OPINION

Wellesley College Lacks the 'Diversity' that Matters: Diversity of Thought

By Georgia Pellegrini '03, Wellesley College, and Brian Grech '03, Harvard College
March 4, 2003

We'd like to commend Pamela Bandyopadhyay for astutely observing that Wellesley lacks the only kind of diversity that matters: diversity of thought ("Devil's advocate craves a debate," Feb. 20). The premise of a liberal arts institution is a free and open exchange of ideas characterized by diverse perspectives and beliefs, tolerance of opinions that contradict one's own and openness to constructive change.

How is such an environment possible with only one openly Republican professor to mentor conservative students? Where are the voices that break rank with the pre-approved Left?

Instead of addressing the real problem of uniformity of thought here at home, Wellesley continues to tow the line of unthinking allegiance to "diversity" to its illogical extreme. We hear of Wellesley's amicus curiae brief in support of the University of Michigan's policies of blatant reverse discrimination. We hear of SOAC's proposal [a Wellesley College student-activity organization] to amend its constitution specifically, some suspect illegally, to allow Ethos [a black student organization] to discriminate on the basis of race. Both are leaps backward for the causes of race relations and campus liberalism. Both institutionalize race-consciousness. Both contradict the U.S. Constitution. Both promote the fallacy that diversity is only skin-deep. Both demonstrate Wellesley's oblivion surrounding its fundamental flaw: too many people here think alike.

To be openly conservative at Wellesley is to contend daily with emotionally driven "testaments," shrill libel and hateful words in the name of "progress" or "peace." Ask any conservative here why she believes what she does; she'll undoubtedly give you a thoughtful answer of substance. This is because she is constantly forced to defend her opinions; such a trial by fire fosters clarity of thought, moral courage and tempered political opinions. But lately, the demonization of the Right has gone too far. Now, even moderates like Pamela are starting to recoil in discomfort while some Republicans are choosing anonymity over the risk of maltreatment.

It's time for three big changes.

First, administrators and students alike should reexamine the widespread obsession with race. True diversity has little to do with the boxes we check on admission forms. What makes us better citizens and leaders is diversity of thought - not melanin levels. If we had more professors who disagreed with the tyrannical majority, more of us would hear both sides. If admissions officers valued political and philosophical differences as highly as they value racial ones, Wellesley's Left would be more often intelligently pressed to escape its hopeless lack of critical thinking. Democrats and Greens deserve to be challenged the way we Republicans are.

Second, the Left should start criticizing the Right in terms of logic and evidence, instead of hysteria, emotion and mindless regurgitation of forwarded email. We impatiently await intelligent debates based on content over clamor -- on the merits of policy rather than vicious ad hominem attacks and reckless assumptions.

Finally, closet conservatives should speak up. The Wellesley College Republicans devoted Tuesday of this week to its own Conservative Coming Out Day. Starting now, we invite those conservatives who remain anonymous to take pride in their convictions and voice them more frequently. We laud the Wellesley Republicans who already endure attacks and respond with intellectual fortitude and humility -- we only wish there were more of them.

The above was originally written as a Letter to the Wellesley News. Brian Grech is the former President of the Harvard Republican Club.