When
Donald Trump was first elected, indeed throughout the election cycle,
there were tacit comparisons made to Germany of the 1930s. Plenty of
people were quoting - in memes, on social media - the famous line by
Martin Niemöller, a Protestant pastor
who spoke out against Adolf Hitler and
spent the last seven years of his life in a concentration camp for
it. "First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out
- Because I was not a Socialist. Then they came for the Trade
Unionists, and I did not speak out - Because I was not a Trade
Unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out -
Because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me - and there was no one
left to speak for me,"
Niemöller is famous for saying.
While
some of those doomsday scenarios may have seemed to represent a more
cynical point of view, today it does not seem so far-fetched. "Give
him a chance", people said. "He is our President."
However, events as they have unfolded since Trump’s ascension
to power have not given anyone solace in the face of such
historically laden circumstances. To anyone with even the most basic
appreciation for history (or eyes, even) the parallels to that era
are obvious and unsettling. Like those troubling times, people of
conscience have begun to organize. And today the characterization is
no longer so extreme. In fact, all of the pieces seem to be in place.
President Trump, for his part at least, does not seem to have any
problem playing the part of tyrannical leader. Today, we do
have something called a “resistance". People are
organizing to protect people from being rounded up. The Ku Klux Klan
expresses itself openly - not only with words but with violence.
Black lives are terrorized daily. Bomb threats of Jewish Community
Centers have reached record levels. Calls to re-institute "Stop
& Frisk" are being reissued. Should it matter that today
it's called ICE and not Gestapo?
The
historical echoes are chilling. And without going into all the
parallels (there are many) "Professor Watchlists" for
so-called "anti-American"
scholars
have drawn increased attention thanks to the so-called "alt-right"
and white supremacist blogs and news services which cause them to go
viral. Left-leaning or progressive scholars in the academy
(especially scholars of color) have been picketed by College
Republican conservative groups. Conservative speakers have also been
picketed. There are massive political debates on college campuses
today about policies, “safe spaces” and an overall effort
to flesh out the true meaning of the first amendment. Most recently,
Dr. Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor, a professor at Princeton University,
received death threats after Fox News aired a clip from her
commencement speech at Hampshire College. Taylor, the author of From
#BlackLivesMatter to Black Liberation
is
also working on a new book in progress Race
for Profit: Black Housing and the Urban Crisis of the 1970s.
Taylor canceled scheduled subsequent talks as a result. A petition
initiated by the Department of African-American Studies and a
Facebook post by Black Lives Matter in solidarity with Taylor went
viral.
But
unlike the alleged rebukes of conservative speakers, such as the
recent flap over the authors of the controversial book The
Bell Curve,
and the expected hew and cry about abuses of academic freedom from
the right, Yamahtta Taylor’s case did not garner as many
headlines as it probably should have. (See: Where is the outrage for
Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor?
This, in addition to many similar cases, has led to a rich (and
worthwhile) debate about the strictures and limits of academic
freedom on college campuses - one that we have been having since
the Berkeley Free speech movement days of the 1960s, and earlier.
Besides these egregious
examples of individual harassment, there has also been what might be
called "institutional harassment" - of either college
presidents of color - black leaders of predominately white
institutions, or in a recent case, of an entire set of black leaders
in Higher education - Presidents of Historically Black Colleges
and Universities (HBCUs). In a "post-civil rights" society,
the question before these leaders is how to lead Black institutions
of higher education in the Trump era - dealing with a government
that is hostile to black people. In a time where people loudly
question the need for HBCUs - who see it as a example of reverse
racism - why do we have historically black institutions? Why is
there a black history month? We don't have a white history month. The
rise of white student unions on college campuses tells the tale. What
is the role for HBCUs in a time of #BlackLivesMatter? How do we get a
seat at the table?
There
were early signs of trouble. When the Talladega College Tornado
Marching Band agreed to perform at then
President-elect Donald Trump's inaugural parade in spite of protests
by some alumni and members of the public, it became
the only historically black college or university (HBCU) to
participate. The outcry was deafening. Or when Betsy DeVos, Trump's
education secretary was invited to be the keynote speaker at
Bethune-Cookman university, the students booed, with many even
turning their backs in protest over shouts from then President Edison
O. Jackson
who stated, over loud jeers from the audience, “If
this behavior continues, your degrees will be mailed to you. Choose
which way you want to go.” Jackson
resigned from the institution in the wake of financial woes, although
the situation with DeVos probably did not help.
There is a general
misunderstanding (call it a selective revisionism, not "fake
news") among the Trump administration about the historical
mission of HBCUs in America -indeed of African-American history
itself. Take Trump's comment about the great work Frederick Douglass
is now doing, and "an example of somebody who's done an amazing
job and is being recognized more and more." In one of the
strongest cases for the continued existence of Black Studies that
I've ever seen, Americans wondered: Could it be that the President
didn't know who Frederick Douglass was?
At a
White House meeting between President Trump
and the leaders of HBCUs held in the Oval Office on February
27th, the President made promises to the leaders
of those venerable institutions - promises about financial relief for
the many HBCUs who have seen a dip in recent years in their
fundraising and giving. The next day, February 28th, Trump
signed an Executive Order, extending the life of the White House
Initiative on Historically Black Colleges and Universities, which had
been under the Department of Education since Jimmy Carter first
established it in 1979.
After
that now infamous
meeting, Betsy DeVos,
Trump's controversial Secretary of Education, used
the opportunity to make a false comparison to the charter school
debate now raging in education,
wrongheadedly describing the origins of HBCUs as having
“started from the fact that there were too
many students in America who did not have equal access to education.
living proof that when more options are provided to students, they
are afforded greater access and greater quality”
and in another statement praising HBCUs for
having "identifying a system that wasn’t
working” and taking it “upon
themselves to provide the solution” from
the outset of their founding."
