Photo of counter-protesters on Saturday, Jan. 12. Courtesy of MyCentralJersey.com
In response to a white supremacist rally planned for 12 p.m. on Saturday, Jan. 12, 2019, right-of-center University professors condemned white supremacy more broadly and asserted that ideas propagated by the movement were not only contrary to their own values but important to be countered.
In the days leading up to Saturday, the white supremacist organization—namely, the New Jersey European Heritage Association (NJEHA)—created advertisements for the rally and posted them on campus. It was not the first time the organization had pursued such action, with flyers being found on various spots on campus in the fall of 2017.
Ultimately, the white supremacist rally was called off, with the NJEHA explaining that they had “punk’d” the Princeton community. Nevertheless, the cancellation did not stop counter-protests from taking place that Saturday.
The situation at large also led to much discussion about how the University community ought to deal with these ideas.
Despite the fact that he was aware of signals that the rally might be cancelled, McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence Robert P. George thought it important to go ahead and issue a statement condemning white supremacist ideology to fellows of the James Madison Program, which he directs.
A white supremacist group has been threatening to march in Princeton tomorrow. The University is bracing for it, though there are signals that the organizers may call it off. Here is my statement to the Undergraduate Fellows of the James Madison Program:https://t.co/B5tH3K68nu
— Robert P. George (@McCormickProf) January 12, 2019
Courtesy of twitter.com
While George wrote that he does not wish to “police students’ opinions or tell them what to think,” he made clear that the white supremacist rally was contrary to his own values, as well as the values of the James Madison Program at large.
“I suspect that, like me, you judge racist beliefs to be reprehensible and disgusting,” explained George. “The fact that you are Undergraduate Fellows of an academic program devoted to enhancing our understanding and deepening our appreciation of American ideals and institutions suggests that you believe, as I do, that ‘all men are created equal’—that every member of the human family—irrespective of race, ethnicity, or anything else—is the bearer of profound, inherent, and equal dignity.”
It is because of these beliefs that George “oppose[s] white supremacy and [is] revolted by the thought of white supremacists coming to Princeton to broadcast their prejudice and hate.”
George recognized that students and other members of the University community will invariably respond to the white supremacist rally in different ways. Some will want to participate in rallies and counter-protests while others will deny white supremacists the attention and hold prayer vigils and rallies that are out of view. Some may even ignore the white supremacists entirely.
After all, as George explained in an interview with the Tory, the white supremacist rally was merely aiming to display their fringe ideas and provoke. George also made it clear that though there are many ways to respond, violence ought not to be one of them.
The issuing of the statement itself was the way George chose to act. He did not think it appropriate to engage with the white supremacist organization directly.
“If anybody wants to do business in the proper currency of intellectual discourse—give reasons, make arguments, produce evidence—then I’m happy to talk with them, whether it’s about race or any other hot-button issue of our time,” George explained. “But the white supremacist group that was coming to campus was very clear that they don’t do business in discussion or debate, and it’s clear that they don’t do business in the sense of intellectual discourse, so I didn’t see any reason to engage with them.”
Other right-of-center professors, such as William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Politics Keith Whittington, agreed with George that the ideas expressed by white supremacists are not valuable ideas worthy of debate.
“You don’t want to legitimate white supremacy by ‘debating’ it, and you also want to be cautious about giving them more attention than they otherwise would have,” explained Whittington. “There is a distinction here with ideas that are intellectually serious [and ideas that are] not, and it’s a political task to educate the public about it.”
Whittington explained that even though they are not intellectually serious, white supremacist ideas cyclically reoccur. Since this is the case, “you can’t stick your head in the sand and ignore [such ideas],” explained Whittington, adding that it is necessary to grapple with them.
Whittington also thought it important to situate white supremacy in the larger political context.
“All big political movements seem to have [extremes], and each have fringe elements that may seem attractive,” explained Whittington. “The Republican Party cleary has a visible problem with an element of society that has become very vocal and associated with them, and there is an obligation to separate themselves from that.”
In this way, Whittington made it clear that the party is not intrinsically associated with this extreme movement but that the current context does necessitate condemning it.
Professor of Politics and International Affairs John B. Londregan, who is also right-of-center, also strongly condemned the white supremacist rally and agreed with George and Whittington on many a point.
Londregan’s most important takeaway from the situation concerned the path forward.
He explained that students and other members of the University community ought to carefully evaluate this experience they’ve had with white supremacy.
The path forward, explained Londregan, is also to discuss how and why white supremacists might want to bring their ideas to campus and what can be done to better counter them in the future.
News Writer Gabriel Duguay ‘22 contributed reporting.
Copyright © 2024 The Princeton Tory. All rights reserved.