Zero-Tolerance for Intolerance

Racial conflict has again beset Harvard. It was just a few months ago that the national media broke stories about a tense encounter between University President Lawrence H. Summers and Fletcher University Professor Cornel R. West ’74 that ultimately led to West’s departure to Princeton. After West’s announcement that he has decided to leave the University, another racial controversy is brewing at the Law School.

A little more than two weeks ago, a first-year law student at Harvard Law School (HLS) sent an agressive anonymous email to a classmate who had previously attacked an HLS website for referring to blacks using the term “nigs.” Although the Black Law Students Association (BLSA) decried the use of the term, other students defended his right to refer to black people using that word or any other. Since then, flyers with anti-black and anti-Semitic statements have been anonymously distributed around the Law School.

In response, HLS Dean Robert C. Clark, Dean of the J.D. Program Todd Rakoff and Dean of Students Suzanne Richardson sent an e-mail to faculty and students condemning the acts, and promising an investigation. Such measures are the typical University response to hate speech and resort to the formula of “condemn and conference.” But this time, the administration’s failure to take further action is unacceptable. According to the group, BLSA has “lost its patience” with the Law School’s “indifference to the needs of black law students in crisis.”

In a letter published in the Harvard Law Record, BLSA chastised the administration for neglecting its duty “to set a responsible institutional tone of civility, decency and respect for minorities.” About 400 students, faculty and even admitted students who were visiting the campus walked out of classes and joined BLSA on Monday in a protest rally outside Harkness Commons to oppose racial harassment at the Law School and to urge administrators to take further action.

On the other side of the Yard, University President Lawrence H. Summers has emphatically denounced the incidents at the Law School. Summers said that “We need to have zero-tolerance for intolerance.”

But what exactly does zero-tolerance mean?

If by “zero-tolerance for intolerance,” all Summers means is that the University will take stern disciplinary action against anyone who engages in racist, sexist, religious, homophobic or other discriminatory conduct, then he has misunderstood the nature and extent of the problem. Merely responding to hatred when it occurs is not enough.

Harvard, and indeed all universities, should seize the moment when incidents such as those at HLS occur. When students err on sensitive issues such as race, universities typically distance themselves from the situation, mistakenly framing the issue as an isolated incident. This “discipline and divorce” response reifies, rather than reaffirms the university’s commitment to diversity and democratic values.

Thus, zero-tolerance means embracing diversity. The current conflict at HLS is not an isolated incident, but is a symptom of a larger, more pervasive disease: inexperience with diversity. To prevent events like those at HLS from reoccurring, Harvard should take precautionary steps to reaffirm its commitment to diversity and prepare students for active participation in a multiracial democracy and a connected world.

For example, Boskey Professor of Law Lani Guinier ’71 has suggested that a university could reaffirm its commitment to diversity by requiring that all applicants write a personal statement describing how they would contribute to the diversity of the university. Evaluation of the essay would focus on the student’s commitment to contribute to the university’s diversity, not on a qualitative assessment of the substance of a student’s contribution. This reform would reemphasize that diversity is integral to the democratic mission of the university. It would also respect the unique individuality of every student—regardless of race—in creating a community rich in ideas, culture and experience.

Harvard could also restructure its curriculum. All students would profit from at least one class designed as a deliberative forum—as opposed to the traditional college lecture—that would expose them to other cultures and experiences, and enable them to actively learn and seek knowledge from those who disagree.

Summers rightly suggested that the University respond with a zero-tolerance policy reaffirming the institution’s core values. One of these values is a meaningful commitment to diversity. As BLSA wrote in its letter, “Racial harassment is not a matter of damage control or public relations, but a call for leadership.” It’s time for Summers and the administration to make comprehensive reform. Transforming the University into a training ground for diversity, rather than a breeding ground for ignorance, is the first step.

Travis G. LeBlanc is a student at Yale Law School and the Kennedy School of Government. Aaron R. S. Rudenstine ’03 is government concentrator in Quincy House.