Tuesday, May 31, 2005

Get Over It

Michael Sloan-Rossiter '08, writing at the Dartmouth Young Democrats' blog, explains that Bush administration officials have "way too much false loyalty to a false President."

In Our Midst

Today, the Daily Dartmouth runs a small piece about the Navigators, an evangelical Christian group on campus. The entire article reads like one long denial: really, the Navigators aren't crazy people out to seize control of Dartmouth like they allegedly have the country.

This comment from Noah Riner '06 probably applies to the Daily D as well: "I think intellectual organizations like the New York Times are often shocked that there are people of faith in their midst -- it becomes a big news story."

Monday, May 30, 2005

Memorial Day

Today we honor the memory of all of America's war dead; at the College, we particularly honor the sacrifice of the Dartmouth men who gave their lives in the service of their country.

Though impossible to recount all of their stories, I shall let one tale represent all--that of Second Lieutenant Duncan B. Sleigh '67, USMC, who was posthumously awarded the Navy Cross for his actions on 6 November 1968. Sleigh is memorialized on panel 39W of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial on the Mall in Washington, D.C.

We give you, gentlemen, our profound thanks and respect for your sacrifice.

Flag Code Violation

Why isn't Dartmouth's American flag on the Green flying at half-staff right now? The U.S. Flag Code is very clear on this point (Section 7M).

Saturday, May 28, 2005

You're Not Paranoid If They Really Are Out to Get You

Chris Bateman '05 posits that the Olin Foundation helped fund not just The Dartmouth Review and other conservative organizations but "essentially, the Robinson-Zywicki Trustee victory."

It doesn't get much better than this:
[A] movement like the Robinson-Zywicki petition campaign -- cloaked in empty language of "Intellectual Diversity," "Liberal Bias," and " of "Free Speech" -- is in reality the culminating action of a massive operation focused on gaining power and wiping out most of the progressive gains this country has made in the 20th century?
According to Bateman, Daily Dartmouth editor Colin Barry '06 "thought I was being a little tooo [sic] conspiratorial." Barry was right.

Katie Gilbert '05 adds that the Center for American Progress "suspects a large scale campaign" to elect conservatives to university boards. We should, she says, "be very afraid."

Class of 2005 Site Up

The official alumni website for the Class of 2005 is now available.

Friday, May 27, 2005

A Positively Final Response

Maybe.

The same bad arguments for divestment continue to be made-- now, in addition to the finger-wagging Little Green Bloggers, also by the editorial writers at the Daily Dartmouth. Boy, those guys at America's Oldest [sic] College Newspaper sure aren't afraid to challenge the conventional wisdom. (...Or are they?!?) But, wait, as C. Bateman reminds me and my trusty steed:
Get off your intellectual high-horse, which is more or less paralyzed when it comes to doing anything productive to end this genocide, and join the movement that's actually getting things done....

Maybe in another two or three years, when all the rape and murder is complete, he'll have finished expounding his subtle position on the subject.
Correction: my intellectual high-horse is well-bred and physically fit. Its coat has a magnificent sheen. But it's a worthy standard-- who's getting things done? I've said many times that I want to see the U.S. and other nations use their military to scare Khartoum. Would you divestors support, say, a tactical military strike on government buildings in that city? Or would you prefer this strategy:
Dartmouth's divestment, moreover, could have a ripple effect upon the financial decisions made by similar institutions. A wave of divestment would put pressure on the Sudanese government to take action to end the genocide and would deprive the Janjaweed rebels of much-needed funds.
That's the D. Put aside that the Janjaweed aren't rebels but paid and armed by Islamist tyrants-- clearly these people feel qualified to lecture the campus after having read Wikipedia or some one-page handout. But how's that for foot-dragging subtlety? While the divestors are cleverly sparking a wave across college campuses in America, hoping that it will upset certain companies to pull out of Sudan, and that that will make Janjaweed irregulars stop raping, killing and stealing-- do any serious thinkers actually believe that this four-to-five step illogical process is tenable?-- the group could be focusing on effecting the passage of legislation, and not just a condemnatory resolution in the New Hampshire legislature. There is no precedent for using civil disobedience to stop genocide. Mass slaughter is carried out about people who do not care about human life. Civil disobedience relies upon your opponents' guilt and at least partial regard for human dignity. That paper again:
The Darfur Action Group deserves commendation for its prominent role in injecting this issue into campus discourse. But now the student body must familiarize itself with this issue and press for proper action to end the conflict.
Campus discourse is fairly receptive, I've found-- not exactly your most accurate barometer of cosmic greatness. When will the Verbum people laud the Greek Houses' contributions to The Discourse? They "inject" themselves into campus happenings to a great extent. But then that second sentence. Ending genocide is not like providing dozens of free bikes, baking brownies, or taking back the night. It's not a matter of spreading awareness, hanging posters, or blitzing out-- it's a matter of being aware and sure and urging free, moral government to intervene. All else is self-promotion.

Then, Niral Shah:
He fails to acknowledge that this isn't a collective action problem, that in fact, each individual instance of divestment helps the groups out there already trying to divest. (That's why this is nothing like voting. In fact, his logic carried over to voting would suggest that's a futile act too, because not everybody will do it).
Huh? Maybe he's talking about this:
You could argue that your divestment will inspire others. People make this argument about voting.... To be effective, it must be a group effort.
The 'you' in that statement, Niral, is quite literally you-- divestment suppporters. I was making your argument for you because I suspected you would compare this to voting, as you did a few days later on your blog, above. So I drew a distinction: simultaneity, which not addressed. Because companies' calculus would happen in succession, nothing happens until a critical mass is achieved, unlike on election day. I still dispute the mantra you repeat: that every little bit helps. Your only evidence is a single company that withdrew. As I stated here, though:
Divestment also presumes that corporations care entirely about money (a pretty cogent assumption). But. If they're supposed to pull out of Sudan because they're concerned about money, which would concern them more: 1) their stock suffering from Dartmouth or other parties hurting it 2) losing very lucrative oil contracts with Khartoum?
And if that company withdrew, clearly it was just not making a lot of money with its Khartoum contracts, and a small amount of money lost in America or elsewhere outweighed that. But the companies that really make a difference in facillitating slaughter, and have huge contracts, will not be affected economically. Divestment has an inherent flaw because most of its steps rely on people making economic decisions not moral ones. He also ignores the obvious differences between apartheid and genocide, which I've outlined. And yet!
Yes, he fails to address any of the points I made on the merits of divestment, and why it has been effective, and will be again in this instance.
How sly! The two logical arguments I make against the effectiveness of divestment are not match for DAG's vacuous righteousness! Yeah, but, he reminds me:
Maybe you should actually attempt activism, see how you feel about it, instead of condemning it from an uninformed outside perspective.
Well-- and this goes out to all malcontents-- why don't you try writing for The Dartmouth Review, see how you feel about it, instead of condemning it from an uninformed outside perspective? "Don't knock it 'til you've tried it": pretty flimsy. But it reveals something, which is that the worth of activism, apparently, derives from how you feel about it. It matters not how I feel about an action-- it still either helps people or it does not. If, one, helping people is moral, and two, an action does not help anyone, then it follows that in order for that action to be moral, it must derive its morality from elsewhere. Is it the emotion? I should hope not. I'm assuming a DAG person would lecture me of its symbolic morality-- 'taking a stand,' or something, which, when deprived of its solvency, is just another way to say 'Look at me!'

Ron Green, the committee chair and director of the Dartmouth College Ethics Institute, has a pretty blunt way of putting the solvency issue:
Whatever Dartmouth does is not going to end the genocide. This is a complex situation, it's not as though we have a switch that we can turn on and off with regard to that. I think it's probably wrong to become panicked about this.
Well, you should be troubled by the catastrophe and the reminder of evil. But, there is no switch, as he says, and to suggest flippantly that selling some stocks and wearing some armbands can make a difference is kind of insulting to those having their lives destroyed. I can see some DAGers jetting into west Sudan, saying, "Hey, there! It's OK, we divested Dartmouth from Siemens!" "Great, thanks! My village just got razed, my sister raped, my father killed, and the year's crop harvest burned... but thanks! I needed that. You guys are heroes. Say, how's that strike on Khartoum coming? Got anything but some UN guys taking pictures of me lying in a ditch?" Man, that's awkward.

And finally, I'm called downright rude for responding:
I'm kind of sick of this. You criticize what we're doing, and I respond. And in typical review fashion, you find some other new point to refute. This goes beyond cyncism. You, like much of your paper, is critical and anagonistic for its own sake.
I guess I'll just have to respond with an excerpt from a speech I admire:
College years - and, ultimately, full lives - are about testing our convictions, exploring our doubts, and engaging in debate and dialogue; these years are about challenges to certainty. Often the most fundamental dialogue is, or at least should be, with oneself. But such introspection can only follow exposure to ideas different from the ones you have brought with you. Now the opportunities for such exposure surround you. An academic community - indeed a free society - rests on the freedom to think and to speak out. The free expression of ideas is a bedrock principle, even though not all that is thought or said is equally valid or true. The corollary of the freedom of speech is the freedom to criticize that which is said. And sometimes this freedom to disagree becomes an obligation. If politeness and civility and mutual respect form the basis of our community, so too do engagement and debate and, assuredly, disagreement. Academic communities at their best are places that challenge more than they reinforce.
James Wright gets it profoundly right. No viewpoint should get off scot-free, particularly on a college campus-- and even (or especially?) if the cause is tricked-out in the trappings of nobility. In the case of the Darfur "Action" Group, I consider my response obligatory. So, no, I won't "shut the hell up."

