National

Fraternity in Racist Video Has Roots in Antebellum South

Published

10 years ago

March 11, 2015

A sign post is seen outside the international headquarters of Sigma Alpha Epsilon in Evanston, Illinois on March 10, 2015. Sigma Alpha Epsilon’s international headquarters may be in Illinois, but the fraternity’s roots are firmly planted in the antebellum South. (AP Photo/Teresa Crawford)

ALLEN G. BREED, AP National Writer

Sigma Alpha Epsilon was born a few years before the Civil War in the antebellum South, the creation of a small group that set out to forge bonds among young men that would “hold them together for all time.”

The fraternity founded at the University of Alabama held its Southern heritage close. “We came up from Dixie land,” says a ditty from an old SAE songbook.

But nearly 160 years later, another song — this one chanted by members of the frat’s University of Oklahoma chapter and containing racial slurs and lynching references — hearkens back to the land of cotton and puts a new spotlight on the group’s history.

SAE officials insist the chant that resulted in suspension of the chapter is neither a sanctioned song nor is it taught to fraternity members.

If there are any other chapters that use the song, “we need to address that with those chapters and stop it immediately to stamp out this type of behavior,” SAE spokesman Brandon Weghorst said.

The lyrics “are so hateful and spiteful that it’s embarrassing to think that Sigma Alpha Epsilon members would even know the chant or how it goes, if they’ve heard it.”

The fraternity was also investigating reports of other SAE incidents that may have been tainted with racism, Weghorst said.

SAE began on the Tuscaloosa campus on March 9, 1856, a few months after Noble Leslie DeVotie outlined his vision to a close circle of friends during a stroll along the banks of the Black Warrior River.

The founders envisioned the members sharing a lifelong bond, according to a 1916 history of the fraternity by William C. Levere.

“So it came about that in the late hours of a stormy night, the friends met in the old southern mansion and by the flicker of dripping candles organized Sigma Alpha Epsilon,” Levere wrote.

More chapters were soon launched in Tennessee, North Carolina and Washington, D.C., at what is now George Washington University. But the founders were not interested in a national presence.

According to Levere, it was their intention “to confine the fraternity to the southern states.”

When a North Carolina chapter member raised the topic of a “Northern Extension,” charter member Thomas Chappell Cook — who later served as a surgeon in the Confederate army — responded that “the constant agitation of the slavery question was a barrier to northern chapters, as it would preclude the possibility of harmony.”

The Civil War soon put an end to the internal debate.

Because of the fighting, the fraternity’s charter was surrendered in 1861. The Washington City Rho chapter was the only one to emerge from the war intact. SAE would not return to its birthplace until 1886, after the Reconstruction-era ban on “secret societies” was relaxed and the school’s trustees, in Levere’s words, repealed “obnoxious anti-fraternity laws.”

In the meantime, the fraternity had granted its first Northern charter in 1883 to, of all schools, Pennsylvania College — the abolitionist institution now known as Gettysburg College.

The editors of the New Encyclopedia of Southern Culture call SAE “the first Greek-letter society founded in Dixie to take permanent root.”

In December 1930, the fraternity dedicated its international headquarters in the Chicago suburb of Evanston. But, like other fraternities North and South, SAE had not yet embraced racial diversity.

In his 2013 book, “The People’s Advocate,” attorney Daniel P. Sheehan claims credit for championing the bid of Tommy Williamson, who he wrote was the first black man to receive a nomination for membership in SAE.

Sheehan, who said he was social chairman of SAE’s Harvard chapter in 1966, said Williamson’s was the first name he called when it was time to vote for new members.

He and Williamson, a defensive lineman on the Crimson football team, both lived at Kirkland House.

On the first ballot, Sheehan said, Williamson received three “blackballs,” or negative votes.

Sheehan then announced he would blackball every other nominee until whoever had blocked Williamson “fessed up and gave us their reasons,” he wrote. It took six more ballots for a member to admit that he was voting against Williamson because he’d heard that the Piedmont, California, native dated white women.

