What Conservatives get wrong about Cancel Culture

“In asking for a holistic examination of Ronald Reagan’s legacy, White Conservatives interpret this request as an attack on their hero”

On August 11th, I self-published a written piece titled, “An Open Letter to The King’s College: What’s a degree from The King’s College to a Black Student.” This letter, essentially, highlighted the distinct realities White and Black students face at King’s by referencing racist content shared by both students and Faculty. Additionally, I reflected on the newfound impact of Ronald Reagan’s private recordings for both his legacy and the House of Reagan. After publication, I received a myriad of responses that ranged from overwhelming support to fierce questioning of my intelligence and intentions. The responses relayed a clear common denominator: a feeling of shock from readers. Many were stunned at how this form of injustice could fester in a community they called home for so long; while on the contrary, many were appalled as they felt their college was being attacked with baseless claims. Throughout all the debates my piece conjured from the multiple Twitter threads to the vast amount of comment streams on Facebook and Instagram, the result was the same: astonishment from the King’s Community. They were surprised by the voices of their classmates, the silence of their professors, and the conduct of their alumni. However, I felt no sense of shock as these responses confirmed my beliefs. The indisputable truth is that we are a divided community with an abundance of hostility deeply rooted in our culture.

Each day I was overwhelmed with sadness as I read various alumni proceed to use personal attacks against those who simply disagreed with them. I was discouraged as I saw my peers fall prey to anger, allowing for the provocation from alumni to prevent any true attempts of healing. I became disheartened as I heard little to no objection from the faculty and staff. But I was most disappointed to see an opportunity for heartfelt reconciliation hijacked by another conversation about “Cancel Culture.” I too fell victim to anger; anger inspired by being misunderstood time and time again. My open letter was never about a single professor, about recounting examples of prejudice, or about if Reagan was a perfect namesake. My open letter was to acknowledge how students of color face difficulties that for too long have been dismissed. I hoped to reveal how the King’s culture is beautiful but flawed, and in need of dire change. Yet, my revelation was received as a threat and twisted by a narrative of fear. Here lies the central tension: in asking for a holistic examination of Ronald Reagan’s legacy, White Conservatives interpret this request as an attack on their hero, their values, and their way of life. This false sense of victimization prevents any path towards progress and works to make our walls of division insurmountable.

The broader discussion at hand is not about “Cancel Culture” or eliminating Conservative tradition but how can we better understand the experiences of the entire community. We must shift our mindset, not to grant special treatment to Black students, but to graciously take into account the needs of Black students. We cannot afford to lose track of our commitment to diversity and maintaining a loving community by affirming all members of King’s, past, present, and future. For those who support the agenda of creating a culture of acceptance, please know that the journey towards improvement is filled with tension where you must forgive as often as you fight. As Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. said in his Letter From a Birmingham Jail, “There is a type of constructive, nonviolent tension which is necessary for growth. Just as Socrates felt that it was necessary to create a tension in the mind so that individuals could rise from the bondage of myths and half-truths… so must we see the need for nonviolent gadflies to create the kind of tension in society that will help men rise from the dark depths of prejudice and racism to the majestic heights of understanding and brotherhood.”

Even the strongest ally must self-reflect and assess how they contribute to division and, moving forward, how they will contribute to fostering inclusion. Similar to those who would oppose change, those who favor it are often unaware of the ugly truths surrounding them. Students of color face additional struggles often unseen to their peers, such as prejudicial practices from faculty, the constant glorification of past ‘heroes’ who dehumanized you or your people, and a student body unwilling to acknowledge that these difficulties even exist. The contrasting parallel of how Black and White’s students comprehend historical figures within the United States illustrates the unique challenges people of color face. For example, I love the Declaration of Independence and believe it to be the single greatest writing in the Western World. However, I simultaneously understand that in praising the Declaration I must also grapple with the reality of the Founding Fathers. These political trailblazers committed acts of great evil where they brutally dehumanized my ancestors by participating in slavery. White students have a higher degree of separation from these injustices and are farther removed from the personal harms and residual impacts these ethical deficiencies cause. Therefore, the majority of White students either ignore or fail to recognize the differing perspectives Black students may have in comparison to their traditional stances. The lens in which Black students view American leaders comes from a more holistic standpoint in which we’re forced to accept the failures alongside the triumphs. This is natural to us because the moral failings you attribute to being human always come at the cost of our humanity.