Dartmouth Lawyers Seek Darfur Action

The Dartmouth Lawyers Association has issued a statement calling for governments to intervene in Darfur, Sudan, to help "alleviate the plight of those displaced from their villages by two years of civil war."

Thursday, May 26, 2005

College Wraps Up Trustee Vote

In an unusual press release, the College acknowledges the controversies around the Trustee election and discusses its possible repercussions. The Alumni Council, for example, has requested the voting data as part of an effort to improve voter turnout, the article says.

The article also includes this shocking piece of news: apparently, the election drew "opposing viewpoints from two student-driven newspapers, The Dartmouth and the Dartmouth Review."

Divestment, Again

The Darfur Action Group is meeting today to protest Dartmouth's investment in Sudan.
From: Darfur Action Group
Subject: DIVESTMENT: Dartmouth Decides Today
Date: May 26, 2005 3:23:19 PM EDT
To: Recipient list suppressed

4pm Faculty Lounge
TODAY

The Khartoum regime in Sudan is a brutal dictatorship that has killed millions of its citizens, and continues to perpetrate genocide in Darfur. Revenues from oil companies, direct contracts with foreign firms, and imported products and services fund this genocide.

Dartmouth is currently invested in several of these companies, and could potentially expand these holdings or acquire stock in dozens of other complicit corporations. Do you think Dartmouth should continue investing in Sudan and funding the genocide? Should you have a say in what your tuition supports?

The ACIR has agreed to consider divestment.

Protect the moral and fiscal integrity of Dartmouth.
Help spark a nationwide divestment movement, and bring justice to Darfur.
Come make your voice heard.

A PUBLIC FORUM
___________
THURSDAY
MAY 26
4 PM
FACULTY LOUNGE
(Between the Top of the Hop
and Alumni Hall, above the HB's)
___________

The Advisory Committee on Investor Responsibility.

Competition for Waligore's Blog

Michael Sloan-Rossiter '08 has started a blog for Dartmouth's Young Democrats. Sloan is the organization's secretary.

Wednesday, May 25, 2005

Mann '02 hits it big

Former Dartmouth quarterback Brian Mann '02 doubles for Adam Sandler in the forthcoming movie "The Longest Yard."

Someone's Bitter

Lauren Maynard '06 joins a chorus of folks whining to the Daily Dartmouth's editors about the decision to axe the "cartoon" "drawn" by Paul Heintz '06.
[I feel] badly for you. Your sh***y life is now enduring the wrath of all of campus. Too bad you're a useless sophomore who just rid the D of it's only worthy aspect.

Have fun being hated by half of campus.

Cheers!
Lauren
Even when the Daily D does something right, they're cut no slack.

Rumor Has It

That "Guy and Fellow" is no more.

Art

I guess there's real meaning behind Tuesday's "Guy and Fellow."

Tuesday, May 24, 2005

Samwick Dissatisfied with GOP

Economics professor Andrew Samwick, a former member of the Council of Economic Advisers, told the Washington Post that he's growing somewhat dissatisfied with the GOP's turn from small government:
"I'm inclined to support the Republican Party, but the question becomes, how much other stuff do I have to put up with to maintain that identification?" asked Andrew A. Samwick, a Dartmouth College economics professor who until recently was chief economist of Bush's Council of Economic Advisers...

Samwick said the disenchantment of small-government conservatives has been building since the passage of the USA Patriot Act, which some saw as infringing on individual liberties, and the Medicare drug benefit, which created future government liabilities that exceed the entire projected Social Security shortfall.

"Some of these outcomes are really starting to alienate people who might be Republican because they are for limited government," Samwick said.

Monday, May 23, 2005

Help Iraqi Children

This is certainly a good cause.
From: Epsilon Kappa Theta
Subject: IRAQI KIDS PROJECT
Date: May 23, 2005 1:36:55 PM EDT

*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~

IRAQI KIDS PROJECT

A Toy, Clothing, and Toiletry Drive for kids in Iraq

CLEAN OUT YOUR CLOSET, USE UP EXTRA DBA

Dates of Drive: May 20 - June 8

Donation boxes located in the basement of DORMS (McLane, Streeter, Mid-Mass, Hitchcock, Russell Sage, Bissell/Cohen lounge, Wheeler, Woodward, Mid-Fayer, Topliff, New Hamp, Brace Commons) TOPSIDE, and COLLIS Info Desk

Give spare change for shipping at Topside

Donation ideas: clothing, beanie babies, soccer balls, toy cars,toothbrushes, hair brushes, stickers, balloons, crayons, shoes, etc.

IRAQI KIDS PROJECT

~sponsored by Epsilon Kappa Theta and ROTC~

*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~

Heschel receives honorary degree

Following in the footsteps of President Emeritus James Freedman, who this year received an honorary degree from Tufts, Jewish Studies Department chair Susannah Heschel received an honorary degree from Colorado College today.

What's Your Fetish?

Date: 23 May 2005 18:03:37 EDT
From: Dartmouth Asian Organization
Subject: what's your FETISH?????
To: (Recipient list suppressed)
---

Get ready for

a Multi-Media Presentation and Dinner Discussion on...
=================================================
Asian Fetish & Stereotypes of Asian/Asian American Women
=================================================

TUESDAY, May 24
Carson L02, 6-8PM

The history - origins to present day

Presented by Serena Chang '05 and Visiting History
Professor Shiho Imai.
Q&A and discussion to follow the presentation.

free dinner

brought to you by DAO & PAC

Only Slightly Less Embarrassing than Attending Trump 'University'...

...is knowing that a professor from your alma mater is on the faculty.

On 'Low Turnout' in the Trustee Election

From a reader:
In Friday's "The Dartmouth", in "Consequences of Low Turnout" [Link], William Montgomery '52 shames himself and his fellow former alumni leadership with half-truths and hypocritical assertions:

1. Regarding low participation: Montgomery fails to disclose that the past five years of opposition campaigns has stopped, stabilized, and re-energized alumni participation. Once dropping below a fifth, it has rebounded to about a quarter. The opposition first called for internet voting, helping boost the rate, and the recent opposition trustees elected have reinvigorated voter participation from alumni who until now have been allowed no horse in the race.

Montgomery was an alumni association officer during the years of declining participation, and he helped write the rules hindering candidacies and helping self appointed committees nominate each other in full circle.

Alumni donor participation and alumni voting participation have dropped for a decade or more. Only in the past five years of re-engagement has part of the alumni body responded to the call of alumni activism. That new participation is healthy, and will not only help diversify Dartmouth but help boost the alumni participation with regard to the College. It was alumni opposition criticism that spurred the College to recognize the low donor participation rates and to launch new Trustee-led programs to boost giving.

Participation is not trivial: the only readily changeable quantitative component in the US News & World Report rankings is alumni participation. The opposition campaigns have help stop and reverse the dropping participation rates, inspiring new emphasis on alumni participation and involvement, and have therefore measurably increased Dartmouth's ranking among its peers.

2. Regarding rules: Montgomery and other entrenched officers put in the voting rules that they thought would keep outsiders out. In fact, they miscalculated, and now they want to change the rules. What they are proposing is a complicated ranking system that will leave only the most middling, average candidates as trustees, rather than the victor. Montgomery didn't like the result, so his first impulse is to change the rules. Tyrannical! Montgomery and his ilk have a habit of changing the rules repeatedly, rather than adjusting their policies to attract greater legitimacy.

3. Regarding margin of victory: 48% is not a small plurality (as Bill Clinton knows in two elections). Last year, Rodgers won with an overarching supermajority.

4. Regarding use of blogs: Montgomery was an early supporter of ASD, the negative campaign group and blog that abused the election rules. In fact, Montgomery helped write those campaign rules, and as he says in his editorial, perhaps a further rule change is necessary "to tone down the rhetoric." In fact, he was an enthusiastic member of the ASD team! Hypocritical!

Montgomery et al monkey-ed around with the rules to prevent opposition, to hinder choice, to stifle discussion. Now he wants to overturn the rules. Free speech was a big issue this campaign - perhaps those sympathetic to the leftist establishment should take some free advice and recognize that the Montgomery-rule-monkeys are part of your problem in attracting supporters to your cause.

