Discussion Should Come First

This past Friday, Exeter’s La Alianza Latina (LAL) staged a protest in front of Grill immediately following Assembly, blocking off the main entrance. As explained in Principal Rawson’s all-school email, the protest was prompted by a costume of Trump’s wall, but ultimately intended to address the treatment of Latinx students on campus overall. Some critics have attacked the protest’s tactics, citing incidents in which protesters pushed back Exonians trying to get into Grill. 

However, considering the protestors’ goal of sparking school-wide conversation and the frankly minimal harm that came out of blocking off Grill for 15 minutes, LAL undoubtedly staged an effective and well-timed protest that incited conversation in classes, Student Council, and beyond.

The aspect of the protest that must be considered first is the event that sparked it: a cardboard representation of President Trump’s border wall worn by three Grill employees. Each member of the costume wore American flag-colored face paint and the employee in the middle also had the words “Make America Great Again” in red, white and blue plastered on her portion of the wall. LAL leaders stated that this costume harmed members of the Latinx community and made many feel unsafe on campus, later prompting Rawson and the Grill staff to apologize for the costume. In his email, Principal Rawson also renewed his commitment to make Exeter a safe and inclusive space for all.

We must, however, examine the profound repercussions that will follow complete support for La Alianza Latina on this matter. “An explicit policy clarifying boundaries of political speech by faculty and staff,” as demanded by LAL, would have wide-reaching impacts on politics and life at Phillips Exeter as a whole.

Acquiescing to subsequent demands that would limit political expression or to reform the policies would in reality only be counterproductive by setting a dangerous precedent of restriction on free speech. Even if the policy only explicitly affects faculty and staff, those are the very people that set the standard for discussion—any restriction will undoubtedly spill over to the student body. 

Such a precedent would therefore be harmful to the very discussion we seek to promote for three reasons: first—ideas that make us uncomfortable and challenge our beliefs can help us strengthen and reconsider our opinions from a new light, second—that this would place far too many conditions on free speech and third—that one of Exeter’s many goals is to prepare us for the real world.

It is crucial that a school which values discussion above all else respects all opinions, particularly those that differ from the norm. Leaders of the protest would likely argue that a Trump’s wall costume has no place at a school that cares about inclusivity, but this is simply part of a much bigger trend to exclude voices that don’t follow prominent majority opinion. Shutting down this type of speech only continues to exacerbate this problem, leading to more polarization and a reinforcement of said opinion. 

We should also think about what would happen if this type of rule were applied across the board. Many topics would become off-limits to general discussion, devolving into a system that only values the opinions of the most vocal groups on campus. Maybe we should officially rebuff Friday’s assembly speaker, Jose Olivarez, for claiming, even jokingly, that “there aren’t any white people in heaven.” These changes would have obvious negative effects on our community. Thus, the same basic rights that allow for the LAL protest should also be protected when used elsewhere.

Finally, it goes without saying that Exeter is far safer, both physically, and more importantly, ideologically, than nearly everywhere else in the world. After acknowledging how tame the “Build the Wall” costume is compared to most political expression and disagreements in the wider world, it seems like a great disservice to students to only allow speech that is agreed upon by all. Exposure to only inoffensive ideas will foster a misconception in how the world will actually treat us.

To recall Mr. Rawson’s words in the Exeter Bulletin and his all-school email­—“at Exeter, we want every student and adult to have an equal sense of belonging and equal opportunity to thrive.” Moving forwards and complying with all of LAL’s demands only undermines this as students begin to police their political speech and shut down genuine disagreement in favor of falsely affirming the more vocally expressed opinion.