On June 29, 2009, Ken Glover, Residential Housing Director of Ujamaa Residential College was contacted by Cornell University administrators and notified that he had been replaced as Ujamaa’s RHD and had been reassigned to High Rise 5. Mr. Glover, having been the director of Ujamaa for over 20 years, was shocked by his sudden reassignment, as he had no intention of moving from Ujamaa.

Mr. Glover’s influence on the Ujamaa community and thus, the black community at large, has reached far beyond Cornell’s campus. No one wanted to see Ken Glover leave Ujamaa, and so just as soon as the news got out about Mr. Glover’s reassignment, a massive reaction was undertaken to reinstate Mr. Glover. This movement included current students, alumni, faculty and staff at Cornell in a determined show of solidarity. The movement was able to get Mr. Glover’s temporary reinstatement to Ujamaa for this upcoming school year; in the spring, however, Cornell will begin a nationwide search for candidates to take over the RHD position at Ujamaa for the future.

But everyone who supported Mr. Glover also realized that demanding his reinstatement was only part of the struggle. One look at the bigger picture shows that this is an issue about the direction of program houses at large.

This year, program houses at Cornell will be under review. This means that places like Ujamaa, the Latino Living Center, Akwe:kon and the other houses will be reviewed in order to determine the best direction for the future of them. Everyone who is familiar with the situation knows that the very livelihoods of these program houses is at stake.

Program houses have enabled communities of color to have spaces that reaffirm cultural unity and identity. This, in particular, has been the function of Ujamaa, and Mr. Glover has done a tremendous job in maintaining this focus and direction.

The attempted expulsion of Mr. Glover from Ujamaa was not a coincidence. It is clear that the Cornell administration does not agree with the direction that Mr. Glover is taking Ujamaa. Furthermore, by reassigning Mr. Glover from his directorial position at the outset of the program house review, the Cornell administration is sending a signal that Mr. Glover’s views pose a threat to the administration’s intended direction.

Reading between the lines, this issue of program houses has everything to do with race. Opponents of program houses argue that blacks, Latinos, Native Americans, Asians (with their struggle to have their own space on campus) and other communities of color who are supported by these program houses are “self-segregating.” But in reality, program houses do not reinforce self-segregation; instead, the houses promote the importance of cultural identity. Opponents of program houses fail to understand this.

People who support the idea of a “color-blind society” often make the “self-segregation” argument. Never mind that most white students at Cornell grew up in almost entirely white neighborhoods, attended almost entirely white schools, have almost exclusively associated with whites their entire lives (other than the obligatory black friend that every white person has, of course) and continue their education at an institution dominated by whites. This is the true nature and the consequences of self-segregation and this is what produces social inequalities in our society.

Whites have always been innately privileged in this country simply for being white. However, these outcomes are not seen as self-segregation by whites because their “whiteness” should be the standard and the norm that everyone — including people of color — in this society should live by. This way, when the debate about segregation on campus arises, we aren’t talking about moving toward a society and a campus that is integrationist. What we are really talking about is the assimilation of people of color into whiteness. Therefore, the “color-blind” ideology and, as it relates to campus specifically, the whole battle about the future of program houses, is more about adopting whiteness as the norm.

The future of program houses is in question because the idea behind program houses directly opposes this kind of thinking. If segregation was that big of a problem to whites, neighborhoods and schools across America would be completely integrated and Cornell University would admit more people of color.

As it is, we live in a racist society that excludes blacks, Latinos and other racial and ethnic minorities from wealth and status. We also live in a society that seeks to eliminate the few spaces left that provide people of color a deeper understanding of their cultural identity and that embrace solidarity within a community, such as the program houses strive to do.

Mr. Glover is a victim of the Cornell administration’s narrow vision for the future. For over 20 years, Mr. Glover has been successful in teaching students how to embrace their identity as members of a larger community, and this poses a threat to Cornell and its strategy to assimilate people of color into whiteness. By relocating Mr. Glover, the administration has been clear with its intent to co-opt the direction of this campus with regards to people of color.

Ken Glover should have a position at Ujamaa for as long as he desires — and for as long as students approve of his leadership. Communities of color need more people like him.