The Paradox of Rebranding: How America’s Higher Education System Has Failed the Black Community

Graphic by Arola Oluwehinmi

In just 21 years, the twenty-first century has changed the course of human history in a way no other time period has. The emphasis that younger generations are placing on diversity, equity, and inclusion have set humanity on a path rarely explored in earlier civilizations—being yourself and exploring your interests has never been this widely accepted and publicized. However, no matter how hard the younger generations work towards racial, sexual, and economic equity, the shadows of the past still linger within the institutions that guide our society—primarily in our higher education systems. The same systems that are meant to lead to a better America, a generation of future leaders, continue to represent the past that we tend to so wholeheartedly commit to condemn. Therefore, while universities around the country have made attempts to divert from their racist pasts, some underlying questions still hint at their true efforts and intentions. Have their attempts to condemn racism through the renaming of historical buildings truly embraced their anti-racist agenda? Or are their attempts just a hypocritical, reputation-saving attempt? The fine line that divides both ideas has become bleary. 

After the murder of George Floyd in May 2020, large scale protests burst across our nation. Millions flooded the streets in an outcry of rage, desperation, and tiredness. For the first time, it seemed like America was finally opening its eyes to see the deeply embedded racism that plagued its political, social, and economic system. While the world observed history in the making, institutions across the country began to see the importance of renaming historical buildings that gave honor to historical figures who embodied racist ideals. Some of these institutions included, but are not limited to, the University of Virginia, Princeton University, and the University of Southern California. In addition to the renaming of buildings across their campus, these universities promised to condemn racism across the board in order to make them a “safer” and “more inclusive” space for members of minority groups, especially the Black community. However, many of these universities are using rebranding as a method of preserving their reputation as a liberal and progressive institution—one which would be stained under further examination of the truth.

Princeton University is one of the more widely known cases of such hypocritical behaviors. Before the murder of George Floyd, student groups and faculty on campus had asked that the Woodrow Wilson residential college and program be renamed, since the 28th president had encouraged segregation when he was president of the university. Ignoring their petition, the university refused to rename it, waving off the racist ideas that it embodied and condemned in order to maintain the name of the building and program. Yet, after the murder of George Floyd, the university finally agreed to rename the building. They claimed to have realized the ideals that maintaining it represented. However, later that same year, Princeton University was investigated for a violation of the Civil Rights Act, dismantling the hypocrisy between their initial actions: while they claimed to be progressive and anti-racists, their administration’s behaviors proved otherwise. Current Princeton president Christopher Eisgruber had previously claimed that the university did not engage in racially biased admissions and employee hiring, which was disproved more recently by files and quotes from the president himself. Additionally, students on campus have been extremely vocal about how the university purposefully represses freedom of speech and prevents students from speaking up about hate speech on campus. Not to mention, Black students have opened up about being shut down and unheard by the administration when attempting to report racist incidents. Clearly, intentions that Princeton has through their commitment to condemning racism and the actions that they are currently taking contradict each other. They are not elaborating in a manner that protects Black students and faculty on their campus. Princeton’s student body has been extremely vocal in calling out the administration in the past, a task they should be applauded for. If the student body continues to engage in these efforts, the University will hopefully see itself with no other choice but to engage in non-racially biased admissions and hiring practices. 

Next, we have the University of Virginia. Similar to Princeton, after the events of May 2020, the university committed itself to an “anti-racist” agenda in order to create a more inclusive campus for all members, which states that “Black lives matter, and we [they] intend to redress the negative impact that systemic racism has had on the experience of many students, faculty, staff, and community members.” Part of this agenda included renaming the former Curry School of Education, claiming that the University no longer wanted to honor J.L.M Curry, who was known for his racist and segregational ideas. While students saw this change as a first-step, the university has spoken beyond their actions. Last year, the University spent $7 million on building a memorial to remember the names of the slaves who helped build the institution. While the intentions were genuine, and it is incredibly important to commemorate their lives, it is even more important to commemorate and serve the Black staff at UVA. Currently, UVA employs their dining hall and cleaning staff through contractors, a large portion of whom are Black and low-income. This allows the University to avoid directly employing them, and therefore allows them to be paid below a living wage. Had UVA allocated those funds towards better working conditions for their workers, higher wages, and increased benefits, they would have had a more tangible impact condemning the systemic racism that continues to lurk in our society. Additionally, the unfair working conditions and wage rates problem is not new information to the University of Virginia administration. UVA students have been engaging in hunger strikes since the 1990s, which was acted upon through protesting against the low salaries that employees are receiving. Despite this, the university never listened, making minimal changes to ameliorate the workers' situation, and continuing to fail to meet student demands and expectations. Therefore, young activists on campus should have their voices lifted as they continue to make sure that the University does not only verbally commit to an anti-racist agenda, but that they put their words into action. 

Another example of such practices is the University of Southern California. Following the steps of universities around the countries, USC removed the name of VonKleinSmid, a known eugenicist, from one of its most important university buildings; however, both faculty and students agree that this is not enough. Three hundred eighty faculty members joined hands to write a letter to the university’s president protesting about the lack of support for both Black students and faculty. An excerpt from the letter reads “our students do not need to further educate us on their experience; they need our active support through material change to USC’s campus structures and culture.” While initially it seemed like the university had a positive response to the letter, little action has ensued. Rates of Black professor employment are still low, as mentioned on their own website, which states “of our tenured faculty, only 3% are black […] Compared with peer institutions, USC has […] a slightly lower percentage of black faculty.” Additionally, little mental health resources have been provided for Black students, and conversations surrounding the issue have also slowly died down. After engaging in conversation with Black students at USC through social media, the same claims kept surfacing: “they don’t really care,” “not much changed,” and “it’s all performative.” It is clear to see the general trend of the Black student perspective at USC. Once again, we see a similar narrative: a university whose words have the correct intention, but have no actions to follow them. USC should listen to their students, and make the correct resources available to them. While it holds true that they responded positively to the letter, the Black community, as aforementioned, still feels like they are not being supported the way the university promises. Current Trojans should be applauded for continuing to stay in touch with USC’s administration in order to amplify the resources available to the Black community—both for mental health and for academic advising. 

Clearly, higher education in America is moving towards progressive and liberal values through the wrong path: a path full of correct intentions but lack of action. The geographic difference between all the institutions mentioned in this article provides support for this claim—it is not a matter of geographical location within the country, it is a matter of collective embedded systemic racism. This problem plagues the Northeast, the South, the West Coast, and every area in between. While their actions might have initially been seen as first steps towards true progress, their continued lack of action demonstrates that there is still room for a lot of growth—one which can only be achieved through meaningful and material steps. Therefore, rather than letting institutions get away with performative action, we, meaning the younger generations and future leaders of the world, need to begin truly holding others accountable for anti-racist agendas on campus. Improving mental health resources, hiring and retaining Black faculty, and creating a safe space for Black students are all at the core of true change. Renaming Lerner Hall to Ramptopia at Columbia University cost $7,376,985. Rather than solely continuing to rename buildings, let's begin allocating those funds and engage in truly effective anti-racist action, and ensure that future generations of Black students have a prosperous future where equity is not a dream, but a reality.