5. Regarding changing rules of Dartmouth governance: Montgomery inflames the alumni with the panicky or threatening prediction or hope that the Trustees will change the mix of Alumni and Charter trustees, and tilt toward the unelected and appointed Charter Trustees which they can control - perhaps even ban Alumni Trustees altogether. While this is a real risk and threat, the real reasons Montgomery brings it up is to 1) panic and threaten the alumni so they refrain from energetic alumni participation 2) Finlandize the alumni council into a weak, collaborative rubber stamp body to sponsor rule changes weakening the alumni, 3) enlist and invite the Trustees to take said action to "save" the leftist establishment from open elections and free speech. If he is speaking for himself, he is being hopeful or weak. If he is speaking for his friends among the Trustees and establishment, then they are proposing a coup to strip alumni of their rights.

Saturday, May 21, 2005

Congratulations.

To Editor Emeritus Joe Rago '05, who has been selected for a Collegiate Network yearlong fellowship at National Review.

See the other fellows here.

Women's Lax Loses in Semis

The women's lacrosse team fell to Northwestern 8-4 yesterday in the NCAA semifinals, ending the team's winningest season. Northwestern will play either Duke or Virginia in tomorrow's championship game.

Friday, May 20, 2005

Re: Divestment Revistited

First-- and I can't emphasize this enough-- the goal should be to stop what remains of the Darfuri population from being wiped out. I support economic sanctions and military threats against Khartoum. (Read that sentence again if you missed it in my first post.) I say this because an 'anonymous, in a comment,' says:
I see no reason why we should not verbalize our opposition to fanatical
religious terrorism, genocide, and tyranny as a matter of truth and the ideals
of our republic in this new era. I do not want to see the Review creep (again?)
into useless anti-divestment diatribes, and go down a politically useless and
morally backward path as with S. Africa. Let's always stay on the side of the
angels, or at least most of them. There is every reason to use both small
personal and large public means to oppose genocide.

In particular, I take issue with the last sentence. I think Christian's and some of my analysis has done a fairly good job of showing why divestment would be ineffectual. Again, parallel debate. But let's assume it is ineffectual. This fellow and Niral say it's still the right thing to do. The issue for me is time-- it's limited, as always. Professors, students and others who clamor for divestment are therefore clamoring less for legislation. I argue that divestment and awareness-raising crowds out the true effectual action. People's consciences become satisfied because they think they have done something.

This leads me to my opinion of 'activism.' Yes, I do basically oppose it, as it manifests itself on college campuses. I suppose activism came about because people for centuries thought there was nothing they could do to change their government. And certainly rights of assembly and petition are among the most powerful tools of a free society. But 'activism' I consider a different bird from political action. It's largely symbolic. Linking arms, making signs, jumping up and down, chanting, making your voice heard. On a lark, I went to an anti-war demonstration in my home town. From the perspective of the legislature (and others who disagreed with them) the protest might not have taken place. It was scarily insular, preaching to the choir. I asked one guy what they were doing-- were they persuading anyone? His answer, after I pressed him, was that he was 'strengthening his political faith in the movement.' 'The Movement' was unclear to me-- there were everyone from black panther types to ANSWER-styled Stalinists to ancient hippies who taught English at my high school to kids in mascara who told me they didn't really care that much about politics. But I think it's clear that for many, activism replaces what religion once did for the human psyche-- the 'higher,' the ineffable 'thou.' This sort of faith allows people to rationalize doing something that will have no effect. It's centered on the believer who can step into grace by performing ritualistic actions. So I am opposed to ritualistic activism because I think problems should just be solved, without respect to 'political faith,' 'optimism' or other attributes, which, you notice, have more to do with the activist than the supposed object of his pity.

I've gotten some criticisms from liberals and conservatives from opposing some of the DAG's actions. They say, 'I basically agree, but come on-- the Darfur Action Group?' I wonder though how many have actually written to their congressmen or even know what's going on in Darfur. Clearly, most or many of the inner circle of DAG have, I presume. I'm more concerned about the'laity,' so to speak, the facebook crawlers. I suspect more just like the idea of the Darfur Action Group, in that they can feel that as Dartmouth students, they're sort of /kind of supporting them, and when judgment day comes, they did their part, and their consciences are unsullied. Now that's cynicism.

Competition for the Scavenger Hunt

**********************************************

          Party in the HOOD

               Cause U Deserve it!


               8-10pm Friday May 20th

FREE FOOD and Drink (Wine for the grown folks) Plus Door Prizes

Featuring Soul Scribes, Portrait Artists, Freestyle MC's, and DJ B Ware on the tables.

Have your portrait sketched or just relax with friends.
Either way, come chill and enjoy a nice evening at the Hood Museum of Art.

Sponsored by the Hood Museum of Art, Programming Board, Mosaic, and Gold Coast Cluster
**********************************************

Hoo Boy!

Date: 20 May 2005 16:37:44 EDT
From: 05-Class-Council
Subject: ipodshuffle scavenger party
To: (Recipient list suppressed)


fun scavenger hunt

ipod shuffle

party pack

good stuff

come and get it

**********************************************

          Senior Scavenger Hunt and Party!!

          ipods, free food, refreshments...

               Friday, May 20

          teams of four will follow clues that lead
          all around campus in an attempt to find
          the location of the party

          each member of the winning team will win
               an ipod shuffle!!!

               The kickoff is at 6:15 pm in Fuel
          Teams can be up to four people (all must be 05s)

          the party begins when the first team arrives, at which
          point we will send out a blitz to the entire class revealing
          the location of the party. all 05s are welcome

*please bring your government issued id

**********************************************

Re: Admissions Agenda

I post this here b/c the comments thread is long and I'd like to take the discussion on a different tact.

Seems like the football part is the bigger news here. The spectrum of DED opinion is presented from being against the letter but supporting KF to wanting to go further. This is clearly not reflective of the overall alumni spectrum, which seems to range from being against the letter but supporting KF to wanting to fire him.

It's extremely troubling if these distorted views are being passed on to applicants, and who knows what other biases are being passed on similarly, discouragning not only athletes but other unfavored constituencies from wanting to attend Dartmouth.

Taking a Cue from President Wright

Today's Daily Dartmouth editorial on the Trustee election sounds a lot like the message President James Wright has been trying to sell to alumni: move along, nothing to see here.
There is no speech code at Dartmouth. The Greek system has not ended as we know it. While there are still issues worthy of great concern -- oversubscription, for example -- the general state of the College is strong. Each incoming class is stronger than the last, and current students and recent alumni are still among the nation's greatest achievers.
The Daily D apparently believes there's not much for students or alumni to be concerned about. The administration's recent baby steps towards removing its speech restrictions and its failure to carry out its standing threat to abolish the Greek system represent, it seems, proof of the administration's benign intentions. It does not bother the Daily D's editorial board that President Wright has not repudiated his commitment to end the Greek system "as we know it" nor his 2001 statement that students lack "'rights' [which] trump the rights, feelings, and considerations of others." And they accept unquestioningly the admissions office line about each freshman class being "the best ever"—even though this is a slap in the face to previous classes, who are, by extension, worse.

The editorial then attacks the petition candidates and their supporters as simply nostalgic old men opposed to progress:
Those who pine for the bygone days of "Dear Old Dartmouth" should recognize that the current student body does not want a return to those days. We want to shape the College in our own way. Older alumni should be wary of subordinating the strides forward made by the College, current students and recent alumni to their nostalgia.
Who wrote that paragraph—Susan Ackerman?

Divestment Revisited

What are the effects?

Niral Shah, the recent Dr. Frankenstein of Free 'Waligore' Dartmouth, the Dartmouth blog-o-sphere's mysteriously reticent, left-liberal web log, has been pushing for divestment on that site and also the Lil' Green One. Here's what he says.
Since our decision to pursue divestment, we have conducted our own research into corporate activity in Sudan, and worked with the ACIR (Advisory Committee on Investor Responsibility) to accomplish our goal.
So, to be specific, they are divesting the College's endowment from corporations operating in Sudan, especially those dealing with the Khartoum government, which arms and supports with air cover the janjaweed, the ones on the ground literally raping and pillaging and killing. This is a multi-step process, and in each step it requires self-interested people to engage in economic calculus so as to effect a moral change.

Then he outlines the categories of companies that will not get investments from Dartmouth. There are oil companies / military suppliers, 'infrastructure,' service / product exporters, essential services (think 'baby formula'), and the fifth, unknown. Then, he adds that the committee doesn't really know which ones to ask the College to extricate itself from:
The difference between divesting from the first category versus the second and third is that, well, the first category is a clear cut moral obligation to stop the genocide. Their is debate on the remaining categories, regarding actual purposes of infrastructure and adverse effects on development and the population. Supporters of divestment during the anti-apartheid referred to this differentiation as fighting apartheid versus fighting the apartheid economy. The argument is that only the latter is effective, seeing that a successful divestment campaign amounts to a privatized version of sanctions.
The question in my mind is this. If Dartmouth pulls its funds, will it be enough to get the companies to change their minds? If those companies change their minds, will that get Khartoum to change its mind, or will some sleazy Russian companies just step in? (I understand theirs and China's provide a lot of support already.) And if Khartoum decides, begrudgingly, to stop shipping Auto-Kalashnikovs to the western regions, will that be enough for Joe Janjaweed and sons to decide not to strip just one more village bare, since they obviously have the resources for it already?

