The University has acknowledged the ‘problem’ of the murals for a long time.

The whole movement of being "woke" is destroying everything that does not fit within a narrow point of view. The people who claim to be tolerant and open minded are not tolerant or open minded. Again, why now if they have acknowledged an issue long ago? The article mentions one person who is in favor of this, saying this is a good first step. Well, what is the next step, and what is the last step?

..that is, what would be judged appropriate for a building housing the history department might not be appropriate for a visitor center or under the dome?

I think you're trying to pigeonhole the folks who made this decision into your view of a group of people who may be rather different.

If the murals have been a topic of discussion for years, a decision should have been done long ago. It just smacks of poor leadership.

AND unfairly selective!

..between those notions which the captain was attempting to highlight.