Sober Reflections

So the immense one is no more. As protesting strains of the Alma Mater drown out the drunken revelry in The Virginia Informer's offices, it ought not pain one to step back and consider what today hath wrought. For many (such as myself), tomorrow will mean business as usual. For others, passion will drive them out of class to defend the man they call "Our Gene." It is my hope that the sides may be at peace, in agreement on one thing if none other; namely, that although our disagreements may be deep, we are one College.

Tonight the College is divided. Unwise procedures and surreptitious offers by the Board of Visitors have served only to widen these rifts. Nichol himself has also stirred the fire by not refusing to go quietly (understandably) into the good night. It shall serve to consider what truly has brought us to this crossroads, and where peace was lost.
I am told all this began with a cross. A cross, the symbol of my Lord Jesus Christ, who came to bring "[upon] Earth peace, good will among men" (KJV, Luke 2:4) is the epicenter of discord. I personally did not agree with the (now former) President's decision to remove the cross from perpetual display, but I could understand why he made his decision. W&M is, after all, a state institution. When the Committee on Religion in a Public University made their decision regarding the glass case, I had the utmost respect for their compromise. Many, on both sides, did not share this sentiment. Amongst all this was the issue of the Sex Workers' Art Show. I have said that I feel that the SWAS was immoral. However, my morality is not, and ought not to dictate, civil law. I disagree passionately with the decision to provide public funds to the Show, but this was not Nichol's doing. I will here say that Nichol was correct in not banning the performances. As performed, I am confident that the Show violated no civil code, and therefore it was free expression. If any must be held culpable, Zach Pilchen is the President who ought to answer for the $1500 in funds, but I suspect the opponents of the Show have chosen weak prey, rather than the person responsible for poor stewardship of the public purse.

Who hath wrought such discord on the College? There is sufficient blame for everyone. Nichol is culpable for his non-transparent handling of the Cross controversy. The Virginia Informer and its editor-in-chief Joe Luppino-Esposito are culpable for turning a generally civil (I hope-I wasn't here) debate over the proper place of religious imagery on public property (a debate that occurs all over the country) into a national mass hysteria. As a Republican, I would like to thank them for setting the party back forty years on this campus. The State Republican Party is to blame for making this a partisan political issue. Nichol supporters are to blame for their obstinence. Alumni are to blame for putting the alleged sins of one man over the inherent greatness of this College. I and those silent few (they exist, surely?) like myself are to blame for our silence, for is not all that is necessary for discord to prevail that peaceable men do nothing (para. from Edmund Burke)? When the Committee on Religion in a Public University issued their compromise edict, the window for compromise had already passed.

But even then these terrible events were not certain. Nichol relinquished most of his day-to-day duties in the fall, rendering himself an emaciated figurehead: Surely this would satisfy the bloodhounds? Nay, they chose to double down, claiming for themselves the power to make as well as unmake Presidents. I say they have the "victory disease," and tonight's revelry will likely be paid in a situation worse (for them, and and perhaps me) than was before. The next President (of the College, Deo volente not the country) will be a liberal Democrat. He or she will not be encumbered by Nichol's baggage and wise from his failings. JLE graduates after this semester; it will be those who will take his place on the center-right who will pay for his hubris. I pray that I have erred, but I doubt that is the case.

So where do we go from here? God only knows. My gut (which told me Nichol would survive the present crisis, FWIW) tells me the furor will subside, and, while it lasts, those caught up in it will only exercise their rights and not infringe those of others. It would be foolish to let the present discord obscure those things we hold in common. The basketball team has an outside shot at The College's first CAA title ever. Those who were so terribly distressed by the cross did not leave. Those who say now "If Nichol isn't welcome here than neither am I" have surely not sent in transfer applications en masse. Something ties us to this place. Be it friends, history, business, or climate, something ties each of us to the Tribe. We will persevere. The College has survived a Revolution, a Civil War, and 1968. The present row pales before those crises. It would serve all well to be considerate of the side opposite their own, and it would especially serve the BOV well to be open in the selection process. We have been handed an opportunity-an opportunity to discard our enmity, lay down our words of war, and build a better College, whether in Gene's honor or in spite of the former President. For Gene, I hardly knew ye, but I wish you fair winds and following seas (just not too fair). For The Informer, I wish you turn away from the Sun before it melts your wings. For us all, I wish the present row to end swiftly, and the College to be one again.

Peace, and Hark upon the Gale.