One year has passed since the Sigma Chi controversy and Hopkins and we would like to take this opportunity to point out that little substantive dialogue on multiculturalism and race has occurred on campus. Instead organizations across campus have failed to address the issues that were brought to the forefront a year ago.
There is ample blame to go around. The sense of urgency in addressing these serious issues has all but vanished, rendering the initial uproar even more superficial. Hearings were held, people were punished, readings were assigned, and the Student Council's bills were passed, but has real change occurred at Hopkins? Do students feel the effects of the "Halloween in the Hood" debate in their everyday lives? Do the same root problems still persist?
The University has been rather inactive in confronting ignorance and prejudice at Hopkins. The News-Letter is not imploring the University to give lessons and offer readings to teach students how to accept diversity. As good as it may sound on paper, such proposals are ineffective and often counterproductive.
Rather, we urge the University to take serious action to not simply increase diversity on campus (in fact, a greater number of black students are enrolled in the freshmen class than in the past several years), but to change the culture of Hopkins. The problem is that there is not one Hopkins community. Rather there are a number of disparate and insular communities centered on specific minorities, interests and academic concentrations. That is not a healthy environment for any institution, especially one that thrives on a healthy discourse.
The University should work to bring people together, using peer organizations. Progress can only be made through open and participatory dialogue.
The Council has not been facilitating open dialogue to the degree that it should. StuCo itself is a very insular organization, and that is truly a shame. It has no connection with its constituency, which happens to be the entire student body. This lack of connection reduces the organization's potency as a positive force in students' lives.
The News-Letter is disappointed with the BSU as well. While their primary function should be to provide a community for black students to come together, the BSU has made such activism a central part of the their identity. Following the Sigma Chi incident, the BSU correctly asserted that there exists a moral imperative for substantive change.
That was when there were microphones and TV cameras. While the BSU is still calling for open discussion and dialogue, they have not been a visible presence on campus.
The Council and the BSU should come together and work with the University to facilitate discussion and help create one community for all Hopkins students.
