Last week, UCLA’s Undergraduate Students Association Council President Devin Murphy resigned.
Much of the discussion surrounding his resignation has been centered on Tuesday’s divestment resolution calling for the University of California to divest from American companies that some say contribute to human rights violations in the West Bank and Gaza. Students have been wondering if Murphy’s decision to leave USAC will sway the vote one way or another, but his resignation is significant for other reasons too.
In his public statement, Murphy attributed his resignation in part to poor campus climate, saying, “UCLA needs to do more to address the climate for students of color on campus. Otherwise, it continues to applaud the tradition that this institution was not made for students of color, students like myself.”
His resignation, then, is reflective of a larger problem on our campus; when a student body feels institutional aspects of its university, including the administration, are not open to understanding its experience of campus climate, it feels disconnected from that university as a whole.
Murphy’s decision to resign cannot in any way be seen as an isolated case on this campus, given the large number of incidents involving some form of racial discrimination at or around UCLA in the past year.
The UC needs to take Murphy’s resignation as an indicator of what can happen when students lose trust in their administration. And they should take that lack of trust seriously – after all, how can an institution function without the support of the communities that it is made up of?
When I asked members of UCLA Media Relations if university administrators planned on taking any specific actions to address Murphy’s comments about UCLA not being an institution made for students of color, I was referred to a statement from Janina Montero, vice chancellor for student affairs.
“Fostering a campus climate that is inclusive and welcoming for all UCLA students regardless of their background remains one of the university’s highest priorities. We continue to work hard every day with our students and student groups to better understand their experiences and enhance the many programs and services UCLA already has in place to support our students,” Montero said in the statement.
But this statement, which does not mention Murphy or his resignation even once, strikes me as yet another way for the university to avoid addressing the root of the issue: Racial discrimination is a problem at UCLA, and it’s going to take more than general statements about student experience to fix it.
Changing a culture is never an easy task. But dialogue between the communities experiencing the racism and the administrators charged with handling the conflicts is a place to start.
When a student leader, but more fundamentally, a member of the UCLA community feels the need to resign from his post in large part because of his race, a response from the administrators who run this institution is not only a necessity, but also a responsibility. These same administrators can’t realistically say that they’re furthering the programs and services Montero speaks of when they fail to address the students who make up the programs.
In October 2013, the UC released a report conducted by a former California Supreme Court Justice Carlos Moreno which revealed that UCLA does not have adequate procedures or resources available to faculty when it comes to dealing with cases of racial discrimination.
Though recognition of a problem may appear to be a way to start remedying the issue, incidents of racial profiling beyond faculty experiences with bigotry continued to come up throughout last year. Just a month after the report came out, Los Angeles Superior Court Judge David Cunningham was pulled over by university police, and later filed a complaint against the officers for use of excessive force, which Cunningham’s lawyer believes was racially motivated.
The same month, fourth-year African American studies student Sy Stokes released his spoken word video entitled “The Black Bruins.” In the video, Stokes and other UCLA students discuss how the lack of diversity and support for black students at UCLA makes it incredibly difficult for them to be proud to attend UCLA.
Come February, a racist, sexist flier was sent to the UCLA Asian American Studies Center, prompting students and officials to demonstrate support for the Asian Pacific Islander community.
The growing list of incidents signifies a lack of preparation by UC administration to actually go about tackling the issue of racial profiling beyond surface-level changes. Though UCLA adopted some of the suggestions from the Moreno report, such as having Chancellor Gene Block send out an email clarifying the university’s “no tolerance” policy toward discrimination, there is still room to improve, and the best way to begin doing that is to engage in a consistent, honest dialogue with the student body.
In many of these isolated cases, from the flier to Stokes’s video, Block or other university officials have called for support of the various communities targeted by the discrimination and formed committees to address the incidents. But after the initial public shock of these incidents wears off, the UCLA community experiences little change in campus climate.
Dialogue can go a long way in allowing students to build trust with their administrators, and actually find student-supported solutions to ending racism and discrimination on campus. Administrators initiating conversations with students in communities that have dealt with discrimination can be a lot more personal and effective in conveying trust than using a general, go-to statement that has been perfectly crafted to handle all situations related to campus climate.
Murphy’s resignation could, at most, create minimal improvements for campus climate. And while adopting the recommendations from the Moreno report is a step in the right direction for faculty, it will only help a portion of our campus community. Students need as much attention and support and as manyresources as faculty.
It is unacceptable to sidestep the issue of racial discrimination at UCLA. Unless a stronger commitment is made by the university to students, one that allows students to put trust in their administration, the list of so-called isolated incidents will continue to build.
It’s a little self-serving, don’t you think, to say his resignation was the result of poor campus climate? If that’s the basis of the argument, then how do we account for the fact that he was elected in the first place? Do you think perhaps the “poor campus climate” is really the result of a couple isolated incidents that just happen to get a lot of press? You say, “racial discrimination is a problem at UCLA”. I say, “baloney”.
I don’t see how resigning helps