Four Years at Columbia: War, Protests, and Elections

The class of 2006 knows it's spring when controversy begins on campus.

The country's entrance into war marked our first year at Columbia, so perhaps it's fitting that we're a class shaped by controversy both within and outside of our gates. We've publicly debated racism, academic freedom, and war. We've been vocal in our criticism of leaders-from George W. Bush to Lee Bollinger to John McCain. And Low Plaza has always been our stage.

When the war began, hundreds gathered in the center of campus, some chanting "No blood for oil"; others, "Support our troops." Within a few weeks we were grappling with questions of a university's role during wartime after an anthropology professor said he wished for "a million Mogadishus" to kill American soldiers. Our new president, a free speech scholar, denounced the remark as disgusting and offensive while maintaining that the professor had every right to say it.

Although the war continued to shape our country, it soon faded into the background of most students' consciousnesses. During our sophomore year, our attention turned to the racial climate on campus and our teaching assistants' working conditions.

First there was the "affirmative action bake sale," where conservative campus leaders sold cookies at higher prices to white, Jewish, Asian, and male students, and at lower prices to black, Hispanic, and female students. Then came the Orgo Night jokes, which glibly used racial and gender stereotypes. Then the "Blacky Fun Whitey" cartoon that parodied Black History Month by portraying stupid, athletic black men intertwined with Ku Klux Klan references.

Students of color responded by calling for an examination of the way Columbia students think about race. They called for safe spaces on campus, changes to the Core Curriculum, a vice provost for multicultural affairs, and diversity training for faculty, staff, and students. Their demands largely remain unfulfilled today.

That same semester brought a graduate student strike after the University refused to allow them to form a union. The students complained about their salaries and benefit packages and brought classes to a halt when they walked off the job for a month. The union does not exist today.

By the time we returned to Columbia as juniors, there was a presidential election to think about. A huge majority of students supported John Kerry, and they traveled to Ohio, New Hampshire, and Virginia to get out the vote. They returned to campus disappointed, and the Democrats have not been as prominent on campus since.

The following spring brought the biggest controversy during our four years at Columbia: MEALAC. A film called Columbia Unbecoming alleged that some professors in the Middle East and Asian languages and cultures department discriminated against Jewish students or those who defended Israel's right to exist. Although the complaints were originally made by students, the discussion was dominated by those outside the gates. National media outlets swarmed, advocacy groups screamed, and many students were left feeling overwhelmed and unable to have an honest discussion about the line between academic freedom and classroom intimidation.

Once again, the major campus controversy faded from the collective consciousness during the transition to a new academic year. But for the first time during our stay at Columbia, the major campus debate returned to a subject we had discussed before. The Columbia University Concerned Students of Color may have disappeared in 2004, but many of its members created Stop Hate on Columbia's Campus after a series of alleged hate crimes left racial vandalism in several on-campus dorms.

The most blatant incident came in December, when two students scrawled racial epithets and homophobic slurs on the wall of a Ruggles suite. The students admitted to the crime, were kicked out of campus housing-though they have not been expelled from the University-and are awaiting a plea deal in the criminal court system.

For the second time in two years, students demanded a vice provost position, new Core Curriculum texts, and more diversity training. And for the second time in two years, they criticized Bollinger for being unresponsive.

Criticizing Bollinger has been a mainstay of the last four years; the class of 2006 has never been afraid to question authority. As a class, we've never agreed on much of anything except the need to debate serious issues. But in smaller ways-on a campus that many say lacks coherence, while debating the most divisive questions-we've been united as a class.