Sheehan said Williamson’s nomination was approved on the seventh ballot. But when Sheehan told him how the vote had gone down, he wrote, Williamson declined the invitation.

Reached by telephone Tuesday, Williamson, who practices employment law in Washington, D.C., told The Associated Press that he wasn’t really interested in joining a fraternity, especially if some members didn’t want him.

“I didn’t want to be the sort of obsessive token negro,” he said.

Weghorst was unable to say whether Williamson was indeed the first black man formally invited to join a chapter because only within the last couple of years has the organization started to track the ethnicity of people who join, he said.

SAE has had its share of controversy in more recent years.

— In 1988, the founding chapter was suspended for violations of the university’s drug codes. The suspension was lifted two years later, only to be levied again in 1992 when the chapter failed to meet the goals outlined for reinstatement.

Most of the actions taken against SAE in the past have been for infractions of a non-racial nature. But the University of Oklahoma video is not an isolated incident.

— In October 2006, the University of Memphis chapter was investigated after a freshman member complained that his brothers made inappropriate remarks to and about his black girlfriend. Two members were later suspended.

— In February 2013, Washington University in St. Louis suspended its SAE chapter while investigating claims that pledges engaged in racially offensive behavior toward minorities.

— In December 2014, Clemson University suspended the frat after a gang-themed “Cripmas party” at which white members dressed in T-shirts bearing images of handcuffs and the late rapper Tupac Shakur.

Last year, SAE reached what it called “a historic milestone” — becoming the first large national fraternity to eliminate the pledge process.

“Instead, we have implemented a holistic education known as the True Gentleman Experience,” SAE says on its website. “It provides education throughout a member’s collegiate tenure and fosters both personal and professional development.”

___

Associated Press writers Kelly P. Kissel in Little Rock and Teresa Crawford in Chicago also contributed to this story.

___

Allen G. Breed is an AP national writer based in Raleigh, North Carolina. He can be reached at features@ap.org. Follow him on Twitter at https://twitter.com/AllenGBreed.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Up Next

SAE Trustees: ‘Horrible Cancer’ Entered University of Oklahoma Chapter

Don't Miss

Ferguson Manager is 5th Out After DOJ Report Alleging Bias

Oakland Post

Click to comment

Activism

OPINION: Your Voice and Vote Impact the Quality of Your Health Care

One of the most dangerous developments we’re seeing now? Deep federal cuts are being proposed to Medicaid, the life-saving health insurance program that covers nearly 80 million lower-income individuals nationwide. That is approximately 15 million Californians and about 1 million of the state’s nearly 3 million Black Californians who are at risk of losing their healthcare.

Published

5 days ago

May 19, 2025

Oakland Post

Rhonda M. Smith.

By Rhonda M. Smith, Special to California Black Media Partners

Shortly after last year’s election, I hopped into a Lyft and struck up a conversation with the driver. As we talked, the topic inevitably turned to politics. He confidently told me that he didn’t vote — not because he supported Donald Trump, but because he didn’t like Kamala Harris’ résumé. When I asked what exactly he didn’t like, he couldn’t specifically articulate his dislike or point to anything specific. In his words, he “just didn’t like her résumé.”

That moment really hit hard for me. As a Black woman, I’ve lived through enough election cycles to recognize how often uncertainty, misinformation, or political apathy keep people from voting, especially Black voters whose voices are historically left out of the conversation and whose health, economic security, and opportunities are directly impacted by the individual elected to office, and the legislative branches and political parties that push forth their agenda.

That conversation with the Lyft driver reflects a troubling surge in fear-driven politics across our country. We’ve seen White House executive orders gut federal programs meant to help our most vulnerable populations and policies that systematically exclude or harm Black and underserved communities.

