FROM THE EDITOR

Controversy always comes to Columbia in springtime. A year ago it was the MEALAC debate, two years ago it was a week-long silent protest against racism on campus. And this year, after a homophobic drawing targeted the president of Proud Colors in late March, Stop Hate on Columbia's Campus (SHOCC) kicked off a three-day campaign to raise awareness about six hate crimes that have occurred on campus during this academic year. Most of SHOCC's demands are reasonable. For the safety of Columbia students and for the purpose of information gathering, alleged hate crimes should be announced by the administration in a timely fashion. And while some may have qualms over SHOCC's proposed “syllabus revision,” which would expand the Core Curiculum to include more female and minority voices, they are hardly outside the mainstream in suggesting this.

So why the virulent reactions expressed on campus blogs and in conversation? Whence the widespread apathy of that elusive target, “the average Columbia student”? No one is surprised that Chris Kulawik, the Spectator's token conservative and president-elect of the College Republicans, registered his outrage at SHOCC, but there must be some deeper reason for the strong defensive reaction on campus. After all, just a few months ago, students arose in general outrage over the Ruggles hate crime. Why the sudden change?

For one thing, SHOCC's vague demands, distributed in brief quarter sheets, provide little depth to the issues they raise. The group's open-ended definition of a “hate crime” is particularly problematic, as it is too encompassing to give full weight to the condemnation a hate crime deserves. Further, SHOCC's outreach needs to target a broader audience. While the group's “safe space” demonstration on Low Steps in early April was a valid means to incorporate Columbia's student population into its discussions, the mandatory all-black dress was off-putting — and I say this as someone who participated. Pictures show clearly the line this dress drew between “those in the know” and everyone else, creating a dichotomy of “us” versus “them.” On top of the demonstrations, by now a serious, inclusive forum should have been held for students to voice questions and concerns and for SHOCC to expound on its demands.

At the same time, these defensive reactions reveal a lack of awareness of the marginalization of women, the lower class, and racial and sexual minorities. While “privilege” should not in itself be taken as a dirty word, it is dangerous not to try to understand what it means to be born with or without certain advantages. This is symptomatic of “the middle class syndrome” the concept that we all are playing on the same level, that we all have had and will continue to have the same opportunities to overcome life's obstacles and to succeed. A lack of awareness does not necessarily result in aggressive acts against certain groups, but it does create an apathetic atmosphere in which such acts frequently go unpunished. In particular, as we round out the year, this issue of AdHoc hopes to take the dilemma of privilege and education and to explore some of its local and national implications. At base, this magazine and SHOCC share similar goals: to promote an atmosphere in which each student at Columbia is able to celebrate his or her identity without fear of recrimination. Instead of defensiveness, Columbia as a whole must promote an awareness of and respect for the diverse backgrounds of all of its students.

Kristen Loveland,
Editor-In-Chief