Wednesday, July 14, 2010

Protest Forthcoming at Bloomberg Lecture

No, it won't be a protest against Bloomberg. Our spies have informed us that there will be a student led protest against the river closure before Mayor Bloomberg's lecture, because that's "where the cameras are."

You heard it here first.

11 comments:

Adam Schwartzman said...

Interesting that the protest comes on the heels of a Bloomberg scandal in its own right.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/29/nyregion/29diversity.html

Anonymous said...

The much more important story today is the beginning of the end for the fraternity/sorority system.

What kid in their right mind is going to pledge a fraternity that owes the town 500 hours community service? Tabard is done; they just haven't figured it out yet.

The correct way to abolish the frats is by a vote of the trustees; Dartmouth is going to let the Hanover police do the dirty work for them.

Addect said...

Wait, so Dartmouth got Tabard to serve alcohol to minors so that it (Tabard) could get hit with a community-service penalty in court?

But Dartmouth already requires Tabard to perform community service. Wouldn't it be easier just to raise the minimum standard?

Something about this conspiracy smells fishy!

Why would Tabard be "abolished" as an organization if it failed to meet the target? How would its closure affect the other houses in any way, except to increase their membership pool?

I'm not sure you've thought this through at all. If Tabard goes under because it broke the law, well, that's nobody's fault but Tabard's.

John said...

The earlier attempt to abolish Greeks via the Student Life Initiative led directly to the petition trustee campaigns and then to the Association of Alumni lawsuit. I suspect that what finally led to easing Wright out was the furor that the lawsuit caused among parents and recent alumni -- any controversy over Dartmouth would "lower the value of a Dartmouth degree", which of course a lot of students (and recent alums) are deeply in hock for.

I suspect that Kim won't touch this issue, committed as he is to "increasing the value of a Dartmouth degree". The Greeks, on the other hand, are hardly helping themselves with coke busts and alcohol violations. If HPD succeeds in eliminating the spoiled rich kids one house at a time, so be it.

Addect said...

But the SLI wasn't an "attempt to abolish Greeks." It was in part an attempt to encourage them to become co-ed Undergrad Societies. Only one Greek switched and one new U.S. formed. The prediction of changing the Greek system as we know it did not come true.

The SLI did not lead to the petition trustees, it led to the Tell law suit. That failed abysmally.

The petition trustees did not lead to the Alumni law suit, the Hanover Institute did. And was that suit really so bad? What has come of it but a few millions wasted - no problem for wealthy Dartmouth - and some bad press? No permanent harm.

Wright left because he'd reached retirement age and had been there as long as any Ivy president.

You confuse temporal sequence with cause and effect. Under your theory, it was World War II that led to disco music, right? Curse Chamberlain if you don't like "A Fifth of Beethoven."

John said...

Except that not long before he announced his retirement, Wright said he had no plans to retire. And the petition trustees were, er, voted in by alumni, who for a time were in a mood to protest the most visible of the Wright policies, the SLI. When the SLI was put on more or less permanent hold, and Beta was allowed back on campus, the wind went out of the petition movement. (The petition trustees didn't help themselves by having Zywicki run his mouth, either.) The executive board of the Association of Alumni that launched the AoA lawsuit was also, er, voted in by alumni. The Hanover Institute funded some of the election campaigns involved by both petition trustees and petition AoA board members, but it was the votes of alumni, responding to the visible Wright agenda (especially the SLI) that put them in. The College's attempt (also on semi-permanent tacit hold) to stack the composition of the Board of Trustees was the cause of the AoA lawsuit, not the Hanover Institute.

Joe Asch's overwhelming loss in his Johnny-come-lately petition campaign was a result of the College defusing the controversial issues via Wright's retirement, as well as Zywicki's singlehanded discrediting of the petition Trustees, who in any case have accomplished nothing visible.

Addect said...

Any president has some expectation of retiring from the moment he takes office. Wright had not formalized nor announced his plans when he was asked. Anyone in that position would say he has no plans at the moment.

Alumni might have protested Wright's policies in general, but the SLI of the 1990s had stopped being news by the time Rodgers was elected in 2004. Alumni previously sued to stop the SLI in relation to Greek organizations, but they lost.