One of the most dangerous developments we’re seeing now? Deep federal cuts are being proposed to Medicaid, the life-saving health insurance program that covers nearly 80 million lower-income individuals nationwide. That is approximately 15 million Californians and about 1 million of the state’s nearly 3 million Black Californians who are at risk of losing their healthcare.

Medicaid, called Medi-Cal in California, doesn’t just cover care. It protects individuals and families from medical debt, keeps rural hospitals open, creates jobs, and helps our communities thrive. Simply put; Medicaid is a lifeline for 1 in 5 Black Americans. For many, it’s the only thing standing between them and a medical emergency they can’t afford, especially with the skyrocketing costs of health care. The proposed cuts mean up to 7.2 million Black Americans could lose their healthcare coverage, making it harder for them to receive timely, life-saving care. Cuts to Medicaid would also result in fewer prenatal visits, delayed cancer screenings, unfilled prescriptions, and closures of community clinics. When healthcare is inaccessible or unaffordable, it doesn’t just harm individuals, it weakens entire communities and widens inequities.

The reality is Black Americans already face disproportionately higher rates of poorer health outcomes. Our life expectancy is nearly five years shorter in comparison to White Americans. Black pregnant people are 3.6 times more likely to die during pregnancy or postpartum than their white counterparts.

These policies don’t happen in a vacuum. They are determined by who holds power and who shows up to vote. Showing up amplifies our voices. Taking action and exercising our right to vote is how we express our power.

I urge you to start today. Call your representatives, on both sides of the aisle, and demand they protect Medicaid (Medi-Cal), the Affordable Care Act (Covered CA), and access to food assistance programs, maternal health resources, mental health services, and protect our basic freedoms and human rights. Stay informed, talk to your neighbors and register to vote.

About the Author

Rhonda M. Smith is the Executive Director of the California Black Health Network, a statewide nonprofit dedicated to advancing health equity for all Black Californians.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Activism

OPINION: Supreme Court Case Highlights Clash Between Parental Rights and Progressive Indoctrination

At the center of this controversy are some parents from Montgomery County in Maryland, who assert a fundamental principle: the right to shield their children from exposure to sexual content that is inappropriate for their age, while also steering their moral and ethical upbringing in alignment with their faith. The local school board decided to introduce a curriculum that includes LGBTQ+ themes — often embracing controversial discussions of human sexuality and gender identity.

Published

5 days ago

May 19, 2025

Oakland Post

Craig J. DeLuz. Courtesy of Craig J. DeLuz.

By Craig J. DeLuz, Special to California Black Media Partners

In America’s schools, the tension between parental rights and learning curricula has created a contentious battlefield.

In this debate, it is essential to recognize that parents are, first and foremost, their children’s primary educators. When they send their children to school — public or private — they do not surrender their rights or responsibilities. Yet, the education establishment has been increasingly encroaching on this vital paradigm.

A case recently argued before the Supreme Court regarding Maryland parents’ rights to opt out of lessons that infringe upon their religious beliefs epitomizes this growing conflict. This case, Mahmoud v. Taylor, is not simply about retreating from progressive educational mandates. It is fundamentally a defense of First Amendment rights, a defense of parents’ rights to be parents.

At the center of this controversy are some parents from Montgomery County in Maryland, who assert a fundamental principle: the right to shield their children from exposure to sexual content that is inappropriate for their age, while also steering their moral and ethical upbringing in alignment with their faith. The local school board decided to introduce a curriculum that includes LGBTQ+ themes, often embracing controversial discussions of human sexuality and gender identity. The parents argue that the subject matter is age-inappropriate, and the school board does not give parents the option to withdraw their children when those lessons are taught.

This case raises profound questions about the role of public education in a democratic society. In their fervent quest for inclusivity, some educators seem to have overlooked an essential truth: that the promotion of inclusivity should never infringe upon parental rights and the deeply held convictions that guide families of different faith backgrounds.

This matter goes well beyond mere exposure. It veers into indoctrination when children are repeatedly confronted with concepts that clash with their family values.

