A Respectful Critique by Tacitus and Aquinas

In light of Dr. Barton's article in the Shield, Tacitus and Aquinas have submitted a response in the following:

Dr. Barton: A Respectful Critique

Back in February, in a discussion with some of the leadership at the college, we brought up difficulties in McClaine’s speech and a volley of discussion erupted ending with an agreement to move forward in unity and a promise that the objections we raised would not be swept under the rug.

In the May issue of the Shield, however, Dr. John Barton published an article entitled "McClain's Speech Generates Healthy Discussion.” Like Dr. Barton says, the speech has generated much healthy discussion and brought difficult issues to the table. However, we think that our main objections that were raised on www.questionthecollege.blogspot.com were left unaddressed by Dr. Barton.

First and foremost, Dr. Barton fails to mention the URL of the blog. Additionally, Dr. Barton does not list the name of the site given as evidence and factual reference either: www.snopes.com/business/origins/blackinv.asp. Instead, he vaguely refers to our blog, but never quotes it directly.

Second, Dr. Barton accurately reports that students raised some objections on the grounds that the speech was divisive and damaging to diversity initiatives. While Dr. Barton addresses these concerns, our particular objections were factual, not emotional.

Third, Dr. Barton states in his article that "others" (i.e. us) have pointed out that the sub-speech "A World without Black People" was "taken (verbatim at some points) from an internet e-story that is in common circulation." This may be partially true, but Dr. Barton does not accurately represent the entire situation. In fact, the "e-story" was plagiarized word-for-word from an anonymous e-mail chain letter. Dr. Barton continues, "In and of itself, I do not see a problem with this, as long as the appropriate credit is given." Not only was the appropriate credit not given, but it would be impossible to give such credit to the "e- story," because the supposed "e-story" is actually an anonymous e-mail chain letter. Dr. Barton further notes, "There also seems, however, to be some questions concerning the accuracy of some details included in that section. Inaccuracies, if indeed present, are unfortunate, and I would suggest they need to be investigated before the speech is ever used again in public venue." Dr. Barton questions whether there are indeed inaccuracies present in the speech despite the fact that we have already show conclusive evidence that not only was the “A World without Black People” chain letter plagiarized word-for-word, but it also was riddled with half-truths and factual inaccuracies as shown by our previously cited source. Dr. Barton also says that the letter "is in common circulation" but does not inform the reader that various forms of the letter have been circling around the Internet for over six years. This is an important fact to understand, because the length of time that the letter has existed for has allowed numerous and thorough rebuttals of the "facts" within, such as:

www.snopes.com/business/origins/blackinv.asp.

This is contrary to Dr. Barton's suggestion that the speech should be investigated -- the letter has already been thoroughly examined (over a year ago, in fact, by our source) and its inaccuracies exposed.

Fourth, while we have indeed posted anonymously, the article criticizing the “A World without Black People” cited sources accurately and quoted the speaker properly. Dr. Barton condemns our use of anonymity, yet he fails to mention that McClain’s plagiarized chain letter was also anonymous. It appears that Dr. Barton has set up a double standard regarding his policy against anonymity. Our article has a high degree of credibility, while McClain’s chain letter does not. However, even more importantly, Dr. Barton writes at length about our anonymity but he ignores our factual objections completely. Instead, Dr. Barton minimizes the severity of the factual inaccuracies by describing the chain letter as having “some of the details” containing inaccuracies, disregarding the fact that the entire “A World without Black People” chain letter was plagiarized and filled from the first paragraph to the last with inaccuracies and misrepresentations. Dr. Barton continues, “Inaccuracies, if indeed present, are unfortunate and I would suggest they need to be investigated before the speech is used again in a public venue.” Dr. Barton ignores that our article (and the Snopes.com reference) has conclusively shown that the chain letter is filled with inaccuracies. As point three has already illustrated, the “A World without Black People” anonymous e-mail chain letter has circulated for years, allowing thorough debunking of its inaccuracies. Clearly, it was a mistake by the Diversity Committee and Rochester College Administration to let this letter be presented in Assembly without proper review of its veracity.

These points may seem caustic, so let us pause for a moment to acknowledge the good in Dr. Barton’s “McClain’s speech prompts healthy discussion” article. Dr. Barton rightly points out that McClain’s overall speech effectively condemned racism and explained that African-Americans have indeed contributed greatly to America throughout its history. McClain’s speech rebuked the pseudo-science and pseudo-intellectualism that has justified racism in the past. All these arguments are commendable and should be recognized for their value to American society.
However, in order to combat the previously mentioned pseudo-science and pseudo-intellectualism that robbed African-Americans of their achievements throughout Western history, we must not respond with factual inaccuracies of our own. Instead, we should cite real achievements of African-Americans, of which there have been many. To do any less would damage this cause, not assist it.

There is one last thing we would like to address in response to Dr. Barton’s argument. In his article, Dr. Barton asserts that we made, “indicting claims about…his lack of spirituality.” This is not true. In our article, we never questioned McClain’s own spirituality, only the spiritual relevance of the “A World without Black People” chain letter, which was not his own work in the first place.

Sincerely,

Tacitus and Aquinas