Response to Government Fellows

To the Editors of The Crimson:

I read with some dismay the recent letter to The Crimson signed by a dozen teaching fellows in Government (April 23, 1979). The authors of this letter urge students and faculty neither to boycott classes nor, presumably, to engage in any demonstrations organized in whole or part by the Coalition for Awareness and Action. Why? Because to do so would be to tacitly accept their "irresponsible accusation" about American society as well as "the bad judgment it encourages."

I find this argument rather disturbing for several reasons. To begin with, one would hope that individual decisions about boycotting or protesting would be based on the merits of the issues at hand rather than the rhetoric of a few individuals. Should Americans have ignored slavery (or continued to "debate" it) simply because a few abolitionists may have "exaggerated" the nature of that institution? Should we refuse to vote because candidates for office invariably exaggerate what we can reasonably expect them to accomplish. We are asked whether the Coalition has not in fact "exaggerated" claims about racial, class, and sexual oppression in the United States. We are invited to "discuss" rather than "boycott."

As I see it, the issue is not whether debate should (or could) be ended, but whether we as individuals should take steps to hasten divestiture and provide for a strong Afro-American Studies Department. This does not mean that we should uncritically accept whatever information the Coalition may feed us and blindly follow in their path. But the concrete demands which the Coalition is making are simple and well-publicized: divestiture and commitment to Afro-American Studies. One needn't follow any party line in order to protest on behalf of these issues. Protest can never put an end to debate, but debate often postpones moral decisions that should be made today. --Jeff Goodwin '80