But Niral talks about moral obligations. I half-argue here that tracing one's loyalty is not really a moral action since it doesn't affect another human being. Let me be clearer: if you rush into a burning building to save someone, but you cannot save anyone because it turns out to be physically impossible, that's moral. You thought at the time you might do some good. But if you do something you know, perhaps 99%, will not save people, that is less moral and maybe a little dishonest. If it's 100%, neither deontolocially nor teleologically is it moral.

Why do I say it wouldn't effect change, specifically in Darfur? I see it as something of a prisoner's dilemma. That is, if all the 'players' (investors) participate, that is the best outcome. There's some leverage. However, if only Dartmouth divests and no one else (or just a few other colleges), then companies will not care, nor will Khartoum or the janjaweed, and Dartmouth will have participated in a futile yet expensive gesture. (I always thought Thoreau looked ridiculous sitting in that jail-- it seemed more like self-indulgence than true protest to me.) You could argue that your divestment will inspire others. People make this argument about voting. One person says, 'I'm not gonna vote. My vote won't count-- it's one of millions.' The second says, 'What if everyone said what you say? Where would we be then??? It's, like, democracy would be shackled.' And he's right. But the decisions in divestment are not simultaneous. If we had 'divestment day,' it just might, especially if others received word that companies would divest. To be effective, it must be a group effort.

Wrong, too, are arguments that smidgen of divestment could save a few lives. A critical mass is necessary to convince the fanatics in Khartoum. This, after all, is not about oil (the civil war, which ended a few years ago was); it's about race (hence 'genocide'). These Darfuris (or, some armed groups) rose up to protest discrimination by 'Arabs' in the government. The fanatics are almost done with killing-- soon Darfur will be destroyed for many generations to come. Unlike apartheid, which was sustained and not a 'finishable' action, Khartoum, even if they stopped when the UN increased presence many, many months from now (doubtful) would still have succeeded in its goal. Then, they can purge their party of thugs by sending a dozen on a Roman ICC Holiday. Poof, they've atoned! A leak in the project won't slow it down, unlike apartheid. (Well, maybe) Plus, the apartheid divestment in the U.S. happened in conjunction with other international pressures-- the most effective of which, arguably, were not economic. South African teams were barred from sports events, and the like. I do not believe that those Burqa-pushing tyrants care much for good international PR if they can retain a stranglehold on their nation.

Divestment also presumes that corporations care entirely about money (a pretty cogent assumption). But. If they're supposed to pull out of Sudan because they're concerned about money, which would concern them more: 1) their stock suffering from Dartmouth or other parties hurting it 2) losing very lucrative oil contracts with Khartoum? Seems like divestment has the wrong assumptions, doesn't it? He also says:
In the fall, Dartmouth held stock in PetroChina, an oil company that Harvard recently divested from.
Well, how did that work? Has the company complained; has Beijing released any dissidents? I don't ask that sarcastically-- what's the solvency record of divestment? Is there a historical precedent of: 'corporate divestment' --> 'stop genocide'? I honestly don't know.

I don't doubt that financial considerations are a huge part of Khartoum's considerations. But why not put a cap on the bottle, instead of trying to block individual bubbles at the bottom, to use a really stupid metaphor? That is, sanctions, coupled with military threats. That happens at the national level. (The slimy Security Council-- with China's supposed veto intentions-- won't do anything.)

I know, I know: DAG is supporting the Darfur Accountability Act. That's good; I think we all should. But it doesn't mean that divestment isn't a waste of time and money.

Obligatory Hufu Mention: But, Mark, I Thought We Were Friends?

Mark Nuckols, the man behind the healthy human flesh alternative, has launched a website.

His FAQ page quotes a recent editorial:

"Q. Has HufuTM created a controversy?
A. Yes it most certainly has. It has been denounced by the Dartmouth Review as another example of 'today's culture of multiculturalism and moral relativism, [where] we are increasingly reluctant to make judgments about ideas, practices, or pieces of art. Sure, they say, cannibalism might seem wrong to your hetero-normative, Judeo-Christian culture, but who are we to judge the Aztecs or the indigenous cultures of Papua New Guinea?'"

Nearly a dozen staff members, including Editor in Chief Michael Ellis, attended a recent Hufu taste test.

PSA

*********************************
Date: 19 May 2005 23:45:32 EDT
From: Rebecca M. Heller
Subject: stolen computer
To: (Recipient list suppressed)

Hi guys,

Someone stole Sarah Morton's computer out of the senior fellows office (241 Baker Office #5.)

This was pretty lame. Her entire fellowship is on it and it's due tomorrow. If you have it, or know who might, please leave it either on the front porch of C and G (1 South Main Street,) the Collis Info Desk (they won't ask who you are,) or in front of the office door (241) which is usually locked.

Even if you are too lame to give it back, it would be mildly decent of you to make an anonymous online email account and blitz her her senior fellowship (Sarah Morton '05.) Please think hard and don't randomly destroy the culminating work of someone's entire college experience.

Thanks,

Becca
******************************
UPDATED: The computer is a 'small, silver Dell Latitude.'

Thursday, May 19, 2005

The ACIR strikes again.

Our friends at the Advisory Committee on Investor Responsibility are back at it.
____________________________________
Date: 19 May 2005 18:14:30 EDT
From: Sally C. Newman
Reply-To: paradewithoutpermit
Subject: Investor Responsibility Forum
To: Sally C. Newman

Dartmouth's Advisory Committee on Investor Responsibility Invites the Dartmouth Community to:

A PUBLIC FORUM
___________
THURSDAY
MAY 26
4 PM
FACULTY LOUNGE
(Between the Top of the Hop
and Alumni Hall, above the HB's)
___________

This year the ACIR has deliberated and made recommendations to the College as to how it should cast its votes in over a hundred shareholder resolutions at companies such as Disney, Costco, GE, Kellogg, Wal-Mart, ExxonMobil, Monsanto and Coca Cola. We have covered such issues as global climate change and corporate responsibility, human rights and labor standards in China and elsewhere, animal welfare and the fast food industry, and reimportation policies of pharmaceutical companies.

We have also been examining, with assistance from the Darfur Action Group, the relationship between companies doing business in Sudan and the genocide occurring in Darfur. The Darfur Action Group has petitioned the College to divest its holdings in certain companies operating in Sudan, and we continue to study that petition.

ACIR will report on these activities and open the floor to the Dartmouth Community to learn about your concerns and answer your questions.

Light refreshments will be provided.

Please come!

Official 2009 Site Celebrates Insecurity

The official Class of 2009 website includes a prominent link to the website of Buzzflood, a group designed to reassure its founders that Dartmouth really isn't a worse school than Harvard or Yale. Does the College endorse Buzzflood's views with this link?

Two Items

You don't see this every day: A professor openly hammering away at the College's postmodern lilt. Meir Kohn may be an econ prof, but he has some bristling words for the humanities:

However, in the humanities and in other parts of the social sciences, an increasing proportion of what passes for research is not reality-based but socially constructed. "Research" does not mean discovering or understanding anything: it merely means writing stuff that your peers like. The result increasingly is post-modernist, neo-Marxist claptrap. Those doing "research" of this type are unlikely to be good teachers in terms of what they teach. They have no truth or knowledge to impart -- only attitude. Indeed they deny there is such a thing as truth or knowledge.

On the other hand, you do see this every day: The Dartmouth (Stuart A. Reid) takes a complicated issue, in this case a retrospective on the trustee election that was, and not only misses most every important point of the story, but also makes some outlandish suppositions. My favorite is this, regarding the influence of national political ideology on the petition candidates' stances:

And the petition candidates' stance against big government perhaps manifested itself in skepticism of Dartmouth's plethora of deans.

Sheesh, Stuart, you gotta try harder than that.

Wednesday, May 18, 2005

Star Wars Mania Comes to Hanover

Upper Valley fans of the Star Wars movies are lining up to see the first showing of the series' final film, Revenge of the Sith, at the Nugget Theater in Hanover. Tickets for the midnight screening go on sale at 10 tonight, but some die-hards arrived in front of the cinema yesterday with tents and even microwaves. As of a few moments ago, the line of costumed devotees had stretched to Molly's restaurant.

Michael Audet

Star Wars die-hards camp out before tickets go on sale tonight at 10.

Irony

Michael Audet

Prof. Jim Kuypers's new book, The Art of Rhetorical Criticism, is featured the Berry Library display of new faculty works that sits in the corridor between the Circulation desk and Sherman Art Library.

The Alumni Council's Admissions Agenda

The Alumni Council's Enrollment and Admissions Committee is considering new rules to "diversify" alumni interviewers, and the committee's members found little fault with Dean Karl Furstenberg's letter condemning the football team, according to an e-mail from the committee's chairman.