Now for all those who were appalled at my open letter, felt as if their institution was unfairly threatened or wrote, “The critics and activists don’t just have a problem with Reagan, but also with what The King’s College stands for” I write this: the vindictive convictions placed upon me and my peers as if certain actors were judge, jury, and prosecutors will not silence our speech. You do not possess the power to determine who and what I stand for. Your futile attempts of weaponized elitism do not erase the truth. What disappoints me with every response to my letter that defended Reagan, Conservatism, or explained the dangers of student activism is that each piece was written from a place of fear. A fear that “Cancel Culture” is coming for The King’s College. A fear that Conservatism is under attack by the “Woke Left” who will stop at nothing until their demands are met. This fear is unfounded. No one demanded Ronald Reagan be forgotten and removed from the curriculum. There was no expectation for anyone to relinquish their faith or absolve their praise in worthy historical figures. The only thing I demanded was for my voice to be heard, for my contributions to be respected, and my opinions to be seen as legitimate. Yet, instead of hearing my voice, you labeled me an outside agitator who spewed rhetoric of radical activism. You saw my words as disrespectful and my actions temperamental. As Dr. King explained in his Letter From a Birmingham Jail, “You deplore the demonstrations taking place… But your statement, I am sorry to say, fails to express a similar concern for the conditions that brought about the demonstrations. I am sure that none of you would want to rest content with the superficial kind of social analysis that deals merely with effects and does not grapple with underlying causes.” Do not allow for your love of order, and your fear of tension to prevent growth. This fear eliminates all goodwill and averts understanding.

The rushed defense of Reagan only helps to prove that students of color are to be seen, but not heard; for if we speak we are sure to be dismissed as radical leftists. The inability to recognize the harms of racism plagues Conservatism the same way it plagues King’s. I am skeptical of Conservatism for the very behavior I’ve witnessed by the Alumni of the King’s college. In asking for equality no sensible ideology or person should feel threatened; rather the efforts to reach fair conditions for all is an application of the principles Conservatism claims to believe. Hear me when I tell you this: Conservatives, you are not under attack and you are not victims.

An article in defense of Reagan after the release of his private recordings said; “At King’s, we know our namesakes were not angels. Though it is necessary to see these men and women in all their triumphs and failures, it would not be fair to reject one for an arguably out-of-character comment. Using that standard, no figure is safe.” This assertion is bold because the author equates not being racist with the behavior of angels. In fear of losing his heroes this author so casually diminishes egregious wrongdoing and normalizes prejudice. The continual downplay of racism and the history of oppression does not make for an accepting community, but a community of exclusion. Fear can not take root any deeper in our home. Those willing to engage in discussion and advocate for a better future are more King’s than those unwavering in their commitment to Conservatism. It is not activism to call for equality, but rather an act of love. Throughout history, some of the clearest examples of love are seen through those who advocate for the marginalized. One of the greatest appeals of Christianity- which should also be an appeal of Christian college- is Christ’s sacrificial love for those that society pushed aside. Christ championed the broken, heard those who were silenced, and advocated for any in need of help, be it women, children or the poor. Why would The King’s College not emulate its namesake by advocating for minority students?

There has been and will continue to be great improvements made towards ensuring every student regardless of ethnicity, gender or orientation feels loved and accepted by the overall community. The student-led decision to rename the House of Reagan to the House of Honor, in addition to the President’s cabinet expanding and diversifying to allow for a larger array of perspectives to be heard, are great first steps on our road to progress. While there are many reasons to feel defeated, I remain optimistic that the concerns expressed by students of color are being taken seriously by leaders who truly care to see our community advance. Regardless of my hope, the change I’m describing cannot be actualized by an institution alone. Ultimately, the burden of change falls upon us; everyone who has ever been blessed to call the King’s college their home. The need for improvement stretches far beyond campus or the confines of a four-year program. To be mindful of your privilege, while also being the best ally possible for those facing unique challenges, is an everyday test. The people affected by your continual growth, or lack thereof, will not solely be members of the King’s community, but the broader society you originally sought to transform. Therefore, the cultural shift starts with introspection. How will we be better tomorrow?