We must recognize that a “conundrum of change” only exists if you’re ignorant of the past, unwilling to admit that you’re wrong, and indifferent to the suffering of others.
Princeton’s international students have always been a key part of the vibrant academic and social community the University is greatly known for. Dismissing them during these times would be of great disservice to Princeton as a whole.
As part of this University, we should be tied together more by seriousness regarding racial justice than by the disciplinary matters that many of us promote and pride.
Both this country and the University have a long history of benefiting from foreign talent; international students and scholars have been part of the lifeblood of American academia since the dawn of this nation. To allow this injustice and manipulation to persist would be to watch idly as the United States is led further into isolationism and darkness.
Even though ICE’s modifications say the government does not want you in the United States, I know that myself and the University want you here to complete your Princeton education. The Princeton community is not the same without you.
As members of the Princeton Filipino Community, we would like to take this moment to provide further context about Filipino current events, reflect on our country’s experiences with dictatorship and struggle for representation, and express our continued hope for the future of the Philippines and for democracy.
What Rajasekar and POCC misunderstand is that their voices are not unheard; they are rather — for perhaps the first time in a long time — unheeded. That is a sign of positive change for Princeton.
It is a sad reality that the mission of the Prize has become only more urgent in the 17 years since its founding. While racial animus, ever present in our American experience, has seeped even more into the national discourse, we are nonetheless inspired and rejuvenated in hope by each years’ Prize winners. We are also invigorated by the ongoing opportunities for Princeton alumni to gather together to further explore our own racial identities and to push each other to expand our anti-racist actions.
Put more simply, we care a great deal about how discourse is conducted at a university and could not care less about what.
The [POCC] piece’s core arguments are the product of an ignorance that is neither honest nor neutral. This ignorance is deliberate, unapologetic, and weaponized.
The Andlinger Center is being used.
We demand the administration take material steps to ensure the renaming is the first step of many to address its racist institutional history.
If Princeton retains its name it will be interesting to see how it justifies William’s legacy and its affiliation with a King who once ruled over England’s colonies, including those in North America, and oversaw the dawn of a period in slave trading in which the trade of African slaves peaked.
I challenge the entire Editorial Board to embrace your Public Safety department and make an appointment to speak with these dedicated officers who put their lives on the line every day to keep you safe.
We must cast away reformism and abolish the toxic spaces we ourselves create — not only to make students’ lives better in Princeton’s future, but to transform our own politics, to better steel us for the fight against both fascist white supremacy and its liberal-reformist cousin.
Students’ upbringings significantly influence — if not outright determine — the course of their academic and social lives at Princeton.
It is our hope that the University will strive to bring as many students back to campus as possible.
We call on President Eisgruber and Director of the Center Lynn Loo to end Princeton’s relationship with ExxonMobil.
While it’s important to celebrate Princeton’s accomplishments in diversifying its student body, recent data shows that there’s still much room for improvement. As was the case 60 years ago, it may be time to rethink the admissions system again.
