Students from historically Black colleges and universities have long played a role in shaping social and political movements, and 2024 is no exception. Across the country, HBCU students are organizing pro-Palestine activism efforts on their campuses. They’re struggling with complicated feelings about who to vote for in November.
To learn more about what political engagement looks like at an HBCU versus a predominantly white institution (PWI), Open Campus spoke with Princess Williams, an HBCU graduate and professor of political science at Washington University in St. Louis.
This conversation has been lightly edited for clarity and length.
Q: Having earned your Bachelor’s in Political Science from Jackson State University and completed your Master’s at the University of Michigan, did you observe any contrasts in political involvement among students at these universities? If so, what were they like?
Princess Williams: I started at Jackson State in 2010, and I would say students were engaged in local and state politics. In terms of national issues, when Trayvon Martin was murdered, there were protests, and people were engaged on campus. In general, Jackson State students have a history of being involved in politics, dating back to the 1970s when there was a shooting on campus during the Vietnam War protests. So, students have always been engaged. During my four years at Jackson State, I would say they were engaged. However, just from observing on social media after I left, it seems like engagement increased because more salient issues were happening in the country — such as police brutality and very consequential presidential elections. In the years 2010 to 2014, there were things happening, but they were not as public-facing, and there were more local issues.
For example, there was a Black man running for governor, and it was a very popular election. We also had a highly contested mayoral election, so the focus was more on local issues when I was there. Upon moving to Michigan in 2014, right before Michael Brown was murdered, it was a strange time to start grad school. I was accustomed to being in a Black enclave in the South at an HBCU, where race wasn’t a constant consideration — you were just living and existing. Then, I moved to a place where the majority was white, with only four percent Black students. Witnessing the shooting unfold during that time was a profound experience.
But there was a lot of engagement. I wouldn’t say that it was just political science or social science students; it was across the board. I would also say that Michigan fostered an environment where students felt comfortable expressing themselves and addressing the issues they cared about.
In 2016, there was an incident on campus where someone posted offensive posters about Black people, leading to campus protests and community demonstrations. Perhaps the issues at Michigan were different, which is why I often mention that there was more engagement at Michigan compared to Texas State. However, both HBCU and PWI students, particularly Black students, are engaging in response to the various issues in the country. With so many challenges, Black people, in general, have always had to go out and advocate to ensure that our needs are understood and addressed.
Q: In your experience as a political science professor, have you noticed any notable trends or shifts in the political participation of young people?
From my point of view, I would say that your generation is way more informed on politics than mine. I also think you all are more engaged, particularly with the use of social media. For instance, you’re constantly having dialogues on TikTok, Twitter, and other platforms. When my generation started on social media, it was mainly for jokes and fun, and at some point, everything became politicized. However, I believe that your generation is more informed on issues, and you are not necessarily loyal to a specific political party or candidate.
When I was in college, my generation tended to automatically align with a party, regardless of personal feelings towards the candidate. It was like, “Okay, I’m a Democrat” or “I’m a Republican,” so I’m just going to support the party. In contrast, I see that your generation is more critical of political leaders. However, I also feel that you all are more disillusioned with politics. This is one of my concerns about the younger generation. While you are more aware, there is also a belief that you can make a difference, that you should be out there protesting, and that you should not get tired of doing it.
I believe that your generation is way smarter, more informed, more savvy, and more creative than our generation was. However, at the same time, I’m hoping that information and understanding the political landscape in this country do not discourage you all from actually voting, running for office, and engaging in other activities later down the line.
Q: How might political involvement on HBCU campuses differ from that at predominantly white institutions (PWIs)?
Based on my experience at Jackson State as a student, Michigan, and Amherst (where I previously worked, and now I’m at Wash U), I would say they are not similar. For example, at Michigan, students had a more radical approach in terms of expressing themselves. When Charles Murray, who wrote the book “The Bell Curve,” was invited by the Republican student group on campus, students hijacked the room and projected an arrow pointing at him, labeling him as a white supremacist. They engaged in more outspoken actions, different from what I observed at other institutions.
There were strikes and protests on campus, particularly by grad students and undergrads, with students of color, especially Black women, taking leadership roles in diversity, equity, and inclusion work. There were instances where students planned strikes, like withholding lectures, demanding payment for diversity work. This led to the university implementing an initiative to pay students for diversity work through stipends. The approach at Michigan was more radical.
At Jackson State, I’m not entirely familiar with current events, but historically, the issues revolved around local and state politics. Even campus issues were approached with an eye on future engagement beyond the university. The concerns were different, such as disputes over meal plans, but not as intense as those at Michigan. Jackson State students had to care about different things, and there was a certain luxury at Michigan in not having to deal with some of the issues faced at an institution like Jackson State. Of course, both institutions had their own set of challenges, like housing, but the required actions and engagement were not the same.
Q: Many Black students may harbor distrust toward politicians and other public institutions. How do you believe this distrust might impact their participation in the political process?
If you feel like they don’t keep their word, you are less likely to participate in politics, because you may not see the political process as a viable vehicle to make changes or maximize your own interests. If you do participate, you might vote third party or, over time, become an independent voter. I believe that this distress leads to a decrease in turnout over time.
Going back to the concern that younger voters are more aware and critical, my hope is that they don’t lose hope and interest in the process. Voting matters; you may not think it will impact you immediately, but at some point, it will influence the policies that are passed or impact your life. Understanding that change is slow but continuous and crucial. You have to have faith that it will work out at some point.
However, I can also understand the discouragement when you see issues persisting for decades. Overall, this distrust will impact turnout and political participation.
Q: What do you think politicians can do in efforts to build trust with Black students?
I think one very simple solution is to have town hall meetings where you invite young voters to come and talk directly to you, providing access to political candidates. A lot of the time, I believe this is one thing that has changed their minds. In the past, presidential candidates and even local candidates were more accessible 10 or 20 years ago. Now, it seems like they rely more on social media to spread the word about their campaigns and express their platforms. However, voters, especially younger ones, feel a bit out of reach, both literally and figuratively. Therefore, engaging with voters in person and in public is crucial.
I also think political parties could do better with outreach, specifically targeting younger voters who are already politically inclined. This involves having them run for offices so they can speak to the issues and bring the voices of youth voters to the table when creating party platforms or passing laws in Congress. In terms of parties and candidates, actively reaching out and mobilizing voters through face-to-face interactions, as well as appointing younger voters to offices and positions in the party, would ensure representation. When you see someone around your age, you’re more likely to listen to them. Therefore, having representation matters and can make a difference.
Skyler Winston is a fellow with the HBCU Student Journalism Network, a project of Open Campus.