In an email to members of the Harvard student body, the activists who organized the demonstration at Primal Scream argued that the event was successful. While these activists do have a just cause, and while their goals lie beyond the scope of disagreement, the demonstration itself did not succeed in advancing any of its meaningful goals.
The email noted first that the demonstration was “peaceful and nonviolent.” Indeed, the demonstrators did not use force against the naked bacchanal of drunken students. However, activists have made allegations that some “Primal Screamers” physically assaulted demonstrators. If there was an assault it should be the focus of this conversation. However, the scope and nature of the allegations are unclear: What type of assault? Were there injuries? How many assailants were there? Were they students? Can we find out who they are? How is it that they escaped the notice of Dean Khurana, who was in the crowd of protestors? If there were at least fifty demonstrators, including Harvard College’s dean, why couldn’t any assailants be detained and identified?
Given that the assault is neither the activists’ central complaint, nor has it been substantiated in any way, the allegation serves to legitimate the larger claim that the unresponsiveness of students partaking in Primal Scream is symbolic of a systemic issue with Harvard student morality. Certainly the “Primal Screamers’” behavior, namely their shouts of obscenities and general refusal to take a moment of silence, is both rude and juvenile, but it is hardly shocking.
The demonstration was a last-minute, poorly-communicated event, the result of which was anything but a “powerful show of solidarity.” While activists did have a large audience, the vast majority of students either did not notice the demonstrators or failed to understand their purpose. Those students, many of whom agree with activists on substance, have instead been made to feel guilty for their actions. This guilt is fueled by the protestors’ misguided attempt to commend themselves for forcing people to confront hard truths and starting a “conversation.”
Unfortunately, conversation is not good in and of itself. Conversation can address the injustices of a society where a police officer gets one paid vacation and a not-guilty verdict for beating a homeless man to death. Conversation can address the unchecked power of a legal system entrenched in an atmosphere of racism. Or conversation can address the chants of a naked crowd of overwhelmingly liberal and informed people, dwell on the rudeness of criticizing badly-strategized protests and draw baseless negative attention to Harvard and its student body.
As Harvard students, we can let pride and righteous sentiment draw our eyes away from murder and towards ourselves, or we can concentrate on fighting the institutional racism that confronts minorities every single day.
Some conversations and protest strategies can actually advance the causes that fundamentally matter. The demonstration which took place at Primal Scream isn’t one of them. Let’s get serious.
© 2024 Harvard Political Review. All rights reserved.