PRINCETON - Discussions regarding Woodrow Wilson, racism and free speech has spread across the country in the past few weeks, spurred in part by a student protest at Princeton University last month.
But even as articles and opinion pieces began hitting stands and websites with increased frequency, a divide was growing right back at the source - between those protesting for a more inclusive Princeton University campus for black students and student peers who criticized their methods and message.
This week, Princeton University student organization the Black Justice League released their first public response to the criticism that they received immediately following the protest they led last month.
Some of the most prominent criticism came from their own peers, like student organization, the Princeton Open Campus Coalition, which was formed shortly after the protests.
The coalition drafted a letter and organized an off-the record meeting with university President Christopher Eisgruber shortly after the protests, detailing their complaints.
In their letter, the coalition called the protesters' methods "troubling," and said that they intimidated other students and shut down room for debate.
The league responded to those claims in their own letter.
"Demanding that marginalized people present their concerns in a way that is most palatable to those who are responsible for addressing their grievances...maintains the oppressive status quo by placing the burden back on those marginalized to prove themselves worthy of being heard," the league wrote
The league's letter went on to say that those kinds of critiques serve to redirect the focus from the protesters' message to their actions.
"By tone-policing and endorsing respectability politics, those within dominant groups move attention away from the real and substantive issues raised," the letter said.
RELATED: Princeton students form group in opposition to protests
They also responded to a claim made by some opponents of the protest - including the coalition - that the league was policing free speech.
In their letter, members of the coalition claimed students were scared to oppose the league or the protests because they could be, "subject to hatred."
"We, the Princeton Open Campus Coalition, refuse to let our peers be intimidated or bullied into silence," they wrote.
For the league, that couldn't be further from the truth. They wrote in the letter that they are "extremely conscious" of their right to free speech which enabled the group to protest in the first place.
"What we challenge is the consistent deployment of free speech as justification for the marginalization of others," they said.
As discussions around the protest grew, so did the criticism. Over the following weeks many people spoke out against the league's demand to have Princeton University publicly recognize former president Woodrow Wilson's racist policies and do away with his name on a campus graduate school.
In the second half of their letter, the league turned from responding primarily to on-campus criticism to criticism they have faced from people across the country - especially in regards to the Woodrow Wilson debate.
"Ultimately, to continue to honor such a man in the present manner is to spit in the face of students whose presence on this campus Woodrow Wilson would have abhorred," the letter said.
For the league, the "mixed reactions," do little to dissuade them from standing behind their message.
"Like the movements of the past, the actions of Black students today have been met with mixed reactions. Ultimately, however, time and justice put those students on the right side of history, and we too, believe, that we will be vindicated by history and justice," they wrote.
nna Merriman may be reached at [email protected]. Follow her on Twitter @anna_merriman Find The Times of Trenton on Facebook.