A university named after an American colonial has officially decided calling themselves “Colonials” is too offensive.
According to a Wednesday news release from George Washington University, the Board of Trustees voted to discontinue the moniker, which the school has used since 1926.
“The board recognizes the significance of changing the university’s moniker, and we made this decision only after a thoughtful and deliberate process that followed the renaming framework and special committee recommendation that considered the varying perspectives of our students, faculty, staff, alumni and athletics community,” Board Chair Grace Speights said.
“A moniker must unify our community, draw people together and serve as a source of pride. We look forward to the next steps in an inclusive process to identify a moniker that fulfills this aspiration.”
A group of students launched a petition to change the school’s moniker because they felt “Colonials” was “extremely offensive.”
Now, you may be wondering what exactly is so offensive about the term “Colonials.” As far as most people understand it, the term is meant to describe people who were part of a colony, including Washington himself.
Yet according to the Hatchet, some students felt the term “glorified the legacy of international colonialism, slavery and racial discrimination.”
Since the school is named after Washington himself, it seems rather obvious the name was referring to American colonials who fought for freedom from Great Britain, not “international colonialism.” But when it comes to woke outrage, logic often falls by the wayside.
University officials repeatedly assured the public the decision to change the moniker was meant to “unify” the community.
“As with any change, I understand that this decision will have a mixed reception,” GW Alumni Association President Christine Brown-Quinn said, according to the release. “It’s at times like these we need to remember that it’s our shared experiences as a GW community which bind us together.
“And as an alum your unique perspective and personal background is what makes us stronger and deepens our human connection. In the spirit of respecting and embracing our diversity in the broadest sense of the word, I look forward to alumni actively engaging in the decision for the new moniker.”
There are two basic problems with this line of thinking from the university.
First, it signals to leftists that if they complain enough, they will get their way. There will always be people who find a way to be upset over just about anything, so in that sense, it is nearly impossible to completely “unify” the campus.
By declaring the moniker change a “unity” issue, GW is signaling to the woke mob that they can force the school to do nearly anything in the name of equity and inclusion.
Second, while the school claims to have a goal of unity, it is clear officials only care about the opinions of those on one side of the argument. Brown-Quinn effectively brushed off anyone who disagreed with the name change in her statement, and she was not the only one to do so.
“The moniker is one way in which our student-athletes, athletic staff and fans build community,” Director of Athletics Tanya Vogel said, according to the release. “I know some people will be disappointed today, but we see this as a tremendous opportunity to come together, share our experiences and consider what is important to our GW community as we launch the new moniker development process.”
What Vogel is basically saying is, “I know some people will be disappointed today, but I really do not care about their opinions because they are not the people with whom I agree.”
You see, it is important to take everyone’s experiences and opinions into consideration, unless those opinions are in conflict with the left. In that case, the opinions of the left will win every time.
When it comes to cancelling terms, the woke mob won’t stop at “Colonials,” either. Soon they will realize George Washington lived in, wait for it, a colony.
When that day comes, will the university stand up and defend its namesake, or will it once again bow to those who scream the loudest? If history is any indication, the prospects don’t look great for The Father of His Country.
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.