The e-mail, from Stuart Bratesman '75, suggests the committee may pressure regional directors to include more members of the College's official minority alumni groups on interviewing teams.

A concerned District Enrollment Director passed on this e-mail to The Dartmouth Review. Emphasis added.
Date: Fri, 13 May 2005 14:38:44 -0400
From: [Stuart Bratesman '75]
To: [Repressed]
Subject: Re: May Alumni Council Admissions meeting

Kiyoe:!

Thank you for your email.

Krysia and I have just been exchanging notes about the agenda for our Admissions and Enrollment Committee meeting. Please let me know if you have your own thoughts or suggestions about what we're proposing:

1. Election of the new Committee Chair and Vice Chair
(I presume that Krysia's elevation from vice-chair to chair will be a mere formality.

The vice-chair's position is open to any current first-year member of the Committee. The member who is elected will serve as vice-chair throughout his or her second year on the Council, and then serve as Chair during the third year. It is the responsibility of the vice-chair to write up a meeting summary to submit to Patsy Fisher, and to give a brief oral summary to the rest of the Council during the early Saturday morning session.)

2. Karl's report on the latest admissions results

3. A comparison of acceptance rates for applicants who had an alumni interview to applicants who did not, and a discussion of how alumni ratings of applicants figure into the decision process.
(Krysia recalls that you gave us a summary of this last year. I agree with her suggestion that it would be useful to make it a regular annual report for the May Council meeting. What would be really fascinating would be to see the acceptance rates associated with applicants at each level of the alumni interview rating scale. I.e., the percentage of applicants rated exceptional who got accepted, and so on through the lower ratings.)

4. A very brief review of the football letter.
(The members of the committee had a fairly active email exchange when the letter was first disclosed and the consensus was that the issue wasn't really important enough to merit our formal action. Everyone who did respond supported Karl with opinions ranging from, "the letter was a mistake, but I support him," all the way to, "the letter was great, but it didn't go far enough.")

5. A discussion of Ivy League recruiting rules.
(This issue has come up in the Athletics Committee, and I think it would be good for our group to have a clearer understanding of how the rules work and whether Dartmouth should lobby to have them changed. My understanding is that the League has established a set of four-or-five Academic Index bands based on a numeric rating system that incorporates SAT scores and high-school class rank. The minimum AI score for each of the bands is the same across all Ivy League schools, but the numb! er of football recruits needing to qualify for the top academic band, second-highest band, and so on, varies from school-to-school depending upon the overall academic index score for the entire student body. Teams from schools with higher overall Academic Indices are allowed fewer recruits from the lower bands and are required to have a proportion of their recruits meet the minimum scores for the higher bands. * or something like that. I admit to still feeling confused. In any event, I think there are some alumni who feel that Dartmouth is treated unfairly by the rules, to the extent that our incoming first-years classes are getting increasingly "smarter" compared to other Ivies, and that means that some miraculously talented football player we could have recruited a few years ago couldn't make it into Dartmouth today, while some other Ivy with a lower overall AI could still recruit him. Other alumni wonder why the Ivy League should tolerate any system that consistently results in Ivy League football players having an average SAT score in the neighborhood of a full standard deviation below that of the rest of their male classmates. They believe that the academic profile of the football team should be statistically indistinguishable from the academic profile of the entire school.)

6. A discussion of efforts to increase diversity among alumni interviewers.
(I have been terrible in letting this get very dormant in past months. There are a number of Councilors who belong to various Affiliated Alumni organizations who are eager to be involved, along with Nels Armstrong and other people from Blunt Hall. [I am wondering if we should keep this as an informal collaborative effort between members of the Admissions Committee and representatives from the different Affiliated Alumni organizations, or as the Council to create a more formal body.] Our current general idea is to approach the problem at two ends:

A. The committee sends a letter to every DED to explain the problem and ask for his or her participation in reaching out to alumni of color and to gay and lesbian alumni to invite and make them feel welcome to participate in alumni interviewing and other local admissions-related activities. To that end, Nels, and most of the Affiliated Alumni groups seem likely to approve of the concept of sending each DED a contact list of every identified affiliated alumni member in his or her region. DEDs would be invited to contact all the persons on the list. One point we would want to make clear in the letter to DEDs! , and in any other communication we send them, is that we want to avoid a situation where Asian alumni interview Asian applicants, and African-American alumni interview African American applicants, and so on.

B. Each Affiliated Alumni organization sends all of their members a message to encourage them to contact their local DED, and volunteer to participate in interviewing and other local recruiting activities. The message would stress that the process is very open and that Dartmouth warmly welcomes their participation. The message would also tell them how to contact their local DED.

Issues:

- Will some DEDs feel like this is asking them to take on too much work? Would Alumni Affairs or the Admission Office be willing to foot the bill to allow each DED to compose a letter, and then print and mail the letter to the! alums on the DED's behalf? Would email be an effective low-cost alternative? I propose that the messages going out from the affiliated organizations not make any promise that "the DED for your local region will be contacting you shortly."

- What happens when an affiliated alum in region Y contacts his or her local DED and the Region Y DED turns them down? How likely is it that that might happen? Is it conceivable that there are any DEDs with a non-diverse group of interviewers, who, none-the-less already have so many volunteers lined up that they would feel like they couldn't handle any more? What happens if we have one or more DEDs who end up reject a minority or gay-and-lesbian volunteer for reasons of prejudice? How do we prepare ourselves to detect and respond to that kind of situation?

That ought to give us plenty to talk about on Friday morning.

I am sending a copy of this email to all the members of the Committee so they can let us know if there are changes they would suggest, or any other issues they will want to add to the list.

We look forward to seeing you and Karl in Hanover!

* Stuart Bratesman '75

Atlas of Health Care

Faculty at the Dartmouth Medical School have put together an "atlas of health care," a database of how health resources are used nationwide. Their work has been widely cited, including in a recent article about the need for reforming government-provided care.

Tuesday, May 17, 2005

Hood to Show 'Quirky Pieces'

The Hood Museum of Art will be giving special tours of its collection tomorrow, including some of its "most quirky pieces." Does that include these works?
From: Callen H. Thompson
Subject: Weird, amazing things in the Hood Museum:
Date: May 17, 2005 1:21:54 PM EDT

*Our art museum owns 60,000 pieces:::: everything from:
Picasso prints from the Vollard Suite to Vito Acconci posters,
Matisse drawings to Dr. Seuss paintings,
Aboriginal art to Native American baskets,
quirky key pieces from the Fluxus art movement (Yoko Ono etc.) to Chagall prints.*

---Sign up to come tomorrow and see some of the most famous & most quirky pieces in the Hood Museum of Art's Collection in person-- in a small intimate setting.

Wednesday, May 18th:
3-4 pm
or 4-5 pm
Only 16 slots available for each time period!

((( Sign up by RSVPing to: crunk@dartmouth.edu )))

******Everything from shrunken mermaids to Pollock to Miro to Rembrandt. All in one afternoon.********************************

Undermine Patriarchies, Embarrass Yourself

This is surely very crucial. Res ipsa loquitur, and all.
**********************************

Drunk boy with popped collar makes derogatory comment at undergrad hottie, should she:
a) give the boy a beer shower
b) slap him the face
c) tell him that both his comment and his collar are inappropriate
d) roll your eyes and get another beer

What would YOU do???

Rude Comments, Unwanted Advances, Sexual Abuse, Emotional Abuse.....
Just because we go to a small school in the woods doesn't mean we are exempt from these issues

LEARN ABOUT DARTMOUTH'S NEWEST SVMP!!!
Sexual Violence Mentoring and Prevention

***7 pm TINDLE LOUNGE this THURSDAY, May 19th*****

Bring Questions, Comments, Curiosity...just bring it on

**********************************

Dunne to Run for U.S. House Seat

Matt Dunne, associate director of the Rockefeller Center and a two-term State Senator from Vermont, has acknowledged that he will make a bid to replace Congressman Bernie Sanders in 2006. Sanders, an independent, hopes to replace retiring ex-Republican Jim Jeffords in the U.S. Senate. Dunne is of course a Democrat--one of a number of Democrats who have expressed interest in Sander's seat.

Makes Sense

No Dartmouth professors gave money to President Bush's reelection campaign, according to the Washington Times. It makes sense, given Dartmouth's overwhelming Democratic majority.

Union Leader on the Trustee Election

Tuesday's Manchester Union Leader features an editorial about the Trustee election: "A Crack in the Wall: Conservatives Win at Dartmouth."

Monday, May 16, 2005

2009 Bloggers

It appears some members of the newly-admitted Class of 2009 are blogging together. Scroll through for discussions of Dimensions weekend and endless photos of acceptance letters.

Based on the comments on this post, some of them are fans of The Review.

Did Blogs Win the Election?

Timothy Waligore '01 writes that it may be a bit much to claim that blogs decided the Trustee election, calling such views "blog triumphialism," and "as credible as most claims about blog's role in causing a particular action." I actually agree with him: blogs played a part, to be sure, but I find it hard to believe they were the decisive factor.

