Matty Van Meter Actions speak louder than petitions

Author: Matty Van Meter

To some it would be a truism to say that action (and activism) is small and day-to-day. It seems to me that the truth of the truism is too often overlooked. Activism has become synonymous with banner waving, slogan chanting and signature collecting. I do not wish to seem a Scrooge - indeed, it seems hardly the season, with temperatures defying meteorological gravity and the Northeast a bleak panorama of grays and browns - and certainly these signature-laden operations do occasionally employ their resources effectively. Yet, the word "activism" has implicit in its very etymology "energetic action," as the OED would have it. You will forgive me if waving an angry sign at passing cars, or adding your name to an e-mail petition seems to me deeply inactive, and, in the former case, a tad self-indulgent. These trappings of activism sometimes conceal a deep and pervasive torpidity of action on a day-to-day level, and, most frequently, distract from the real processes, which are the stuff of change.

This brings me to the matter at hand. A number of faculty members wrote a letter to the Campus at the end of last November, petitioning for the College to "reaffirm our commitment to diversity." While I could add to the volumes already written on the endowment of a professorship in the name of Chief Justice Rehnquist, to which the petition is a reaction, I am primarily concerned here with this particular reaction to it. Do the signers of this letter think that this action will change actual policy even one iota? Does it constitute real action, or is it, as I suspect, a waste of time? Policy change, like any change, does not come about because a number of people, however influential or erudite, have signed a strongly worded missive.

And policy change is everywhere in the letter's subtext. Implicit in this "reaffirmation" is the desire for assertion that we are, after all, a united campus, homogenous at least in our feelings of repugnance towards Rehnquist. We are not united against the professors, nor would the cause of diversity be served if we were. These professors obviously have a heartfelt commitment to the college community and to preserving the rights of all people, but must the administration's time be wasted in reaffirming a policy which we already had, and which was in effect during and I would say upheld by the acceptance of the endowed professorship? To those who value diversity, I say that change is wrought every day. Activism is small; it is not reaffirmations of commitments to diversity. It is seemingly mundane, and yet more effective than all mission statements.

So what are these day-to-day actions, which are so vitally important? There is a saying of my Quaker ancestors: "let your life speak." Our capacity for change is not in the loud, but ultimately ineffective and confrontational writing of letters and writing of posters and slogans, but how we live our lives. So how can you change Middlebury? Turn off your lights if you're concerned about the environment, don't leave Friday night's mess for the custodians, if you support the workers, and, if you support diversity, try sitting at the "black table." It's a start, and it's real.