It is a tall order to speak for a Union that comprises 250 undergraduates, but as the current Floor Leader of the Left and one of two Black members on the Union’s board, I feel that my opinion matters. To hear similar sentiments expressed differently, you should read Mr. Kirkpatrick’s article. The Yale Political Union is a place where discourse is had, allowing us to confront the issues that define our current moment. And, certainly, transitioning from a young white boys’ club into a diverse collection of voices has allowed us to reflect on our past and think seriously about the future. Although it’s a difficult close to a hard-fought semester, I believe Harvey Silverglate’s language makes for one of those moments.

Honestly, I was shocked. I didn’t even catch him saying the N-word between all of the words of his incoherent and confusing speech. And I was in the front row, right next to him. Only after, when I talked with other union members, did I even find out about Silvergate’s use of the N-word. Unfortunately, it was the same case with our President and Speaker. I know that if they heard it as well, they would have gaveled him down according to parliamentary procedure because we have a no-tolerance policy for inflammatory and racist language — even for our “esteemed” guests.

Harvey Silverglate’s flagrant approach to free speech reminded me of a recurrent pattern I’ve seen as a Black student at Yale. Oftentimes, racism gets swept under the rug and Yale, as an institution, repeats the same lesson of race without remembering it at all. I hope these reflections are not seen as a band-aid on a bigger system both within and outside Yale’s walls. But what reassures me, amidst this confusion, is that our Union and its leadership have come together against this.

Mr. Silvergate’s comments are sickening. There is neither a time nor a place to say the N-word and, certainly, not in a speech to a public audience. We already have a solid replacement for it in our language. I’ve used it in this piece a couple times already. It’s inflammatory when we already have the language available to talk about how slurs hurt people. Just because he says he could take a slur — mind you, a slur meant for Black people — doesn’t mean people have to bear the brunt of centuries of racism and white supremacy. Is he expecting free speech to be some free for all for bigoted, interpersonal attacks? I disagreed with him that night. And I still disagree with him now.

It’s still confusing and I’m still angry, but I believe it has been incredibly formative. If we ought to follow Yale’s mission of a liberal education, then it means we take what was a destructive moment into something more generative. Protecting speech demands a positive commitment to a better world — within Yale and beyond it. Words, either spoken or written, have had and still have a hand in shaping our communities. They were the reason why people like me could be at Yale in the first place. And, in recognition of this fact, we must continue to discuss. We must work through the political foundations of the spaces we occupy. And that’s what we do at the YPU.

I hope, in the future, we continue to foster a space of discourse: speech that pushes past our limits of thought, in service of community instead of division. I believe we will. 

RICHIE GEORGE is a sophomore in Grace Hopper College. They edit Opinion for the Yale Herald and can be reached at richard.george@yale.edu.