Digital Library for Alumni

The College has opened part of its digital library to alumni. Until recently, the subscription-only resources had been available just for undergraduates.

Libertarians Claim Victory

Ed Naile of the Coalition of New Hampshire Taxpayers, a libertarian group, is claiming victory in the Trustee election. In an e-mail to supporters, he describes the April 1 protest where his group sought permission to participate in the balloting, which is open only to alumni.
Victory is ours!! The "vote" we staged on April 1 st at Dartmouth College panned out for us and the two alumni of Dartmouth we "voted" for with our 150 restaurant guest receipts. Peter Robinson and Todd Zywiki are now on the Dartmouth College Board of Trustees. Figuring that any real guest receipt was just as good as an out of state drivers license as ID for voting in NH, CNHT members and Libertarians "voted" in the Dartmouth Trustee election. Thanks to The Dartmouth Review for the kind publicity.

TDR Interviews New Trustees

Over the weekend, The Dartmouth Review sat down with new Trustees-elect Peter Robinson '79 and Todd Zywicki '88 for interviews on their election victory, the state of the College, and what lies ahead.

Sunday, May 15, 2005

FIRE's President on the New Trustees

David French, the president of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, praises the election of Peter Robinson '79 and Todd Zywicki '88 to the Board of Trustees:
Peter and Todd now join T.J. Rodgers as independent voices on Dartmouth's board. When T.J. was elected a year ago, many people dismissed him as an anomaly. With the election of two more trustees—this time in the face of a strong establishment reaction and extensive voting irregularities that favored establishment candidate—Dartmouth is facing not an "anomaly" but a genuine free speech movement.
Last week, FIRE upgraded its rating of Dartmouth's speech code.

Women's lacrosse to Final Four

The Ivy League champion women's lacrosse team advanced to the Final Four with a convincing 13-3 thrashing of Georgetown today.

Dartmouth will face undefeated #1 Northwestern in the national semifinals this Friday.

Saturday, May 14, 2005

TDR Online Exclusive

A new column on the election of Peter Robinson '79 and Todd Zywicki '88 to the Board of Trustees, "The Lone Pine Revolution," is now online.

Trustee Election in the News

Today's Boston Globe has a wrap-up of the Trustee election. The Associated Press ran a brief article on the results. And the Weekly Standard, the Daily Standard's big brother, has an article about the Trustee election in its new print edition.

Another article on the Trustee election

The Daily Standard weighs in with its article here.

Friday, May 13, 2005

Robinson the Reviewer

Today's Daily Dartmouth notes that "While at Dartmouth, Robinson majored in English and wrote for The Dartmouth." What it neglects to mention is that he was also a staffer for The Dartmouth Review.

Robinson graduated in 1979, and the paper was not founded until 1980. However, he appears on the masthead beginning in Vol. 1, Issue 2 and remained there for some time--listed variously as an "Oxford Correspondent," "Washington Correspondent," and "Contributing Editor." He is also listed as a "former editor" in the preface to an early 90s interview about one of his books.

I'm unsure of how directly Robinson was involved in the paper--and it's something I'm curious to ask him about--but just that the fact that someone who was once on the Review masthead has been elected to the College's Board of Trustees really brings home the significance of this victory.

Credit Where It's Due

In fairness, Alumni for a Strong Dartmouth is gracious in defeat. (Which can't be said for everyone....)

Robinson accepts victory on NRO's The Corner

Here

Nice DartLog shout-out and link as well.

New Issue Online

The Green Key issue of The Dartmouth Review is now online.

-The College v. FIRE;
-Why the Darfur Action Group doesn't work;
-J. Stethers White reviews Babes in Boyland;
-Neff's So Dartmouth;
-An interview with former economics professor Colin Campbell;
-Plus sports, Week in Review, and much more.

More Calls for Wright's Resignation

Echoing Emmett's post, the Voices in the Wilderness blog demands a leadership change:
The election results can been seen most clearly as a referendum on the direction of Dartmouth...In short, can an administration that had veered one way and now veers back in the opposite direction possibly have any further credibility? And can it possibly lead effectively?...To crib from another prominent site in this election, we would say that for a truly strong Dartmouth to continue in the 21st century and beyond, it is time for change at the top.

Robinson Credits Dartmouth Blogs

Trustee-elect Peter Robinson '79 told the Valley News that Dartmouth's weblogs are a more reliable source of Dartmouth information than the College's official outlets.
"I learned far more about what is actually taking place in Hanover, New Hampshire, from blogs, for the most part run by undergraduates and recent graduates...than I did in the last 25 years reading the Dartmouth Alumni Magazine," said Robinson, a fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution.

But Perhaps I Haven't Made Myself Explicit:



RESIGN

Victory in a Strong Field

One of the most remarkable aspects of Robinson and Zywicki's victory in the Trustee election is the strength of their opposition. In any other year, Gregg Engles '79 and Ric Lewis '84 would have made extraordinarily strong candidates: both have very strong credentials, both were endorsed by the Daily Dartmouth, both echoed Robinson and Zywicki's emphasis on undergraduate education, and Engles even went so far as to decry the "orthodoxy of thought on campus" in one of his e-mails to alumni.

The fact that Robinson and Zywicki were able to defeat such high-caliber candidates makes their victory a de facto vote of no confidence on President Wright and the College's administration. The only real substantive difference between them and Engles/Lewis was their very status as petition candidates. Wright's attempts to placate alumni dissatisfaction with his speaking tour failed miserably, and I would not be surprised if Mike Sirota '03's call for his resignation is echoed by other alumni.

Powerline on the Trustees

Over at Powerline, Scott Johnson presents a recap of all of the trio's posts on the Trustee election.

More Reaction to the Trustee Election

Chien Wen Kung '04:
In fact, I think conflict and open hostility between the new trustees and the administration or faculty is a bad thing. Conservative stalwarts may recollect with fondness the battles the Review waged against official Dartmouth in the 1980s, and may look forward to such skirmishes in the years to come, but I don't. I don't want my professors protesting on the Green; I want them in the classroom, teaching students. This is not to say that I'm against the trustees criticizing the faculty or administration. Some degree of criticism is necessary, because some things -- like tuition fees for instance -- need to be looked at. The question is how.
Mike Sirota '03:
Hopefully this will give another kick in the pants to Wright to resign ASAP so that the College can move on and get back to the business of education.
Former Dartmouth Review editor James Panero '98:
For the establishment omerta that has kept conservative leaders out of the governing bodies of our top schools, this may just be one more battle won in the effort to retake the universities.
President of the American Council of Trustees and Alumni Anne D. Neal:
"Alums have had enough," Neal said. "They are part of a growing cadre of alumni who understand that they need to step up to the plate. The 'go along, get along' approach isn?t the way you keep colleges financially healthy and academically healthy."
President of the Association of Governing Boards of Colleges and Universities Richard T. Ingram:
"When you find yourself on the board, you need to do what's best for the institution, not carry out a personal agenda," Ingram said. That can be hard for candidates who have won election on a specific platform. "We need more active trustees, but not more trustee activism," he said.
Update—10:05 am: Added a few more.

Thursday, May 12, 2005

Early Reaction to the Trustee Election

Trustee-Elect Todd Zywicki '88:
We made it quite clear that we had some concerns about how Dartmouth has been moving in recent years. I think it's a very clear signal by the alumni as to what direction they believe the college should be moving.
Chris Bateman '05: "Republicans win again"

Julia Bernstein '07: "So what does those mean for the college? I'm honestly not sure yet..."

An anonymous '02:
The election of two outsider candidates, and three in two years counting TJ Rodgers, should send a clear and unequivocal message to both the Board and, more importantly, the current administration
John Bruce '69:
I don't see good prospects for Dartmouth or other schools where the only possible answer to reform may need to come from trustees trying to micromanage day-to-day business, though. These will be interesting times in Hanover.
Roger Simon '64:
In yet another indication of the growing influence of the blogosphere and the Internet in general, the primarily online campaigns of Peter Robinson and Todd Zywicki (sponsored on this blog and several others) for positions on the Dartmouth College Board of Trustees have apparently been victorious! This marks a sea change in the election of university trustees.
National Review's Katherine Lopez: "It looks like Peter Robinson should be having a victory party in the Dartmouth elections soon."

Talk show host Hugh Hewitt:
The message the Robinson-Zywicki election sends is simple, and I think of much wider applicability than just Dartmouth: Colleges and universities are out of touch with large segments of their alums, and those alums do not like the policies and practices they read about at their alma maters.

Robinson and Zywicki Elected to the Board of Trustees

Peter Robinson '79 and Todd Zywicki '88 have been elected to Dartmouth College's Board of Trustees, The Dartmouth Review has learned. A source with knowledge of the results, who has asked to remain anonymous until the news is official, confirmed that the two petition candidates were elected in a six-way race.

Update—5:45 PM: The College has officially announced their election, a day earlier than expected.

