wait a moment

Dear College Republicans

Dear College Republicans,

I think that you all exemplify the illusion of white allyship. Earlier this semester, there was an incident that occurred in the meeting you all held in regards to the Yik-Yak resolution. In that meeting an individual stated that people of color should grow thicker skin, “People are going to call you N******. They are going to call you spics…” The individual then proceeded to describe a lynching in grotesque detail. All the while, none of your members in attendance did anything to stop that individual. In fact, members (and/or visitors) of the club sat there and agreed with the statements made. As usual, the minority students in attendance had to stand up for themselves.

In the wake of this incident, you all proceeded to cover up the event; sending emails and sending letters to the Point News claiming that you all handled the situation during the meeting. Telling people that you all spoke up to correct the individual and stand up for those minorities in attendance. And it seemed as though you all got away with it, and I was willing to let it slide. However, with the rising tension on this campus and in the county as a result of the election, I refuse to let anything else slide. It irks me that I now see individuals that were in attendance during that same meeting wearing safety pins. Which leads me to wonder… Who exactly are you all standing up for? Who are you going to advocate for?

Furthermore, a great number of students participated in the walk out on November 16th, 2016. During which, we passed members of your club simply standing and watching as we walked by. Showing no interest at all in joining us in our peaceful display of solidarity to denounce the hate that has resulted from the presidential election. I would just like to remind you that, as Desmond Tutu said, “If you’re neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor.”


A Seahawk

15 thoughts on “Dear College Republicans

  1. Why don’t you try to talk to the other side instead of belittle them even more. More than likely you will never try to talk to a republican without calling them a racist. You are the reason why Trump won because only your opinion matters. To be honest, when he won it was the greatest middle finger to PC culture and it was great. Now, do you want to come to the table and talk or you going to walk out of class and complain?

  2. Russling the Jimmies,

    I have talked to the other side, and their actions after talking with them have belittled me. I have a lot of friends who are Republicans. I may even be a Republican myself. How do you know that I did not vote for Trump? I believe that you misunderstood the purpose of the piece I wrote. I am in no way bringing politics into this. And I guess I should have made it clearer that I was not talking about St. Mary’s students who are registered Republicans. I was referring to individuals that attended a specific College Republicans Club meeting (who happen to have the name of a political party in the name of their club). Whether you were one of them or not, is something that I will not assume. I know that an individual’s political affiliation does not represent all of their personal views. So no, I do not believe that all Republicans are racist.

      1. Seahawk literally said in the first sentence of their comment that they have been talking with the other side. They’ve already engaged the other side in conversation on campus, through their letter, and in the comments. I know Seahawk, and they are still trying to engage with the other side IRL. However, if these individuals keep up with their negative energy and dismissive rhetoric, a real dialogue will be difficult to achieve. And yes, Seahawk is choosing to remain anonymous, but they have every right to do so.

        1. Caroline,

          What dialogue has been negative energy and dismissive? If you are saying strongly worded responses are then I don’t think you know what dialogue is. All thought the last week, everyone has said your thoughts are valid and to express yourself thought. I am doing just that and you need to accept that or debate me.

          Russling the Jimmies

          1. I honestly wasn’t trying to challenge your thoughts, and if it came across that way I apologize. I was just offering what I’ve been told about situation. I’ll admit negative was the wrong word to use, but from talking with Seahawk they definitely feel that the people they’ve talked with have been dismissive. I am familiar with what a dialogue is, and I do believe that sometimes strongly worded responses can lead to a more open and honest dialogue.

        2. This doesn’t engage anyone in conversation, it’s a condescending and self-righteous diatribe laden with misinformation. Not to mention the stunning generalizations made. Are the College Republicans really being dismissive when, time and time again, they hold open meetings for anyone to attend?

          1. I have engaged in civil discourse with members of your club. Quite a few times actually, all of which have been in person. One of those times being right after the incident I referred to occurred. In which I sat and listened to a member of your club admit that nothing was done in the meeting. I (as well as other members of the campus community) listened as that individual admitted that they failed to speak up and be an advocate as well as every other member in that meeting. Perhaps I did generalize the members who attended that meeting. Maybe some of them really are allies and advocates for minorities on campus, but silence speaks louder than words. And their actions have not proven otherwise either.

