Group Mentality Poses Dangers

Far be it for me to question the motives of Joshua A. Kaufman '98 in response to his latest editorial as he has questioned the motives of others. And far be it from me to condemn Mr. Kaufman personally as he seems to have done to John Appelbaum '97 and others. And far be it for me to contort his thoughts and beliefs as he has contorted the thoughts and beliefs of others in continually getting his facts wrong. But his latest essay, which was so self-righteous as to almost be pompous, deserves a response.

Mr. Kaufman proclaims in his editorial that I, in my own "patronizing way," am favorable to a possible multicultural center because of its "limiting potential."

But it is not Kaufman's insensitive implication that all members of ethnic and racial groups have the same mind set, it is not his name-calling and it is not his ranting that offends me. It is instead his arrogant presumption that he would know what my motives--or anybody else's motives--are in taking the public stances that we take.

In fact, I support an independent multicultural center not because it would limit students but precisely because it would do what Mr. Kaufman claims to want to do--allow people to be individuals and parts of groups at the same time and to learn from and to share with and to relate to each other. Instead of fighting over our differences, we must begin, in the words of Mr. Kaufman, to "[work] towards [some] thing better than the present."

He is right to say that we can and should change the wrongs in our society and our campus. But I would argue that too much of a group mentality could actually contribute to the wrongs on our campus--and it is not difficult to see why.

First, it has the potential to cause a segmentation and division that is even greater that what we see today. Second, in creating a greater segmentation, it could cause more division among groups than presently exists as those left on the outside of groups develop a resentment of those left on the inside.

This is not to say that I do not believe that race or ethnicity has a role in a person's life--it does. Indeed, we are all shaped by our experiences. And my view of the world is very much shaped by the fellow fourth graders who would chant in unison that I was a "terrorist" or the French airport officials who detained me for over two hours (even though I was born and raised in America) because my last name sounded North African, just as a black student would be shaped by his encounters with racist police officers or a Jewish student would be shaped by anti-Jewish incidents.

These stories of our lives do shape us and they do make the bonds that we may share with people of similar backgrounds that much stronger. But these cannot be the only ties that bind.

Indeed, if we lose our sense of a broader humanity, we are only inviting a repeat performance of some of the most horrendous chapters of history. And as a fellow Semite (albeit from a North African and non-Jewish background), I do not have to remind Mr. Kaufman of all of the horrors that our peoples have both been made to suffer because of an over-identification with groups in the Crusades or the Inquisition. I am sure Mr. Kaufman knows as much, and I am not implying that he believes otherwise--but I do believe that he has understressed the perils of over-identification with ethnic and racial groups.

Moreover, many of us, are not part of one "we" or group--instead we are part of many. My own background contains a rich mix of a French, Algerian, Catholic and Muslim heritage. Looking at the backgrounds of my friends, I can relate the experiences of friends, who are simultaneously black, Hispanic, Buddhist and homosexual. Which "we" would we belong to?

During my first year at Harvard, I had the opportunity to sit with a group of female students of a different cultural background than mine. And during the course of our discussion, conversation turned to culture and religion. What happened next was possibly the most insulting treatment I have ever experienced at Harvard. These very intelligent women that I was eating with began immediately to ask themselves, in my presence, "Is he one of us? Is he one of us?"

Unfortunately for them, I was not "one of them." But the message to me was clear--if I was not "one of them" I did not count (or, at least, not as much as I would have had I been "one of them.")

This is the underbelly of the "we" that Mr. Kaufman celebrates. While I believe that sharing experiences with people of similar backgrounds can enrich us all, we must never forget that it also has the capability of producing experiences remarkable in their cruelty and insensitivity. And this, none of us should forget as we strive to find the balance between the "I" and the "we" that Mr. Kaufman rightly identifies. --William D. Zerhouni '97-'98,   president,   Harvard-Radcliffe Republican   Alliance