Nearly a quarter of Dartmouth's alumni—over 15,000—voted in the election. Robinson garnered support from 7,376 alumni, roughly 48 percent of the total, and Zywicki earned 6,844 votes, 45 percent of voters.

In the press release, College President James Wright said he looked forward to working with the two men, who "both have a deep affection for Dartmouth."

Hanson v. Edsforth now online

The February debate between Victor Davis Hanson and Ronald Edsforth in 105 Dartmouth Hall is now online in video and audio formats.

It's News to Alumni Relations

Nels Armstrong '71, the director of alumni relations, says he has not yet heard the news about the Trustee election. While this certainly doesn't mean the rumors below are false, it does mean that they remain just rumors until confirmed on the record.

Hail to the ex-Chief

The Collegiate Network is announcing its newest class of yearlong fellows and summer interns at major publications. Congratulations to former Review Editor Joe Rago '05 for his yearlong position at National Review magazine.

I'm also pleased to see my current institution, Notre Dame, rack up two of the spots. We have a very good daily rag, The Observer (the only knock being that they selectively run political advertizements, but they actually report on important campus goings-on), as well as an active conservative paper, The Irish Rover.

Early Word

The Voices in the Wilderness blog reports that the petition candidates have won the alumni Trustee election. There is as yet no official news on the matter. We are working to confirm.

Update: The results have been entirely tabulated, according to several knowledgeable sources, but they will not be available until the official release, scheduled for tomorrow.

Update 2: Alumni activist John MacGovern '80 is reporting that the petition candidates have won.

Wednesday, May 11, 2005

Re: Hufu Taste Test

It went off without a hitch. Nuckols's dumplings were delicious, as was the stew. The 'flesh' was tasty; I might characterize it as chewy pork. Pictures to follow in an upcoming issue. In the mean time, perhaps some of the offer staff in attendance (there were about a dozen of it) might like to weigh in with their assessment.

Re: Panero

You got his Dartmouth quote, but the best exchange is clearly this:

"BC: How do you describe your view of the world? Would you say that you are a classical liberal? A conservative? Perhaps a traditionalist?

Mr. Panero: I would say that I am James Panero. I would also say that I contradict myself, I am large, I contain multitudes."

Read the whole thing, as they say.

More Coverage

Inside Higher Ed, an online education, news site, provides an excellent summary of recent free speech happenings here at Dartmouth.

Hufu Taste Test

Mark Nuckols Tu '06 will be offering samples of Hufu, his people-flavored tofu, at 1pm today in front of the Tuck School. On the menu is Serano Nanito, a Papua New Guinea-style dumpling made with Hufu.

Interview with a Former Editor

Bernard Chapin of the conservative Enter Stage Right web magazine has posted an interview with former Dartmouth Review editor James Panero '98.

Panero describes his political coming-of-age at Dartmouth:
As for my political maturation, liberalism has a remarkable way of turning you off the more you encounter it. At Dartmouth, I was shocked at how liberal, or I should say "illiberal," the Dartmouth administration could be. As a school with a liberal administration and a moderate to conservative student body, Dartmouth's attitude towards its students is nothing short of frightening. I believe that you can at once love a school and loathe its administration, and for those of us who loved Dartmouth there was The Dartmouth Review, the famous independent weekly that is still thriving after a quarter of a century. I joined the Review my freshman year, and I found my own education at that paper, becoming editor my Sophomore spring. The Dartmouth Review, my major in Classics, and my fraternity made for a great four years and left me with a strong sense of what you might call identity. So when I encountered the Mandarin culture of Brown as a graduate student, let's just say that it didn't put that identity in doubt. Instead I applied for a job at The New Criterion.

Re: Has Anyone Noticed

I took my first ride on a Big Green Bike this evening while returning from a late evening at the office. Nothing about the bike was big except its handlebars, but I did enjoy the flame design of the tire treads. I also haven't ridden a one-speed in years.

Anti-Trade Teach-In

A Dartmouth group seeking to block the Central American Free Trade Agreement is hosting a teach-in Wednesday with New Hampshire anti-globalization activist Arnie Alpert at 5pm in 101 Collis.

Tuesday, May 10, 2005

Center for Women and Gender

Apparently, former Las Vegas transsexual stripper Andrea Hackett was seriously considered to serve as a Visionary in Residence at the Center for Women and Gender this year (at least I'm hoping it was this year and not next).

The article's old (can't believe we missed this), but read the whole thing. So many ridiculous quotes, I don't know where to begin. I'm not sure whether to congratulate the CWG for good sense or wonder why they were considering her at all.

Dartmouth under FIRE

We've seen some encouraging developments this week regarding the free speech climate on Dartmouth's campus. It's important to get a sense of perspective.

Four years ago, President Wright felt comfortable asserting that free speech is bound by the constraints of other people's feelings. (He said this boldly and confidently; I don't doubt he believed it then, and I really don't think he's changed his mind since then.) Four years ago, this arrogant and self-righteous attitude was expressed not just by those letters,but also by the College's draconian punishment of a group of students for nothing more sinister than mere private jokes. This was Dartmouth's public, official reaction to a case that attracted significant (negative) press coverage.

Today, the negative press coverage is properly focused not on Dartmouth's supposed indifference to the feelings of its students, but on its hostility to free expression. This is thanks to FIRE. Talk about backpedaling -- Dartmouth has really distanced itself from its showpiece rhetorical response to the Zete affair. As a precedent for future actions against students, Dartmouth has repudiated those letters. This doesn't mean that there definitely won't be another Zete -- but it does give encouragement.

(It's worth saying that I don't think that administrators have suddenly had an epiphany regarding free speech. More than anything else, many administrators -- at Dartmouth and elsewhere -- are just careerists at heart. Ideology drives a lot of administrators to censor, but I really think that most are motivated by a simple desire to keep the campus quiet and the donations flowing. If being a fan of free speech garners public praise, keeps the checks coming, and maybe takes the wind out of the sails of those pesky petition candidates for the Board of Trustees -- well, that's all the incentive they need, isn't it?)

It's important to recognize that real progress has been made here. True, Zete remains derecognized; no one should trust this administration until that wrong is righted. True, Dartmouth still bans student publications from the dorm rooms; anyone who would now say that Dartmouth welcomes free expression with open arms should keep this fact in mind. Facially, Dartmouth's policies are acceptable; but it would be naive to think that everything will be hunky-dory from now on. Rather than causing a relaxation of efforts, I think this week's success should spur us to push the advantage, to keep the pressure on -- because now we know that it can work, even at Dartmouth.

In the end, let's not forget: today, Dartmouth is closer to having a healthy respect for free speech than it has been for many, many years. This is undoubtedly cause for celebration. FIRE has worked very hard to get us this far; it is no mean feat when you have no legal weapons -- only principles. For this, FIRE deserves our thanks.

Green light...with an asterisk

As noted, FIRE has upped Dartmouth's free speech rating, which will surely meet with cheers from P. Wright--even though just a couple weeks ago he was snidely referring to FIRE as an interest group while campaigning against the petition candidates.

Anyway, in response to a few questions I had regarding the upgrade, FIRE president David French has clarified that Dartmouth's green light has an 'asterisk.' See here for my letter and FIRE's response, which is more nuanced than the press release let on.

Has Anyone Noticed

that the Big Green Bikes are actually black? They are, at least, big.

Monday, May 09, 2005

FIRE Upgrades Dartmouth Speech Rating

The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) today lifted Dartmouth's "red" free-speech rating, its worst ranking, declaring that the College no longer has a speech code.

The change was prompted by a May 2 letter from College Counsel Robert Donin which declared that President James Wright's and Dean of the College James Larimore's previous statements in regards to the Zeta Psi case did not represent "a binding statement on College policy."

Wright's 2001 letter stated that "[i]t is hard to understand why some want still to insist that their 'right' to do what they want trumps the rights, feelings, and considerations of others. We need to recognize that speech has consequences for which we must account." The letter has since been removed from the Dartmouth website.

New Issue Online

Volume 25, Issue 12 of The Dartmouth Review is now online. It includes:

-An article on the state of the Hood Museum;

-A review of the campus blogosphere;

-An interview with Mark Nuckols Tu'06 of Hufu, Inc., makers of "the healthy human flesh alternative";

-Victoria V. T. Corder's critique of AREA and the campus artistic climate;

-Michael J. Ellis's editorial;

-Week in Review, sports updates on football, rugby, and baseball;

-And more.

Social Security Debate

Tonight at 6:00 in the Hinman Forum, Professor Jeff Smith will debate Professor Andrew Samwick over the future of Social Security. The event is jointly sponsored by the Young Democrats and the College Republicans.

Joe Trippi on Campus

Joe Trippi, the Diet Pepsi-powered brain behind Howard Dean's failed presidential campaign will speak on a panel Friday afternoon on "Representation and Politics in the Digital Age." While the "revolution" will not be televised, it is unclear if the event itself will be.
Conference on Cyber-Disciplinarity
May 13-14, 2005
(Note different locations)
Friday, May 13, 1:00 ? 4:00pm
Loew Auditorium, Dartmouth College
_ _

1pm _Panel: Representation and Politics in the Digital Age_
_ _

Joe Trippi Political Advisor

?The Revolution Will Not be Televised?

