When I tell people at Harvard about my experiences in a racially divided public high school in Southern Illinois they are quick to condemn such racism. Upon hearing about the gas attendant in a small town who stared at me like I was green instead of brown, some people laugh and others lament the fact that "things have not changed" in rural America. But while my friends show sympathy, they are quick to point out that I'm now safe in tolerant, civilized New England.

I am always surprised by their attitude that, as students at Harvard, we are some how removed from the immediate effects of racism. I have had the most serious and insightful conversations about racism back in the Midwest with high school friends, neighbors and co-workers. Ironically, it is much easier to discuss racism when it is omnipresent. Even people in "safe" areas found themselves discussing racism in the wake of L.A. riots.

The difference between a Harvard conversation on racism and conversations in the "real world" is that the former is often a careful, non-offensive one, while the latter are filled with brutal honesty. Paradoxically, racists who do not care whom they offend, can talk more openly about hatred between ethnicities than the individual who is attempting to see all sides of the issues. And people who are confronted by racism everyday are not embarrassed talking about something which concerns their most basic relationships with other people.

This summer two of my co-workers had very heated discussions about the extent to which racism affects the "average" American. One of them, the first Black scientist at a local chemical company, was not afraid to tell the other, a white scientist from Iowa, that she had no experience with African-Americans and could not talk objectively about the extent to which racism affects them. She, meanwhile, could freely say that it did no good to constantly blame one group of people for a problem as complex as racism.

Initially, their conversations seemed futile because each could only tell the other how wrong their views were. However once they each conceded that neither had the copyright on truth, their talks actually became very concrete discussions on what can be done about racism in America.

This year Harvard required incoming first year students to participate in discussion groups on diversity. And while this new approach better fulfills the University's responsibility to promote awareness of racism, it also highlights the limits of any institutional approach to promoting discussion on diversity. Asked to discuss a topic as emotionally charged as racism (couched in the safe term of "diversity") in an official setting of proctor groups and surrounded by peers who are still strangers, first-years could not be expected to engage in truly candid discussion. Even if important issues were discussed, they were probably not discussed with the brutal honesty of two co-workers who could speak their mind without the worry of offending each other.

Harvard tries to offer us a diverse environment. But living next to people with different ethnic backgrounds is too superficial an interaction to allow students to challenge and examine long-held views about other ethnic groups. And all the organized minority groups on campus may, in fact, allow some students to feel that there is no need for them to get personally involved. In fact, the "average" person may well be intimidated by the presence of so many "experts" on race.

While fear of offending others may inhibit honest discussion of race, a misguided belief that racism doesn't exist here can be even more harmful. While many people believe that the KKK thrives "out there" in some uncivilized part of the country few are as willing to believe that racism exists in the Camelot of Harvard. Yet I was shocked by what was written on some desks in a Harvard library--things that I would expect to find on the walls of my high school's bathrooms.

But racism does not have to be concrete before you recognize its presence. If people recognize that at least some group will be treated unfairly in any setting, whether it is a rural town or a university campus, then they can move on to talking about how to end racism.

Racism is not a concrete problem that is somehow only understood by minorities. Minorities are not immune from having prejudices against people of other ethnic backgrounds. Any one who has felt prejudice or hatred because of their ethnicity will have strong feelings on the issue, but they do not have a special right to dictate what is said about racism and what is done about it. Even among people who abhor racism, there is room for differences on what should be done about it.

There may be no step-by-step solution for eradicating racism, but one definite step towards ending racism is to move it from the realm of academics to the realm of a real-world problem for which we all share some responsibility for solving. At Harvard, honest discussion on racism and diversity has a place in institutional settings but it also has an important place in the everyday discussions of students.