Del & Jasmine

Dr. Jones had a personal relationship with Jerry Falwell Sr. and has an ongoing relationship will Falwell Jr. He loves and respects Jerry despite some of the more public statements he has made. He has tried his best to council Jerry and show him the consequences of his actions. One of the illustrations Dr. Jones used was the old saying “eat the fish, spit out the bones”. He told me that Jerry has been a brother to him over the years. Like any sibling relationship, they don’t always act in a way that you support, but that does not mean you love them less. Dr. Jones believes in the vision of the university, and wants to see it’s potential extended to all students. Unfortunately, his job has been complicated due to Jerry’s tweets. It is people like Dr. Jones who are left with the unfortunate responsibility of handling the public’s reaction. His department is the only mediator of race relations on Liberty’s campus. He has been put in a position of defending the university to the public, which is not their department’s job. They are an advocate for discriminated, not an advocate for the university’s public image. Dr. Jones has had to speak with hundreds of students, parents, and other staff for hours on end. Dr. Jones has been forced to assure these individuals. that the actions of one are not the actions of a whole. He has to tell parents that their children will be safe and represented on campus. He has to tell students that their voices will be heard and respected. It has no longer become a question of whether a student will receive a quality education, but whether their child will face discrimination on campus. Dr. Jones would much rather not have to face that problem. He would much rather empower those students who are on campus so that they can feel heard and encouraged.

Another problem that has been discovered due to Jerry’s tweets is that students may feel like that kind of behavior is tolerated on campus. Whether he likes it or not, Jerry is the face of the institution; he sets the tone. When someone is in a position like that, they need to be a role model. However, if someone in that position makes light of racial issues, that kind of behavior may be seen as permissible on campus. It causes a sense of justification, “if Jerry can do it, so can I”. Out of 15,000 students, you will always see those you feel empowered by those kinds of behaviors, it gives them an excuse to make comments and jokes of their own. It then becomes Dr. Jones responsibility to contradict the behavior of the university’s president, and he does not enjoy telling his friend that what he did was wrong. Dr. Jones cannot be the only racial diversity standard on campus, nor can his department. They cannot continue to be the only advocates. At some point, it needs to become publically visible, it needs to be reflected university-wide.

One thing that Dr. Jones warned against was the dangers of group association. This has become an unfortunate norm across the US, and is reflected on Liberty’s campus. This is a very dangerous habit to form because it can very quickly shut down any kind of dialog. For those who publically support the Black Lives Matter movement, they will often be written off as radicalized left-wing democrats. And gun supporters will often be written off as alt-right racist republicans. It is incredibly easy to lump an individual into a category; give them a label so that you can judge everything they do by that standard. That’s easy, but having a conversation is perceived as being way too difficult. So where does that leave you? Something like a post-modern version of the hunger games. Group association will kill universities and it will kill countries. You don’t have to look very far back to see it unfold. So what’s the antidote? Free speech, but I’ll get to that with Jasmine.

Jerry has been very vocal about his politics, while also implementing less apologetics than may be recommended. This has created a rather tense and polarized environment for both students and staff. This also does not help the diversity of his campus. According to Dr. Jones, the demographics of the university have largely followed the demographics of the US; with black student enrollment around 15% and the black population is around 14%. However, within the last five years, that number has dropped to 4%. That would be roughly 600 out of 15,000 residential students. It not a great public image. And neither is faculty, staff, athletes, and students all leaving the university. That has also been added to Dr. Jones’ plate; somehow proving that Liberty is not racist. It isn’t, but the numbers are not doing them any favors. Del needs to be an advocate for the same people who don’t seem to take racial justice seriously. It seems like a thankless job, and it is. Del thanked me many times for talking to him and asked that I continue to pray that he does not get exhausted by the task of pushing the university forward.

Del told me that he has seen this type of behavior more among Christians than non-believers. Which is a deeply troubling prospect to dwell on. A lot of those feelings can stem from a cultural heritage, particularly in the south. Many southern Christians don’t have a very pretty history. He gave me several quick history lessons and plenty more for me to research on my own. One of those quick histories was how many southern Christians would leave church on a Sunday and for a “picnic”. However, the term picnic was derived from a derogatory term for a black man. Going for a picnic meant finding a black man a lynching him. So to say that Christians never had a part in it is the farthest thing from the truth. Christians are also generally quite low in openness, which is one of the “big five” personality traits. This can lead to a very narrow-minded outlook on ideas, even if they are beneficial. Del told me that many of the people he has worked with have been incredible believers, but very closed off in their perception. This makes initiating conversations on important racial topics even harder. Much of that cultural prejudice is not consciously taught, it is simply perceived through parents, relatives, and friends. If you were raised in a small, Christian, predominantly white southern town, you will simply find yourself in that kind of mindset. You would never be challenged on those issues, and you would certainly never be aware of them. If it was not taught in school or by a parent, the chances of you stumbling upon racial avocation is very low. Your outlook is shaped by your upbringing. In the case of Jerry, Del told me that he is most likely been raised with a very privileged. His family was wealthy even before the school was started. He has never faced some of the more obvious challenges of his students. This makes it much harder for him to sympathize. This makes his lack of perception understandable, it may never occur to him. This makes Del’s position essential, he told me he has had to inform Jerry of how his comments are received. The importance of upbringing and education cannot be undermined.

Del also told me that a large majority of the phone calls he has received have been very been from white students. White students are finally waking up, and getting active. They have seen the plight of their fellow students, they are taking responsibility and demanding for change. Del is convinced that it will be students who will continue to move the cause forward. He expects protest to continue and it will most likely occur on campus as well. They have made cultural intelligence a priority and will no longer tolerate the insensitivities that have become normal.

Jasmine McKinney is the Director of Diversity Engagement. She has been encouraged that people have become more active than ever. However many are still apprehensive about the whole situation. She told me that some people do not like hearing Black Lives Matter because it someway it tells them that they did something wrong. Americans don’t like being told that their wrong, especially when thousands of people take to the streets to tell them that they’re wrong. It places the responsibility on change on them, a change that they will not usually be willing to make if the change that is demanded doesn’t affect them. If your life is comfortable, maybe you might not want to admit that you have done anything wrong. The goal is not necessarily to place blame, but to educate as to how actions are affecting others and that change is mutually beneficial.

Jasmine explained that many Republicans feel as though they have championed free speech so it gives them a pass to say whatever they wish, but the double standard is very apparent. When free speech supports their particular agenda, it is met with welcome. But if it doesn’t, well then it is considered a manipulative abuse of freedoms. This is no more apparent than in Laura Ingraham’s comments about LeBron James. Ingraham has been a proud of supporter of free speech, but when it comes to a sports player being vocal about his ethnicity, she simply says “shut up and dribble”. For free speech to be effective, you must have the ability to make your opinions vocal, despite the impact it has on your point of view. This has to be the case, otherwise you are reduced back to group identity politics, where no one benefits.