“I don’t think anybody can read that and say: well, this is just telling children that there are occasions when men marry other men,” noted Justice Samuel Alito. “It has a clear moral message, and it may be a good message. It’s just a message that a lot of religious people disagree with.”

Justice Amy Coney Barrett raised a crucial point, noting that it is one thing to merely expose students to diverse ideas; it is quite another to present certain viewpoints as indisputable truths. By framing an ideology with the certainty of “this is the right view of the world,” educators risk indoctrination rather than enlightenment. This distinction is not merely academic; it speaks to the very essence of cultivating a truly informed citizenry.

Even Justice Elena Kagan expressed concern regarding the exposure of young children to certain materials in Montgomery County.

“I, too, was struck by these young kids’ picture books and, on matters concerning sexuality, I suspect there are a lot of non-religious parents who weren’t all that thrilled about this,” she said.

Justice John Roberts aptly questioned the practicality of expecting young children to compartmentalize their beliefs in the classroom.

“It is unreasonable to expect five-year-olds, still forming their worldviews, to reconcile lessons that conflict fundamentally with the teachings they receive at home,” he said.

As was noted in my previous commentary, “The Hidden Truth In The Battle Over Books In American Schools”, what lies at the heart of these debates is a moral disconnect between the values held by the majority of Americans and those promoted by the educational establishment. While the majority rightly argue that material containing controversial content of a sexual nature should have no place in our children’s classrooms, the education establishment continues to tout the necessity of exposing children to such content under the guise of inclusivity. This disregards the legitimate values held by the wider community.

Highlighted in this case that is before the Supreme Court is a crucial truth: parents must resolutely maintain their right to direct their children’s education, according to their values. This struggle is not simply a skirmish; it reflects a broader movement aimed at reshaping education by privileging a state-sanctioned narrative while marginalizing dissenting voices.

It is imperative that we assert, without hesitation, that parents are — and must remain — the primary educators of their children.

When parents enroll a child in a school, it should in no way be interpreted as a relinquishment of parental authority or the moral guidance essential to their upbringing. We must stand firm in defending parental rights against the encroaching ideologies of the education establishment.

About the Author

Craig J. DeLuz has almost 30 years of experience in public policy and advocacy. He has served as a member of The Robla School District Board of Trustees for over 20 years. He also currently hosts a daily news and commentary show called “The RUNDOWN.” You can follow him on X at @CraigDeLuz.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Activism

Newsom, Pelosi Welcome Election of First American Pope; Call for Unity and Compassion

“In his first address, he reminded us that God loves each and every person,” said Newsom. “We trust that he will shepherd us through the best of the Church’s teachings: to respect human dignity, care for the poor, and wish for the common good of us all.” Newsom also expressed hope that the pontiff’s leadership would serve as a unifying force in a time of global instability.

Published

5 days ago

May 19, 2025

Oakland Post

Pope Leo XIV. Screenshot.

By Bo Tefu, California Black Media

Gov. Gavin Newsom and First Partner Jennifer Siebel Newsom on May 8 issued a statement congratulating Pope Leo XIV on his historic election as the first American to lead the Catholic Church.

The announcement has drawn widespread reaction from U.S. leaders, including former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who called the moment spiritually significant and aligned with the values of service and social justice.

In their statement, the Newsoms expressed hope that the newly elected pope would guide the Church with a focus on compassion, dignity, and care for the most vulnerable. Newsom said he and the First Partner joined others around the world in celebrating the milestone and were encouraged by the pope’s first message.

Newsom also expressed hope that the pontiff’s leadership would serve as a unifying force in a time of global instability.

“May he remind us that our better angels are not far away — they’re always within us, waiting to be heard,” he said.

Pelosi, a devout Catholic, also welcomed the pope’s election and noted his symbolic connection to earlier church leaders who championed workers’ rights and social equality.

“It is heartening that His Holiness continued the blessing that Pope Francis gave on Easter Sunday: ‘God loves everyone. Evil will not prevail,’” said Pelosi.