Say Something
By TMP 42nd Editorial Board
This week, our Monday night editorial meeting was (even) louder than usual. When we received an article about the 2024 election, our conversation became heated—not because of any particularly controversial opinions, but rather due to the use of anonymous sources. Our policy as a newspaper has always been to name sources unless under extenuating circumstances of dangerous or compromising situations, like cases of sexual misconduct. As such, we made the collective decision not to publish the article.
Although the article featured only five interviewees—and their discomfort with going public may not extend to the Milton community as a whole—this instance seems to us symptomatic of a larger cultural problem. If people are unwilling to speak up, we need to take a moment and think about why.
As we debated anonymity, honesty, and the quality of political discourse at Milton, we raised one critical question: in an age where politics have become increasingly fraught and personal, are our political opinions so sensitive that anonymity is necessary to safeguard those who express them?
Political differences can destroy relationships; this much we know. Judgment is not censorship and opinion is not identity, yet we live in a polarized world where these concepts are conflated and treated as if they are the same. Our political affiliations often do result in social implications—like an argument with a classmate, or the loss of a friend. It would be naïve of us to pretend otherwise.
Although Milton’s administration may push for neutrality, and refrain from issuing statements in response to external events, the fact remains that Milton leans liberal (in both student culture and institutional programming) in an equally liberal state. It’s not hard to imagine that a conservative student, who subscribes to a less prevalent belief within our community, might feel hesitant in expressing their opinions in fear of ostracization.
This aversion to speaking up extends beyond the more ‘unpopular’ political beliefs at this school. In TMP 41’s State of the Academy survey, over 50% of our 381 respondents indicated they had felt the need to censor their political leanings while at Milton—but only 13.6% of them self-identified as conservative. And in Monday’s article, all five interviewees had expressed opinions from across the political spectrum.
Still, we must speak up. After all, a healthy society and a healthy democracy depends on the free exchange of ideas. Our world is incredibly complex, and single perspectives can never fully capture the full scope of reality.
We’re aware that this large, abstract consideration cannot be answered in a single editorial. But ultimately, we know that openness is the only way forward.
We cannot have productive political discourse without being willing to speak up for what we believe in. Our beliefs are generally far from unfounded and baseless; they arise for a reason. If we care enough about something, and believe it to be true, we should be prepared to defend our convictions. We may make compromises, may disagree with the candidates we vote for, but holding beliefs is useless if we cannot stand earnestly by it.
But we also need listeners who are willing to accept and appreciate that vulnerability. We ought to confront the barriers to honesty—the social repercussions for disagreement—but understand that if we let political differences dictate our lives and shut out opposing opinions, we can’t expect someone to be brave enough to step forward into our circles.
So, in the spirit of debate, some of us at TMP have offered our own takes on last week’s election. No pseudonyms, no pretenses—just honest, uncensored thoughts. We hope that you will be open to what we have to say, and have the courage to join the conversation with something of your own.
If we want to dismantle echo chambers and cultures of silence, we must first find the courage to say something. And who knows? We may surprise each other.