Of course this
statement was universally criticized and roundly dismissed by anyone
with even an inkling of an understanding of Black History--dare I say
American History.
John
S. Wilson, former President of Morehouse College and the head of the
White House Initiative under Obama, responded to Devos's statement
explaining:
“HBCUs were not created because the 4 million newly freed
blacks were unhappy with the choices they had. They were created
because they had no choices at all. That is not just a very important
distinction, it is profoundly important. Why? Because, if one does
not understand the crippling and extended horrors of slavery, then
how can one really understand the subsequent history and struggle of
African Americans, or the current necessities and imperatives that
grow out of that history and struggle?”
However, in our uproar
about what appeared to be "a seat at the table", what we
may have missed is that a deal may have also have been on the table -
a deal that if accepted, could very well change the nature of HBCUs
in this country. DeVos' cryptic statements about HBCU's may obscure a
potentially ulterior motive - to turn HBCUs into the charter schools
of Higher Education. Before you say "No", consider this.
Trump promised massive funds for HBCUs. It made headlines. What has
not made as many headlines is the fact that thus far no money has
been forthcoming. Money was promised but never delivered. If
#BlackTwitter is any indication, many assume it is never coming. But
it just might be. The aforementioned funds may come from some of the
sources that have bankrolled Charter Schools and have flooded a
growing number of districts with private donor money (and in most
cases public money). So much money in fact, that many public schools
find it hard to compete-- a system that essentially provides charters
with tax payer-funded public start-up funds and allows them to also
enjoy a kind of entrepreneurial quasi-private status as they compete
to receive private funds.
In
August of 2017, Education secretary Betsy Devos back pedaled on her
statements of of the previous spring regarding HBCUs. As reported by
the Root, she stated, in an interview
with the Associated Press,
“When
I talked about it being a pioneer in choice, it was because I
acknowledge that racism was rampant and there were no choices. These
HBCUs provided choices for black students that they didn’t
have.”
I
knew President John Wilson from my days at Boston College. I interned
for a group called “Bridging Bridges”
that grew out of the cooperation of several Boston
area community based youth development organizations, but mainly
Concerned Black Men of Massachusetts, Inc. (CBMM)
and the Greater Boston Morehouse College Alumni Association (GBMCAA).
There was also cooperation and support from the Paul Robeson
Institute (PRI)--all major voices in
changing the lives of young black men in the 1990s. They saw these
groups as "bridges" in the community. Their task and goal
was simply to "bridge the bridges".
He and several of the others who formed that group—Dr. Keith
Motley (who also took a somewhat earlier than expected retirement
this year as the first Black Chancellor of Umass-Boston under the
muted cries of racism but officially over budget matters.... another
casualty of "Institutional harassment"), Demetriouse L.
Russell, and Dr. Donald Brown were generous mentors. I happily and
proudly took the minutes amidst special appearances from fellow
Morehouse College alumni Spike Lee, Jasmine Guy, and the mighty
Morehouse College Glee Club. Although I am not a Morehouse man
myself, for obvious reasons, I feel a special kinship.
I
have been struggling to understand exactly what happened with this
situation. Originally, TheRoot
had reported that Wilson had been fired as President due to the White
House meeting. He was after all "the only HBCU president to
boldly speak out after Donald Trump summoned the heads of HBCUs to
the White House to sit quietly for a round of Betsy DeVos insults and
pose for Kellyanne Conway’s
Snapchat,"
The Root reported.
He was fired for it, the HBCU
Digest reported.
However,
in a letter to students explaining that reports of his ouster were
“not
accurate”
Wilson stated, "while many of the HBCU presidents raised the
expectations of their constituents, other than getting bronzer all
over his hand, nothing much came out of the summit." His
Although Wilson stepped down in June, only three months later, when
his current contract ended, the speculation of many observers at the
time was that his contract was not renewed because of his handling of
Trump. Wilson was defiant in his defense of the meeting, the damage
was done—it was a public relations disaster. In addition to
natural skepticism, the image of Kellyanne
Conway’s feet on the couch—a moment begging for further
analysis to be sure—eliminated any possibility of this being
received in any way other than outright disgust by many.
(#BlackTwitter swooned about never having been allowed to place their
feet on their mother’s couch, but the truth is that the optics
of a white woman surrounded by mostly black men in such a casual
position smacked of an earlier epoch in American history. But that is
another blog.)
However,
what Wilson (nor most of the leaders gathered at that fateful
meeting) may have
failed to realize however, is that what DeVos may have been proposing
was that HBCUs will be the latest target of Trump’s obsession
with privitization and as such, HBCUs will enter into the fractious
debate around public vs. charters—thus underscoring the current
crisis in Black Education. (Trump is also trying to shut down Amtrak!
Probably for purposes of privatization. Remember Trump Air? There
is a reason why he campaigned on fixing our crumbling airports.
Privatization. Get it?) There must be a reason Trump placed the White
House initiative under the Oval Office--in a clear case of keep your
friends close, and your enemies closer.
Wilson
was one of the only leaders who spoke out against Trump after the
meeting. In his efforts to get HBCUs a seat at the table, he may have
sacrificed his position. But at the same time, perhaps Wilson
understood something we don't. Things weren't perfect before this
either. There were budget issues. An Inside Higher Ed article stated,
“Wilson has endured his share of bumps during his tenure. He
put budget cuts in place to stem a financial crisis in 2013. He took
criticism for being unable to reverse a recent history of falling
enrollment at Morehouse” A petition was also circulated for his
ouster.
For many of the finance riddled HBCUs, a chance for a seat at the
table may prove too hard to resist. But we cannot say that John
Wilson did not warn us.
|