On Wednesday, the protestors won. They got you to skip class. They antagonized you to such an extent that police force was necessary to prevent a brawl. One of your own was handcuffed. In their minds, they left as martyrs. When they discover their actions forced a three hour dialogue, they will be ecstatic. Their methods are working, outdated dogma spreading. Never before has this hodge-podge group of bigoted nobodies attracted so much attention. When an irrelevant ant crosses your path, do you make a scene of stomping it out? When you receive an unwanted side at a restaurant, do you deliver a soliloquy denouncing the vices of mashed potatoes? Antiquated bigots are just that: ants, mashed potatoes. You have already won the long game. History has made these types obsolete. Last year we held a highly productive discourse on privilege. Ideas were challenged, minds were opened. At Wednesday’s discourse, were anyone’s ideas really challenged? Did any bigots in attendance experience a revelation, if they were there at all? Was it necessary to take three hours of the day to confirm our own believes and lend credence to archaic opinions? “Discourse” of this type does nothing but discredit the productive discourses of the past and fruitful dialogues to come. I am proud of the progress DePauw has made in its efforts to accommodate marginalized groups and give them a voice. Exposure to these sorts of issues is one of the primary reasons a DePauw education is so valuable. But dialogue is a band aid solution at best and a self-satisfying groupthink festival at worst; a method by which the illusion of true progress is created. Let’s make the dialogues we do have count, and pay no attention to bigoted ants and mashed potatoes.
—Jon-Mark Sabel, Alumnus, Class of 2015
