Our Position on the Name Change
By Will Tanner ‘21, David Hotze ‘21, and Sofi Daniels ‘23,
W&L has recently become the center of an intense national debate over removing the names of historical figures now deemed by some to be unacceptable. However, while the national discussion surrounding those figures and the emergence of iconoclasm is inherently political, W&L's discussion is not political. Keeping our name was never a matter of politics or justifying Lee's role in the Confederacy. The Civil War was an atrocious event that killed hundreds of thousands of Americans. Politics should be taken out of our current discussion.
The debate over changing the name is a matter of policy and preserving the brand and history of Washington and Lee; our intergenerational connections between students and alumni, the honor system, academic excellence, and loyalty to the institution are more significant than the name, yes, but the name is integral to them.
To increase diversity in all forms, we must have a strong academic foundation along with fixing the other enormous issues that afflict our university, such as rising expenses, the erosion of our campus culture of civility, and the need to hire more professors who teach the subjects students want to take, namely politics and business. Those problems are larger and more pressing than the emotional push to change the name in recent weeks as a result of riots across the country. If Washington and Lee reforms all of the above, while pushing outreach/recruitment programs in diverse geographic areas of the country and middle class and poor neighborhoods, we will be increasing diversity and letting more people know and hopefully fall in love with Washington and Lee. Supposedly, that is the administration's goal; however, changing the name is not required to bring in a diverse student body.
Most students who come to W&L do so because of W&L's brand; it has a unique history and culture with which many who come here fall in love. Honor, a unique connection to the history of America and the Old Dominion, and a campus culture of civility are the hallmarks of our school that past students have fallen in love with, whatever their personal opinions of Lee or Washington. Generations of students had no say in who our namesakes would be. Yet, they embraced the identity of being a W&L student along with all the self-accountability, integrity, and civility it entails. They understood that perhaps their feelings about a particular issue aren't the most critical aspect of that issue. Instead, they wanted to be part of something larger than themselves.
We all need to ask ourselves how will changing the name impact Alumni and future and current student's relationships?
The answer should aid our decision on whether to change the name or not. When the above question is answered honestly, the clear answer is that changing the name will fracture our beloved Colonnade Connections. If W&L's unique bond, between alumni and students, is broken we students can expect to have a harder time finding jobs. Breaking the bond between past and present students will also lead to a lack of alumni donating to the university they once cherished, as well as leading directly to an increase in full-tuition prices (which impacts lower-income students the most, thus counter-productive to our goal of improving that aspect of diversity). Confusion over the W&L identity will result in our college rankings dropping as our school becomes another Davidson. A school with no unique culture and a radical student body. This problem of destroyed alumni relations is a serious issue that seems to have been brushed aside by the current cancel culture.
Relatedly, we think there is a serious ethical issue. If the university does change its name suddenly, it will have engaged in deceptive advertising for the incoming freshmen who applied to Washington and Lee due to the prospects of strong Alumni connections that would no longer exist if we ceased to be Washington and Lee.
So, what can we do to make W&L a better place? That's the goal of everyone engaging in this debate in good faith, so we thought it would be wise to address our viewpoint. Before we dive into radical changes, we must fix existing problems to create a solid foundation.
As a prestigious institution, academics are our priority. Right now, it's difficult to find classes in intro and intermediate level courses in the Business School, English, CSCI/STEM, CBCS, Journalism, Law Justice and Society, and Spanish. This inability to find spots in the classes we want to take should be concerning to everyone. The fact that students must place their education on hold until they can get into these courses means that the institution is failing at achieving their primary responsibility and is instead forcing students into disciplines in which they have no interest. That issue needs to be corrected immediately by spending money on hiring excellent faculty that are diverse in terms of both background and thought. We don't need more administrators and deans; we need more faculty members. Furthermore, having diverse and excellent faculty of all viewpoints that teach the classes students are interested in will help W&L attract more students.
The other issue that should be corrected is the sky-high tuition for people who pay full price. The higher the tuition, the less likely people will want to attend. They will look elsewhere, thus limiting the body of applicants who will apply and preventing the school from becoming more well-known and sought after, along with creating an incentive for people to possibly transfer. Until we focus more on academics and lowering tuition, we won't be attracting all forms of diversity. Would the money spent on scrubbing the entire university of references to Washington and Lee be better spent on that undertaking or improving the academic experience? Would the "talent" the administration is worried we aren't currently attracting be more likely to be drawn to a school that cares about academics or one that purges its own benefactors?
Finally, changing the name is problematic because it will dissuade a large swathe of people who would otherwise want to attend W&L. The name is not a major factor in most people's decision to attend, but keeping the name "Washington and Lee" does represent to many students that our cherished university is different from the others. Up until now, it has not bowed down to the Jacobin mob that wants to erase history. Instead, it has stood up for its institutional history and has commemorated those men that have done so much to make our school the wonderful institution it is. Without both Washington and Lee, our school would not exist; it would have died long ago. Keeping the name commemorates and honors their contributions to our institution. For many W&L students, that commitment to history is a huge selling point. A continued movement toward iconoclasm will likely turn them away.
Washington and Lee is a university with a storied history and one that has thrived over recent years as ever-greater numbers of applicants have recognized the immense value a W&L degree provides; a vibrant alumni network, an excellent liberal arts education, and a reputation for honorable conduct. If the name is changed, that alumni network will collapse, precious resources will be spent on purging the names of our most important benefactors, and W&L will drop in the rankings as its name-recognition drops to zero and fewer students apply. What will we have gained for that? Nothing other than the temporary appeasement of a group angered by national politics.