In celebration of the International Day of Democracy, USC President Beong-Soo Kim spoke to Trojans as part of his Open Dialogue Project initiative, which is designed to promote civil discourse.
Students, however, weren’t convinced. The panel, which was originally focused on democracy in an age of AI, became a greater conversation on how the university community faces and addresses political polarization.
As the event opened to a Q&A section, one student called on the university leaders to address Annenberg Media’s report that the school was selling cadavers to the U.S. Navy and the Israel Defense Forces.
“I feel like there’s hypocrisy in having this open dialogue,” she said.
In response, Kim agreed to have another dialogue with students regarding the cadaver contract.
“Let’s have another dialogue event and then we can have the rational full conversation about it,” Kim said. “So, let’s do that. I welcome it.”
Outside of the TCC Performance Center, where the event took place, students protested against the USC cadaver contract with written signs and a fake body bag, representing cadavers sold to the U.S. Navy.
Earlier this month, a similar protest took place outside of the “Theater for Dialogue” event at Bovard Auditorium. Kim did not mention the protests but rather used the event as an example of an open dialogue event he held with students.
“We had individuals from the audience come into the auditorium and engage with the professor in the program. I don’t see any inconsistency at all,” Kim said, addressing the accusation of hypocrisy. “I welcome all perspectives on this.”
A member of USC South Central for Justice in Palestine (SJP), who was granted anonymity due to fear of retaliation, said they were skeptical that the school would follow through.
“They’re going to pick who they want to be involved in this open dialogue and that’s not what open dialogue is,” they said. “That is them using a hierarchy of power to enforce their will while looking like they’re enabling an open dialogue.”
The source said that USC did not provide enough openness in their open dialogue events, with faculty members speaking for 45 minutes, and the Q&A sections only having limited time.
“If this event does happen, it won’t be in good faith,” the SJP spokesperson said.
Edited by Lindsay Augustine and Andriana Yatsyshyn