Referee for the Referendum

The College of William and Mary is a smart person's kind of school. Some millennials and Gen Z people would say it's Nerd U, but it's a place where the super-serious student can comfortably excel in a milieu dedicated almost exclusively to erudition unencumbered by social distraction. Of my peeps, the William and Mary people fit neatly among the subcategory of "my smartest friends." My 2.0 GPA and I sit in the back of this class, slightly embarrassed to be here and hoping no one calls on us.

But I love the higher-minded discussions among these smarties. Gheorghe: The Blog is the perfect amalgam cake of keen cleverness and intellectual point-making iced with a heavy coating of whimsical merry-making.  

The W and M student body now informs me that via a referendum open to all students, a majority agreed that Thomas Jefferson (and buildings or awards named after him) contributes to a hostile environment on campus. 

The fine print was that the question was worded:

The following quote is by an alumnus who is prominently represented on campus: “A black after hard labor through the day, will be induced by the slightest amusements to sit up till midnight, or later, though knowing he must be out with the first dawn of the morning…In general, their existence appears to participate more of sensation than reflection… I advance it therefore as a suspicion only, that the blacks, whether originally a distinct race, or made distinct by time and circumstances, are inferior to the whites in the endowments both of body and mind…This unfortunate difference of color, and perhaps of faculty, is a powerful obstacle to the emancipation of these people...When freed, he is to be removed beyond the reach of mixture.”
Do you think the person who wrote the above quote contributes to a hostile environment for Black, Indigenous, and People of Color on campus?

2,584 students responded, including me.  56% responded Yes, 15% Probably, 8% Undecided, 7% Probably Not, 14% No.

The Student Assembly President sent a letter to the Board of Visitors on the subject. It includes: 

The author of the anonymous quote was Thomas Jefferson. Though we hold respect for our Founders, the extremity of the quote highlights a clear disconnect between his glorification and his beliefs. Currently, many Founders are honored by being the names of the top awards that we give to our William and Mary community and distinguished guests. This indicates that they are the best students from William and Mary, which history demonstrates is untrue. While it is important that they are represented, it is also important to consider how BIPOC students may feel receiving an award named in honor of their oppressor.

Not sure how I feel about this methodology. I can't imagine anyone in their right mind responding "No" to this question in the context in which it was provided. Clearly that's the point; once you separate the quote from the man, you can look at it objectively. But separating a quote from a time period and laminating it in 21st century plastic carries some fallacy with it. 

I would never issue blind support for evil deeds with the blanket "They were different times." But acknowledging the limitations of eras gone by and the danger-fraught practice of scrutinizing the only tangible thing we are left with from a person of those times -- attributed quotes and written letters --  as something far more three-dimensional should warrant some serious asterisking.  They were indeed different times, ones in which women were 2nd class citizens in corsets, cockfighting and bull-baiting were de rigueur, electricity was a far-off invention, and philosophies were communicated via quill and ink on parchment delivered via horse-drawn carriage. Glad to be here now and not then.

These days we have the answer key to a lot of questions that have been posed through the ages. If the original Teej missed the mark (and of course he did) on this particular one -- one that, 225 years later now carries the gravity and the scars of innumerable acts of wretchedness that permanently stained our country's history -- but did so as a philosopher in search of answers and with a forestated caveat of "as a suspicion only" . . . well, it seems like something that the true intellectual would at least want to debate in an unemotional forum of bright-minded peers.

Using the results of a blind distaste test like this as evidence of the will of a student body . . . it feels like this College and the brilliant scholars who attend it should use a little more brainpower than that.  At least it does to me.  I'd invite you philosophers to weigh in. 

As for me, I'm still in the back of the class, cutting up and eagerly awaiting when we get back to your regularly scheduled dipshittery.