The one thing all Cornell students have in common is the hard work they put into getting admitted to Cornell, the years they invested in studying here, and the common positive impact that a Cornell degree will have on their resumes.
With luck, Cornellians will allow Cornell to shape their character and sense of values as the institution nurtures them during their most impressionable years – when they learn important life lessons.
A decade ago, new student orientation sought to integrate new students into the Cornell community with an emphasis on Cornell traditions, Cornell culture, and even Cornell songs. Students saw the vast opportunities that Cornell offered them, and students were encouraged to think of themselves as an integral part of Cornell.
That approach has produced almost 160 years worth of alumni who went into the world as proud Cornell alumni, dedicated to furthering the reputation of the university. Cornellians could celebrate the victories of its sports teams, the accolades earned by its faculty, and the generosity of its donors.
If asked, most Cornellians would say they believe that their life was positively impacted by their Cornell years and that they continue to value their network of Cornell friends.
A shifting focus: identity politics
Within the past decade, new student orientation has shifted to emphasizing identity politics and to each student thinking of him or herself primarily as a member of a specific identity group rather than as a Cornellian.
Students were taught to interact with each other very aware of “microaggressions.” Rather than relate to fellow students as people with a lot in common, formal training from the Intergroup Dialogue Project (IDP) taught students to think of their peers as being “different” with conversations handled with kid gloves under careful rules to “talk across difference.”
As a consequence, students minimized striking up conversations with strangers from other groups for fear of offending them, resulting in grave disciplinary consequences. The staff reinforced this because they had to undergo “DEI training.” Cornell also invested in staffing up 626 Thurston Avenue filled with people holding impressive titles such as “Associated Dean of Students for Black Student Empowerment.”
Students were given “safe spaces” to congregate with members of an identity group, to the exclusion of other Cornellians. Examples include the Latino Living Center and Ujamaa Residential College.
Soon, a group of Cornell staff’s job security depended on perpetuating identity politics on campus rather than cultivating a sense of common Cornell identity.
Current challenges
All of this was brought to the attention of national media by a public letter written by Trustee Emeritus Jon Lindseth ‘56. It has also targeted Cornell through investigations by the U.S. House Ways and Means Committee and the Office of Civil Rights of the U.S. Department of Education.
The emphasis on identity politics left Cornell unable to respond effectively to the October 7 events in Gaza. The DEI playbook could not label either the pro-Palestine or the pro-Israel side as the clearly righteous cause, with each side asserting that campus opponents were displaying antisemitism or Islamophobia, rather than seeking ways to further meaningful dialogue to exchange views.
In the past, Cornell would take pride in the number of nationally recognized faculty experts who could weigh in on finding foreign policy solutions. Many Cornellians would appreciate that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spent some time growing up in Ithaca while his father taught on the Cornell faculty from 1971 to 1975. Netanyahu ultimately graduated from MIT with an architecture degree.
Unfortunately, today the Gaza dispute is viewed in terms of identity politics. Each side claims that the other is an “oppressor.” Rather than engage in a constructive dialogue, students chant slogans at each other with the goal of getting Day Hall on their side.
RELATED: Cornell must distinguish between criticism and hate speech
Meanwhile, instead of growing Cornell as a welcoming forum where issues can be debated, Cornell is reducing free expression on its campus. On January 10, a student responded to a social media post with the reply of “Zionists must die.”
That was not a specific threat, and as an extramural statement did not come anywhere near violating Cornell’s Student Code of Conduct. Yet, the next day, President Pollack issued a statement promising the poster “will be held fully accountable and appropriately sanctioned. This post is heinous, and I condemn it in the strongest terms.”
Ultimately, it is up to a hearing panel consisting of three students, a faculty member and a staff member to decide any Code violation and their penalties, and the president cannot and should not play a role in deciding individual cases. In rare cases, the president can ban an individual from campus, pending the hearing.
Even worse, on January 24, Cornell announced an Interim Expressive Activity Policy, that it developed without consulting the University Assembly. Under this policy, Cornellians or groups planning protests involving 50 or more people must obtain the prior approval of Day Hall. This requirement has since been dropped.
If Day Hall does not believe it can safely accommodate the protest, it reserves the right to bar the protest from occurring. The university’s head lawyer finally presented the policy to the UA on February 6, and the UA is collecting comments. Cornell is also taking disciplinary action against students who protested on February 8 in academic spaces or the library.
This reflects a tension between the expectation that free expression will be honored and protected on the Cornell campus while students should be protected from “harassment” based upon their identity group. There are court cases navigating between these two goals, but no middleman will ever please all sides to such debates.
Solutions
There are no easy answers to rebuild the shared Cornell identity. A start would be to hold a large sit-down lunch in Barton Hall during orientation week and have 1,500 new students sit side-by-side with 1,500 faculty and just talk as humans. Another step would be to follow the University of Chicago in hosting an annual faculty lecture on “the Aims of a Cornell Education” during orientation week.
Finally, Cornell would be wise to avoid taking sides on political controversies such as American foreign policy in the Mideast, and use the occasion to announce a policy of institutional neutrality.
If Cornell were to adopt the Kalven Report, it would make clear that Cornell is the host of critics, rather than being a critic of society itself. Cornell should value and promote institutional neutrality so as to allow Cornellians to openly debate the issue and to encourage everyone to contact their elected representatives without censorship or pressure from Day Hall.
Cornell should avoid falling into the trap of people seeking to “cancel” the viewpoints of other identity groups. Cornell would do well to join over 100 other schools in adopting the Chicago Principles of Free Expression as well. As an alternative model, the Princeton Principles for a Campus Culture of Free Inquiry would also serve this purpose.
In addition, on February 5, the American Bar Association, which sets nationwide accrediting standards for law schools, adopted new rules requiring protection of free speech and academic freedom as mandatory part of its standards
We are all Cornellians, and our time on the hill is too short to waste it by accusing each other of “genocide.” Years after the Gaza conflict is long forgotten, Cornellians will have to rely upon the institution’s reputation for their career advancement and will draw support and comfort from their network of Cornell friends. Strengthening a sense of Cornell identity (over other identity groups) will help reach that goal.
