The other day, I stopped into Dewick for a late lunch and picked up a copy of The Primary Source. As I sat there, preparing to feast on three hour-old pasta and the new and improved, non-cardboard-tasting brownies, I marveled at the number of things - just on the cover of this biting newsletter - that I had already found offensive.
Now, like most of the Tufts community, I read the pages of The Primary Source with a combination of eccentric curiosity and visibly wincing disgust. I begin chuckling at the sheer brashness of the editors while they attempt to bombard this very liberal campus with as much anti-"PC" criticism as they can muster. Most often, the vast space of issues that are covered can keep me entertained for an entire sitting.
But then I always stop on something that hurts me personally, and the grin goes away. This is bound to happen. As a black gay male, the vast space of possible insults to who I am seems to multiply when in the presence of critical individuals rather than simply add up to a tolerable level. Whether it is The Primary Source referring to "colored" (Primary Source archive: "Dr. Rice: Not Black Enough") students on campus as "Africans" (Sept. 29, 2005) having "inter-tribal squabbles" or gay students as "heterosexual people with homosexual problems," (Source archive, "Do You Diggs It?") there is pretty much guaranteed a sentence or two within the hate-speech that attempts to label me as a dumb sex freak.
This kind of talk is not a just a fringe section of the Tufts Republicans expressing themselves. The Tufts Republicans seem to prefer this form of communication with their fellow students: Insult and make fun of everyone in the most juvenile fashion possible and ignore the consequences. Any attempt to confront the constant badgering by these people is usually met with even more specific personal attacking that often digresses from the simple difference in opinion that separates a Democrat and a Republican.
What is not so obvious is the question, "Is all of this really necessary?" Why are the Tufts Republicans a group that tends to attack other people more often than present their opinions in a convincing and mature manner? After all, I can pick up a copy of The Wall Street Journal or watch an episode of The O'Reilly Factor any day and hear the voices of somewhat competent people give compelling reasons for why they believe their different outlook on life is the better one. Why is The Primary Source so radically (liberally) different?
The reason, ironically, is that, on campus, conservative thought is the minority. The only way this group sees getting their ideas more visible is to swipe at other minorities as nastily and loudly as possible.
As a senior, I have had the opportunity to listen to the high-volume anger of this group for three long years. In my sophomore year, I had the opportunity to listen to three speakers brought to campus by the Republicans speak on why homosexuality is some sort of curable mass mental problem and calmly tell a Tufts professor in attendance, "All your friends are dead" due to their rampant promiscuity.
Now, if the aim of this organization is simply to inform an otherwise shielded campus concerning conservative issues, why would they allow such radical hatred to sully any further discussion on the issue? Why would anyone honestly listen to a Tufts conservative student speak about anything having to do with gay rights (or any other issue) in light of having fringe groups like these berate their educators in such an angry way while the Republicans sit with grins on their faces?
One might believe that, with such a small corner of the campus on their side, the Republicans are legitimized for making their presence known through uncomfortable jeers and schoolyard bullying.
I disagree.
I would argue that the argumentative personality of this group does more to hurt its causes than help. Few faculty and students take them seriously, and instead of civilized dialogue, most of their interaction with the rest of the campus is characterized by unbridled anger. This is one of the reasons their more moderate academic freedom lobbying never even got off the ground.
I say, at the beginning of this new year, the Tufts Republicans (who constitute a large part of The Primary Source staff) should take a good look at its history and ask, where has all the name-calling, the hate-speech and the victim-talk gotten them? Indeed, it may have pushed many interesting and enlightening perspectives on real-world issues even farther back into the periphery.
I say, on this, your 25th anniversary, let's put aside the bitterness of past debates and negativity and begin the next 25 years with a smile, handshake and a little maturity.
David Dennis is a senior majoring in computer science.