Lisa Nakamura Communication Arts / Visual Culture Studies, University of Wisconsin, Madison

?Subjects and Objects of Interactivity: Digital Racial Formation and Media Convergence?

Michael Curry Department of Geography, UCLA

?The Promise of Provenance: Networks, Narratives, and the New Model of

Object Management?

3:30pm - Reception, Kim Gallery

Saturday, May 14, 9:30am - 5:30pm

Filene Auditorium, Moore Hall, Dartmouth College

9:30 - coffee and pastries

10am _Panel: Freedom(s) and Access in the Digital Age _
_ _

Jeffrey Rosen George Washington University Law School

?The Silver Bullet: Protecting Privacy and Security through Law & Technology?

Eszter Hargittai Department of Communication Studies, Northwestern University

"Digitally Connected Yet Worlds Apart"

David Phillips Department of Radio-Television-Film, University of Texas

?From Freedom to the Management of Personally Identified Information:

Toward a Political Economy of Privacy and Identity?

Noon - Lunch Break

1:30pm _Panel: Challenges to the Academy in the Digital Age_
_ _

Michael Heim Freelance educator, Southern California

?Adventures of the CyberForum: A Cautionary Tale about Cyber-Disciplinarity?

Alan Liu Department of English, University of California at Santa Barbara

"The Humanities: A Technical Profession"

Geert Lovink Amsterdam Polytechnic/University of Amsterdam

?Mapping Critical Internet Culture: A Research Agenda?

3:30pm - Break

3:45pm _Panel: Visual Culture/Critical Praxis in the Digital Age_

Wendy Hui Kyong Chun Department of Modern Culture and Media, Brown University

"Intrusive Reason, or Fiber Optics and Pornography"

Ursula Frohne History and Theory of Art and Literature, University of Bremen, Germany

"Controlled Observation: Digital Technology and Visual Warfare?

5pm - Reception, Filene Lobby

An event scheduled in conjunction with the Cyber-Disciplinarity Humanities Institute

These events are free of charge, and open to the public.

Please send this announcement to all who may be interested.

Sponsored by The Fannie and Alan Leslie Center for the Humanities, The John Sloan Dickey Center for International Understanding, The Institute for Security Technology Studies, The Hood Museum of Art, The Department of English, The Department of Sociology, The Rockefeller Center, The Department of Government, The Department of Geography, The MALS Program, The Department of Film and Television Studies

Celebrating Bureaucracy

The Spanish-language affinity house is celebrating the founding of European Union today with a multicultural mélange.
From: Natalia.Barantseva@Dartmouth.EDU (Natalia Barantseva)
Date: May 4, 2005 2:42:24 PM EDT
Subject: Europe Day Party!


Come and bring your friends!!!

<*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*>

Do you know that May 9 is the official birthday of the European Union?

!! EUROPE DAY PARTY!!


Greek dancing and Italian music
Spanish food and French dessert
and booklets in many languages

Where: La Casa
When: Monday, May 9, 8pm
Why: Because it's interesting and fun!

!BE THERE!


Co-sponsored by Programming Board, Italian Club, La Casa, French department
<*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*>

Hoochin' It: A Dark Odyssey of the Soul

Thirsty staffers do the Big City.

Key moments included: a mysterious national security operative searching for the Mexican consulate, a pea-green staffer reacts with creepy glee to an assemblage of New Criterions, Michael Ellis's own Sister Souljah moment, Kevin Hudak flies 'off the chain,' a sake ordering gone terribly wrong, an estranged '06 with a crucial sense of humor and accompanied by a belligerent Fat Albert knocks back a few with the staff, a generous seersuckersuited saint, Nat Ward forgets about Dre, a receipt cum billet doux, Joe Rago loses his wallet but retains his rig, Stefan Beck is cruelly ambushed in his own home, James Judah taunts the Army Rangers, a bitchy waiter named William acts like a bitch, C. M. A. Kluender spars with hotel incompetents and charms a sommelier, The Review and J. Press revere the same classic cartoon.

And many more.

Sunday, May 08, 2005

A Specter Is Hanging Over Hanover...

The Student Assembly's third attempt in four years to start a communistic bicycle-sharing program gets underway tomorrow.

The Assembly expects the bicycles will somehow last unscathed until winter. The last incarnation of the bicycle program, last spring's Rides Across Dartmouth, lasted only a few months, while another Big Green Bikes program was cancelled in 2001 after the bikes either broke down or were stolen.

They just don't learn.

If only SA could stick to expanding library hours...
_______________________________
Date: Sun, 8 May 2005 23:25:11 -0400
Subject: Join Tomorrow
From: Big Green Bike Program
Reply-To: Big Green Bike Program
Precedence: bulk
To:


*********************************************************
Your Student Assembly is...

Announcing the Big Green Bike Program!

This nonprofit communal program starts tomorrow! Be among the first to sign up in front of Robo at 1pm and get a key that matches the lock on all 50 brand new Iron Horse Bicycles. Maintenance will be provided until it starts snowing and then the bicycles will be put in storage next winter. See you there,

The Big Green Bike Program Directors
Frank Glaser '08
Todd Rabkin Golden '06
Ben Zimmerman '07

Sponsored by: SA, Afro-American Society, Dean of the College Office, S&S, DOC, Lou's, Dartmouth Bookstore, Camera Shop of Hanover, & EBA's
*********************************************************

What Creative Loners Do

Each year the University of Chicago hosts its Scavenger Hunt. For the sake of insanity, here's the hunt's list of items for this year (Warning: large PDF). I had never realized how many inside jokes and inane references could be included in such a small document.

No doubt Dartmouth President Emeritus James Freedman is an avid supporter.

Protesting the FDA

A small group of gay activists protested in Hanover on Friday against the Food and Drug Administration's decision to prohibit sexually active homosexual men from donating sperm.

The FDA said its decision was intended to isolate populations with a higher risk of HIV, the virus which causes AIDS. Gay activists counter that the decision is intended to discriminate against their lifestyle.

Many passers-by approached by The Dartmouth Review believed the group to be protesting discrimination in blood donations, particularly since two participants' shirts appeared to be streaked in blood. A week-long Red Cross blood drive concluded Friday afternoon.

Distracting from their message was the weekly anti-war protest staged a few feet away by local middle school students.
Protesting the FDA

— Gay activists in Hanover on Friday —

Saturday, May 07, 2005

Irony

In the latest edition of the Dartmouth Free Press (not yet online), editor Liz Middleton and company attempt to take on The Dartmouth for biased reporting, particularly in regard to the Jewelle Gomez and Dorothy Allison affairs.

A few relevant quotes from Middleton's editorial:

"But sadly The Dartmouth [sic] has brushed them [accusations of misconduct] off, refusing to print retractions or explain their choices of quotes, sources, and descriptions of events."

"When the masthead prevents these remedies [printing corrections, &c.]?the periodical violates public trust and fails to fulfill its responsibility to the principles of journalism."

"?The Dartmouth [sic] is not held accountable by the administration for the content it prints."

How quickly the DFP forgets. Seems to me they exemplify the epitome of poor and irresponsible reporting in recent memory, the Jane Doe fiasco. Even a cursory fact-check revealed gaping factual inaccuracies in the story, suggesting that the DFP, if not knowingly complicit in the falsehood, at least was none too willing to back their story up with facts. What makes Middleton's editorial all the more interesting is that the DFP, to my knowledge, never printed a correction for the story, and refused to respond to repeated inquiries from The Review asking for details and sources.

Note to the DFP: it's still not too late to publish a correction and admit you were completely wrong. It would make your criticisms of The Daily D so much more meaningful.

Friday, May 06, 2005

Association to Reform Election Rules

According to an article in today's Daily Dartmouth, the Alumni Association may scrap the highly-restrictive rules that govern alumni Trustee elections:
Many accused Alumni for a Strong Dartmouth of violating the strict election rules on campaigning. As per the trustee election guidelines, "campaigning by the candidate or his/her supporters beyond the two e-mails is inappropriate."

According to Walters, the Alumni for a Strong Dartmouth clearly violated the spirit of the guidelines, but the ballot committee can only restrain first-party campaigning.

These campaign restrictions, ironically part of an election that focuses on free speech, have raised questions of their purpose. [Association President John] Walters ['62] said they were an attempt to maintain the dignity of the process, but admitted that given the impossibility of enforcement and the growth of online campaigning, they were obsolete.

"We're going to have to do some significant restructuring of those guidelines," Walters said. "Frankly, I would be in favor of more opportunities for open dialogue."
Walters did not say whether the new rules would permit candidates themselves to campaign. The current restrictions hamper outsiders like petition candidates Peter Robinson '79 and Todd Zywicki '88, who lack ties to establishment groups like Alumni for a Strong Dartmouth.

Voting in this year's alumni Trustee election ends in five hours.