I am not sure what makes you think Zywicki was running his mouth. He was defending the petition movement carefully. He and the others have stuck to the script since, and they have accomplished things. Didn't Zywicki revoke the onerous Speech Code?

"The College's attempt (also on semi-permanent tacit hold) to stack the composition of the Board of Trustees was the cause of the AoA lawsuit,"
I assume you are referring to the Board's ongoing expansion. The Board was entitled to vote to expand. That was not the cause of the law suits, however predictable they were. The law suits would not have happened without a concerted effort of a few alumni meeting in secret. Yet the suits have had very little effect, nothing wealthy Dartmouth can't afford. They will be forgotten as quickly as the SLI law suit was.

John said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
John said...

Er, "They then brought in this fellow, truly evil man, James Freedman, . . ." is not running his mouth? Seems like you're forgetting things a lot faster than other folks. Zywicki did, however, in the same place, identify one root factor that led to his and the other petition candidates' elections as dissatisfaction with "[c]omprehensive social engineering of student life and replacement of the Greek system".

Regarding Wright's retirement, Dartlog reported at the time of its announcement, Meanwhile, the democratic trustee election process that has resulted in four sitting reform trustees—a quarter of the Board—remains under consideration by a New Hampshire judge, and this week the Board of Trustees delayed, for a second time, its Board-packing plan, which was mounted five months ago to dilute the influence of elected trustees by expanding the Board with hand-selected trustees less apt to levy public criticism of executive performance. The presidential search begins under the shadow of these proceedings and the four years of student and alumni activism which precipitated them. Oh, of course, this had nothing to do with his retirement, when not long before, he'd said he was going to stick around for the foreseeable future.

Addect said...

John quotes a fair and balanced blog on how the Board agreed to temporarily put off implementing its vote until the suit could be resolved. The kicker is that the presidential search was beginning at the same time as this one episode in the multi-year litigation. That's all the proof John needs, apparently.

So what? Did Wright singlehandely expand the Board? No, it was not even his idea. It was announced by Neukom, pushed by Haldeman, and adopted by a vote of the majority. Wright might have abstained from the vote.

But don't let the facts stop you from a speculative rewriting of history. If the lawsuit against the Board caused its chief employee to retire at age 70, then how can we be sure these other events of the time had nothing at all to do with the law suit?

1 - Serzh Sargsyan was elected President of Armenia.

2 - The Serbian National Final in the Eurovision Song Contest was postponed.

3 - Scientists finally sequenced the corn genome.

4 - The first commercial aircraft powered by biofuel flew from London to Amsterdam.

5 - Tabard might have served someone a beer.

Don't believe me? Look it up.

dfadf said...

Y te vi bailar bajo la lluvia
y saltar sobre un charco de estrellas
Obama Is Lying<1>
When was the last time the MSM took a Republican's side in a fight over credibility with a Democratic opponent?Microsoft OfficeOffice 2010Well, it has been a while.Microsoft Office 2010However, conservatives have little to grumble about in the recent Office 2007face-off between Barack Obama and John McCain over McCain's statement thatte vi bailar bajo la lluvia
esperando la luna llena
Volverás a reírte de veras
Microsoft Office 2007troops might have to remain for "100 years" in Iraq "as long as Americans are not being injured or harmed or wounded or killed" afterOffice 2010 keyfighting had concluded, Office 2010 downloadMost recently, ABC's Jake Tapper noted that at least on three occasions Obama had personally said that McCain favored cuando creas que estaba perdidovolverás a reírte de veras
continued fighting in Office 2010 ProfessionalIraq for 100 years. Tapper concluded that "Obama has in the past distorted McCain's comments" and "that he is violating his own stated si te quedas conmigoTe vi bailar bajo la lluviaesperando la luna llente vi llorar bajo la lunMicrosoft outlookaspirations...[b]ecause not only has he distorted what McCain said, he is not being honest about having made those distortions."Outlook 2010Tapper is not the only MSM reporter to point this out, Windows 7of course. It is not every day that the RNC sends around e-mail blasts quoting Frank Microsoft outlook 2010Rich ("Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton should be ashamed of themselves for libeling John McCain") and reports from the Chicago Tribune,