National overview
The ultra-awake idea of Columbia University: segregated graduation ceremonies
Last week, Columbia University, where I am currently a junior, made national headlines about initial ceremonies demarcated by race, sexual orientation and socioeconomic status. Such multicultural ceremonies have a history at many schools, but Columbia was apparently the one that received media attention nationwide. Although discussion and discourse are always important, most of the social media madness is focused on wrong ideas. It’s not about getting into the weeds and arguing about which historically marginalized group deserves to be recognized and whether these ceremonies are optional. The origin and existence of such events is fundamentally problematic right outside the gate. Separating students according to race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, and socioeconomic status is inherently detrimental to the structure of university communities and impairs the social progress that these events seem to want to achieve. The embrace of reregulation in this scenario to combat “inequality” centers on one uncontrollable trait of an individual and reduces the person’s identity to superficial stereotypes, neglecting his or her nuanced existence. It also seems more like a passing, awkward resemblance to the racism of recent decades. People are versatile with their own experiences, talents, interests and strengths. The failure to acknowledge this is not only ignorant but also dehumanizing. A common reaction to criticism of these ceremonies is that those who want to end it do not care about the achievements of the students celebrating the ceremonies. This is not only untrue, but also condescendingly assumes that black, Asian, “Latinx”, first generation / low income, “lavender” (LGBTQIA +) and Native American students can only have their achievements celebrated by the abolition of a institution that cannot see beyond their mere identity. It also assumes that America is so racially bankrupt that those in these groups must depend on an institution to be recognized as human. In this way, the university’s focus on identity strengthens campus division, as students become more dependent on institutional labeling to determine who they are. The result is the undermining of campus unit to almost irreparable point. Columbia probably started these ceremonies in good faith. But the road to hell was paved with good intentions. Diversity and multiculturalism can be worthwhile. However, this may not be the only focus of all university affairs. Yet this is increasingly the case, so much so that it is sometimes difficult to identify what else you can learn at these expensive elite institutions. The introduction of diversity as the prevailing prerequisite for any action has polluted good intentions, and it now facilitates the armament of multiculturalism to conduct witch hunts on conservatives, commanding freedom of speech and political correctness in the classroom. As a result, identity politics is now in full swing, so no objective debate can take place due to overwhelmingly affective censorship. Objectivity is forbidden, and everyone believes that he should invest emotionally in a discussion. Everything is now personal to those in any conversation. Aside from the collapsing discourse in the classroom, the Balkanization of historically underprivileged groups is also a complete disaster for campus culture. The purpose of a liberal arts education is to be included in a student body of all races, backgrounds, creeds and ideologies. A school that encourages students to choose one trait to define themselves establishes tribalism, but also underscores the potential of students in other areas. This fragmentation polarizes the student body. To the extent that it took place in Columbia, it is often referred to simply as ‘the culture of New York City’. But that’s hardly an excuse. Awakening cliques have exacerbated campus culture, even though no one, especially the school administration, wants to acknowledge it. Columbia can work hard to facilitate the meaningful growth of a community. Instead, the school cuts its corners by building a large facade that is marketed to prospective students. It is a facade that the fact that our community is now just an unorganized amalgamation of factions, loosely held together by a vigilant elitism that steams everything and anything in the name of ‘multiculturalism’. Academia no longer cares that students find the common humanity in each other. We are no longer supposed to see previous race because we are instructed to further entrench ourselves in it. To make matters worse, schools can not really bother to resolve racism. These ceremonies exist only so that colleges can give the perception that they are making progress for the sake of their savior complexes. If universities truly care about structural racism, multiculturalism will not be honored in the toxic way it is today. Universities will not accept tokenism because they are desperately trying to fill their incoming classes with the most uniquely underprivileged students to paradise as a false proof of their waking bona fides. Universities would rather deconstruct the disturbing institutional racism against Asian Americans in the admissions process. In fact, the school’s reputation is more important than the fight against racism. This is exactly why Columbia, instead of directly defending their multicultural ceremonies, simply uses obscurity tactics and changes the name of the events into ‘celebrations’ once it has become clear that criticism of the events outweighs praise. For institutions like Columbia, all convictions are flexible if the school’s name is at stake. Racism is an excellent case to fight if it is convenient. Columbia’s voluntarily segregated graduation ceremonies are not pragmatic steps to resolve discrimination and inequalities in the real world. They are nothing but smoke and mirrors to try other schools “one-on-one” in their search for wakefulness. If schools were to actually solve racism, how would the diversity-industrial complex survive? How would our universities prove that they are better than those in the street? By really looking for ways to renew learning, improve their graduation ceremonies or develop academic specialty niches? Forget the thought. Instead, a wake-up call rages across academia, and what institution proves he can win the “Olympics for Oppression” comes out on top. It is with a heart of gratitude and love for Columbia University that I express my grievances. No institution is to blame, including the most prestigious this country has to offer. Diversity is important, but respectful civic discourse needs to be restored. They do not exclude each other. Criticism of graduation events cannot simply be dismissed with the basic calls of ‘racism’, ‘sexism’ or a laundry list that is an ‘isism’ on a given day. Students and faculties of all ideologies need to reflect on their tolerance of opposing ideas and how they approach conversations with others. For those who have become so overwhelmed to share their ideas for fear of ‘cancellation’, humiliation or underestimation, it is time to gather your own courage and galvanize the spirits of others, for you are not alone. We must all do our part to restore the integrity of academic freedom. Without it, the powerful influence of academia in shaping some of the best and brightest American minds will fall on a progressive illiberal hegemony that will continue to blow until the flame of academic freedom dies. Then graduation ceremonies are the least of our problems.