaJul 24, 2020 at 7:10 pm

    This joint statement can give us pride in Georgetown, unlike that smelly thing that GUSA did. Even so, “legislative malpractice” is an overly civil description of what happened here. What they did was criminal harassment and old fashioned ostracism. What they are is little bigots, tiny bullies. They appear now offended that we would think their action “censorship.” Let’s be clear, we consider their action the work of intellectual impotence, not censorship. That suggests authority. We can consider it also an incitement to a crime. We are taught in debate not to offer ad hominem attack, but always to stick to the issues. GUSA has illustrated for Georgetown’s history what an ad hominem attack is. We will not forget.

    The two chairmen are impressive in their unity, but someone important is left out of the educable moment…where is Jack DeGioia? The University’s silence on the GUSAno resolution means the University gives consent to it. Silence tells us the University is unwilling to teach. It should speak, because these young people did not come to their thought-police shallowness on their own. Look to the Twitter accounts of some notable Faculty speaking on this. There The Hoya will find a news story.

    And why not call for a retraction or an apology? Or for a referendum recall election? If the little fascisti feel brave with their teenie-weenie power why not see if the student body agrees with them?

    Manuel A. Miranda,
    F’82

    Reply