Liam Glavin ‘27 (he/him) is a government major from Falls Church, Virginia. He loves running, reading and spending time with friends and hopes to instill values of political and civic engagement across the community. Contact him at ljglavin@wm.edu.
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own.
During one of my first visits to the College of William and Mary, I went to the Hearth: Memorial to the Enslaved. It was a visceral experience. It stood as a testament to how this university benefited directly from the toil of enslaved people. What I find important about the memorial is how it stands as a reminder of how the horrors of chattel slavery still inform our present, especially as a university. Even if we could be doing more, the Hearth is still a significant achievement because it represents progress from this university in addressing historical inequities. With the attacks against diversity, equity and inclusion that we’ve seen across the country, I’m reminded of the fragility behind this progress.
The University of Virginia board of visitors recently voted to dissolve their school’s Diversity, Equity and Inclusion office. This move is concerning for many reasons, but it’s especially worrying for us as students of the College because it means we could be next. We should do the right thing. We should affirm the values listed on our diversity statement and continue to be a welcoming and inclusive environment for students of all backgrounds. DEI programs and initiatives are critical to protecting these community values. If we capitulate to the Trump administration and abandon those values, I worry about what might be next. I wonder about what other entirely manufactured issues conservatives will conjure to justify harming marginalized people.
Republicans have designed these attacks against DEI to harm marginalized groups. They are a clear continuation of the “Southern Strategy” attacking these people. For those of you who don’t know, the Southern Strategy is something famously attributed to Richard Nixon’s winning 1968 Presidential Campaign. During this time, many white Southerners were furious about the Civil Rights Movement and its achievements and didn’t want their states to take any anti-discriminatory action. Nixon would exploit this resentment in a particular way. He would speak to these racist Southerners by making nods toward supporting racial discrimination and segregation, but never outwardly saying he supported these things as to not alienate potentially more moderate voters. For instance, Nixon would stump on seemingly more race-neutral topics such as “states rights” or “local control.” While these are less outwardly racist things to say, he was still directly communicating to these racist constituencies who wanted states rights and local control to work against racial progress. But he did so without completely alienating moderates, and it worked magically. Nixon won the election. His former campaign advisor Lee Atwater summarized the strategy in an interview. He said, “You start out in 1954 by saying, ‘N—, n—, n—.’ By 1968 you can’t say ‘n—.’ That hurts you, backfires. So you say stuff like, uh, forced busing, states’ rights, and all that stuff, and you’re getting so abstract.”
The Southern Strategy did not end with former President Nixon. It has transformed. Republican attacks against DEI and “wokeness” have become the new Southern Strategy. While the gears of racial progress continue to churn, resentment has continued to accumulate. Especially with increased efforts at addressing historic and systemic injustices, many view this as an affront to their privilege. Since Republican politicians can no longer resort to 1960s era racism (although some still do), they now tap into this racism by making nods against racial progress instead of outwardly objecting to it. Conservatives have manufactured these DEI and woke flashpoints to toe this line. For instance, instead of outwardly saying that you don’t think the President of the United States should be a Black woman, you call her a “DEI hire.” For Republicans today, this language speaks directly to their racist constituencies, similar to Nixon, without outwardly ostracizing those on the periphery. This dynamic is at the heart of the Southern Strategy.
I recently visited the Hearth again. Its beauty strikes me. It’s a testament to how this university can act in furtherance of progress. The College should stand firmly against this new Southern Strategy. We shouldn’t capitulate to it. We ultimately have a decision to make. Do we value our students and the community we wish to foster? Let’s make the right choice. Following in the footsteps of UVA would be disastrous. We should protect DEI programs instead of dismantling them.