          2. Seahawk has been responding to almost all the comments on here, using fairly respectful language in my opinion. If you don’t believe that’s an attempt at trying to engage in a dialogue, that’s your opinion. Out of curiosity, what parts of Seahawks letter did you think were condescending? I’m not trying to challenge you or be condescending myself, I honestly would like to know. I’ll admit Seahawk made some generalizations in their original letter, but they have corrected in their comments that their experience was with select members of the group. I personally think it’s unfortunate and unfair that Republicans are so frequently stereotyped and generalized. However, I feel like if Seahawk had addressed the letter to “Select Members of the College Republicans” that would have come across as them singling out and attacking specific people. Even if it wasn’t the best choice to address the letter to the whole club, perhaps it may make some of the club members aware that there are certain members of the club who are being silent and dismissive in the face of dialogue. That being said, I know there can be many reasons why people don’t speak up in public dialogues. Maybe they feel their opinion has already been shared enough times by other people, they have anxiety about speaking up, or any other reason you can think of. I’m not going to make assumptions.

            Besides the unfortunate meeting comment Seahawk brought up in their letter, frankly your open meetings sound like excellent opportunities for discussion. I’ll have to come to one. Also “diatribe” is a really awesome word, thank you for sharing it! (even though I don’t think it applies to Seahawks letter)

    1. A seahawk,

      Can you please stop acting like you are not assuming? First of all, you rejected their apologize and are subjecting them to banishment because they don’t believe the same future as you do. You have not convince a sizable part of the country that your argument is correct. Second, you harass them for not participating in a volunteer match right after the election, which they rightfully won. Should you really be shock about this after how much the campus community hated Donald Trump during the election process? Third, being offended has stop working as a effective means of persuading people after this election. Both sides were offended and tough to everyone. It just happen that the Republicans won and you haven’t accept this. You say this is about just the college republican on campus but everyone know your article is more than that. Grow up and get over it.

      Russling the Jimmies

      1. I am not banishing anyone at all. In fact I have engaged in civil discourse with members of that club about the incident that occurred. I am simply pointing out a pattern of behavior that I have noticed from a particular group of individuals on our campus. Again I will say that this has nothing to do with anyone’s political affiliation. I would be doing the same if it were a campus baking club (for example). I agree with you when you say that both sides are offended and both sides are responsible for the current climate of our country. The purpose of the march was not to focus on the president-elect or the candidates that lost. It was to show that as a campus, we will not tolerate any form of hate, and that St. Mary’s is an accepting institution and community for all of it’s students/faculty/staff. Had individuals took the time to read the mission statement, or simply talk to someone who would be participating, they would know this. I will restate that I do not in any way, shape, or form believe that all Republicans are racist.

      2. After seeing you both use the word “banishment”, all I can think about is a literally Seahawk in a castle with a little crown banishing people. So adorable, thanks for the visual Jimmy!

  3. I have found that the college republicans (minus a few members) have a great deal of compassion, understanding, and okay discussion- yet ONLY when the room is filled with people who have heard about their racism in meetings, who have come to see what actually goes down in the meetings. I have found that they are only like this when they are being monitored, by women, by a good amount of African American students who had heard all about their meetings, and others who just couldn’t believe this hateful thing happened in a club meeting.
    Also, to address the person who claimed trump’s victory is a middle finger F-U to PC culture, You’re somewhat right. It was a F*** you to political correctness, but I happen to think that PC is actually a good thing-to a certain point. Whats so bad about caring a bit more about how things you say affect people. Take for example a sexual assault survivor, who feels chills back to her assault when she hears “grab her by the pussy”. I don’t think theres anything wrong with being more PC, especially if it makes it so that a person doesn’t have to feel horribly all over again.

  4. Anonymous Seahawk, you are entitled to your opinion, but this is such a one sided and unfair generalization of an entire group of people with an obvious agenda. I was not at the meeting that led to the hateful comments being said, but I have heard from multiple people who were there that there was major disagreement with the person’s views among the attendees. In addition I know the College Republicans have since refined their meeting rules and taken steps to prevent similar incidents from occurring. Moreover, the College Republicans have no obligation to attend any rallies or events. Not everyone is going to have the same political beliefs as you, if they do not want to attend a post-election rally they don’t have to. To be fair, that rally was more than anything a reaction to Trump’s victory anyway. I doubt it would have taken place had Hillary Clinton won, like most of the campus(including me) was hoping for. Even taking this into account, just because you may have seen members of their club not attending and watching, that does not mean that no one attended. Anecdotal evidence doesn’t hold up in a court of law for a reason. An opinion piece like this only serves to further widen the polarizing ideological divides in the country, not help them. If you want to have a real discussion about political/racial issues on this campus, publish under your own name, and take your close minded generalizations elsewhere.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *