In our society today, there is a constant debate over the validity, or lack thereof, regarding safe spaces, trigger warnings, and political correctness. I find in most cases, the best compromise lies in the middle, not to one side or the other, not all or nothing. However, "my way or no way" appears to be the dominating voice in politics. There is also a growing sense of playing up victimization, in an attempt to be relatable or a martyr. This isn't to say there isn't social injustice still present - there is, and plenty of it to go around. However, I find that many people tend to see injustice where there is none. This attitude culminated at Occidental College in Los Angeles, when a 9/11 Memorial was vandalized because it was seen as a symbol of oppression for certain minorities in America, and not representing the full consequences of the terrorist attack on September 1, 2001.
The situation was such: the Republican club on Occidental's campus set up a 9/11 Memorial with about 3,000 tiny flags set into the ground, each one meant to represent a victim killed in the attack. Then it was found that vandals had "crushed, snapped and threw in the garbage every single flag", according to the club. They set up the memorial again, not to be deterred by the vandalism, and a campus security guard was stationed to protect it from any further damage. While no one has yet come forward, a group on campus called Coalition Oxy for Diversity and Equity (CODE), defended the actions of the vandals.
An anonymous poster on the CODE Facebook page said, "As students of color, this symbol of the American flag is particularly triggering for many different reasons. For us, this flag is a symbol of institutionalized violence (genocide, rape, slavery, colonialism, etc.) against people of color, domestically as well as globally." First of all, their use of the word "triggering" brings a weight to their statement that isn't properly placed. Triggering, in its actual meaning, if we are referring to "being triggered" by something, means to be put in a state of extreme distress, and it is usually associated with PTSD victims. Reactions to triggers are brought on by traumatic experiences in the victim's past that are inexplicably linked to the trigger. A common example is war veterans, many of whom have trouble with loud, sudden noises or flashes of light because they associate those stimuli with bombs that have blown up near them and likely killed people in close proximity to them. The reason I'm explaining the actual meaning of triggers is to get the point across that it is extremely unlikely that people of color are triggered, with a real, visceral reaction, to the American flag.
This is not at all to invalidate the experiences of minorities in the United States. There have been many, many examples of horrendous mistreatment, violence, and oppression inflicted upon them, and there is still injustice been afforded to them today. However, to go so far as to say they are triggered by the American flag is a step too far. It also does not excuse tearing apart a campus display, 9/11 Memorial or not. If freedom of expression is only freedom of expression when it suits you, then the purpose has been defeated.
Another invalid excuse for the vandalism is the concern for "the complete disregard for the various peoples affected by this history." It's extremely unlikely that this was an intentional dodge of the victims after the fact (Muslims in America who are discriminated against and Iraqis who died from the US invasion as a direct result of the 9/11 attacks). However, a fantastic solution to that would be to put up another display somewhere else on campus. Maybe CODE, or whoever is interested, could have put up a memorial for everyone, or for the Muslim and Middle Eastern victims of the after effects of 9/11 in a way that didn't discredit the original display. But how can this reasoning justify vandalizing a memorial? It wasn't meant to be a political statement - it was meant to be a commemoration. It could have been improved by expanding upon it instead of destroying and shaming the first display.
The bottom line is, this was a spiteful attack on a well-meaning 9/11 memorial, done by people who claim to be fighting against perpetuating hate. It unfortunately has become all too common in our politics today to fight fire with fire, hate with hate, and just creating more bitterness, resentfulness, and hate in our communities. We should be building each other up instead of breaking each other down. Respond to ignorance (intentional or not) with compassion, not condescension and name-calling. The vandalizing of the 9/11 memorial on Occidental's College was petty and unjust, not brave (highlighted by the fact that this was done in midnight and not broad daylight). I believe there is a lot of good we can be doing by bravely fighting social injustice and spreading awareness, but this was sadly not a good example of that being done at all.
