The Dartmouth Review The Dartmouth Review The Dartmouth Review 25th Anniversary Gala

    The Dartmouth Review     Dartlog     Subscribe     Indian Store     Donate

 

Friday, June 13, 2003

Right and Wrong

Stanley Fish writes in the Chronicle that free speech issues are rarely in sight on American campuses. He's right in that too often free speech is used as the only defense of rude, disrespectful and unthoughtful speech, even when no one proposes that such speech should be banned. While no rule or law prevents one from writing and publishing, for example, an incontrovertably racist column, nothing compels the editor of the campus paper to publish it and common sense and tact would argue that he not. But that's not a speech issue; the author may still publish elsewhere or even self-publish. He retains his right to free expression regardless.

But I'm not sure that such cases are so common as Fish implies. Aside from his two examples, no others come immediately to mind.

In misrepresenting the state of speech controversies on campuses, Fish sweeps under the rug a more interesting (and relevent) sort of case, those in which students' rights are clearly abridged by their universities, as opposed to merely criticized or marginalized. Look to FIRE for dozens of examples of this sort of policy.

Full post and comments below the fold.

Posted by Andrew Grossman at 7:25 PM (0 comments)

He Must Have Terrorized Himself...

Charles Glander, a seminary student in Minnesota, has been charged with making terrorist threats because he scrawled a racial slur on his own truck. That's right, his own truck.

Actually, this story illustrates a number of different concerns.

It seems that Glander is under suspicion over several instances of legitimate unlawful threatening graffiti -- but he has thus far not been charged. In light of this, consider the following quote:
Obang Okello, a Bethel senior who found and reported a racist message drawn on his car in April, said he was somewhat eased by the arrest.

"That brings hope that something is being done about it," he said. But "I'm very sure there could be more people involved."
Wait a sec. As of now, there's no evidence that Glander is responsible for anything other than the graffiti on his own vehicle. It's a bit hasty to assume that his arrest constitutes "something being done" about the other incidents. This could be -- not is, mind you, just could be -- the early stages of a good ol'-fashioned scapegoating.

Perhaps of more obvious concern is the fact that no elaboration on the allegedly racist message on Glander's truck is given anywhere in the article. How can the reader make any assessment if the reader has no clue what the message was about? Frankly, only something like "I will kill all Spics today" would be an arrestable offense. Simply putting, for instance, "nigger," "kyke," or some such vulgarity on his truck does not strike me as an illegal act, and it certainly does not count as a terrorist act. (It could be that he was violating some local ordinance on obscenity, under the colloquial understanding of the word. But again, that's not terrorism.)

But the reporter gives absolutely no hint as to the content of the message. I think this is rather emblematic of how paralyzing racial ettiquette has become in this country. The slur itself need not be reported, but what would be wrong with saying "a slur against blacks" or "a death threat to Muslims" or some such thing? It's impossible to make any sort of assessment from reading this article.

Very interesting stuff.

UPDATE FIRE's legal director, Greg Lukianoff, also raised a very interesting point about this incident. The article never mentions Glander's race. Considering his defense:
Glander's explanation for marking up his vehicle, according to the complaint, was that he was angry at whoever was targeting minority students on campus and at Bethel for what he saw as the college's failure to properly deal with the incidents. He also said he was angry at campus security for ignoring complaints he had made about alleged harassment of him and his spouse and upset that a professor had failed to give him academic help he needed.
Oddly, then, this fellow could be a minority himself. The plot thickens...

Full post and comments below the fold.

Posted by Emmett at 10:24 AM (0 comments)

Tuesday, June 10, 2003

Hey, Graduates

So, you just graduated from a prestigious Ivy League Uni, and, after four years of academic toil, you're back at home doing nothing. Forget i-banking, forget consulting, why not be a mystery shopper?
On the breezy patio of the Silver Lake Golf Course here, Jennifer Voitle was hard at work.

"Cheers," she said, hoisting a frosty Corona with lime. Tanned and relaxed after playing a few holes, she finished up the beer and ate a cheeseburger. The golf and burgers were all part of the job, as were the strict instructions from her boss to "consume at least one alcoholic beverage."

Her morning jobs were equally trying. She went dress shopping, stopped into a bank to cash a check and visited a Saturn dealership to look at new cars. After golf, she was headed to Manhattan for dinner at a nice Italian restaurant. All these activities were paid jobs. Her total earnings for the day: about $300. "Can you believe they call this work?" she said.

And if it doesn't work out, remember, you're always qualified to be a medical test subject!


Full post and comments below the fold.

Posted by Andrew Grossman at 12:40 AM (0 comments)

Sunday, June 08, 2003

Nicolas Duquette '04 responds

>Date: 08 Jun 2003 18:36:23 EDT
>From: Nicolas J. Duquette
>Reply-To: SunkCostsSunk
>Subject: your blog
>To: Alexander D. Talcott

"the honesty to look closely at ourselves and what we do, the resolution to face those broader matters that seem to be simply wrong, the courage to confront them. "

And how is this inconsistent with free speech?

It's called "moral clarity" to use a Republican term for the idea. Racists have a right to express their ideas, but the College doesn't have to allow acts of racism on campus. That's common sense. Racism is "simply wrong."

The PROBLEM with the administration is that it views certain forms of speech as actions. Saying racially insensitive things (or supporting racially insensitive mascots) has been lumped, dangerously, with shouting fire in a theater as unprotected speech. And the College is not as bad about it as most -- whatever FIRE has to say about the issue. Go to Smith sometime and then tell me Dartmouth is anti-speech.

If you (the Review, not you the person) want to fight against Dartmouth's conflation of speech (wah-hoo-wah!) with actions, go ahead. But as long as you frame the debate in terms of that Indian mascot nobody but alumni a generation ahead of us care about anyway, don't expect the student body to rally around you.

Also, watch out for Marty Redman. He's a [expletives deleted] who will tell you to distribute to the dorms then instruct his staff to throw the Review away. You guys need to get some distribution boxes on public property.

Full post and comments below the fold.

Posted by alex at 8:12 PM (0 comments)

Website

The Website has been updated with the Commencement Issue, which is a) very long and b) almost entirely recycled material, save a good piece on Kucinich's visit.

For those who care about the little things, I also put all the covers online from this term. Apologies for the tardiness.

Full post and comments below the fold.

Posted by Alston B. Ramsay at 6:20 PM (0 comments)

How dare President Wright

Now may be as good a time as any to call for the resignation of Dartmouth President James Wright.

A number of conservatives, including our own Dinesh D'Souza, have successfully--hijacked, some would say--the rhetoric of Martin Luther King, Jr.'s "I Have a Dream Speech," arguing that present-day liberals are not only failing to live up to King's call for colorblindness, but in fact they are doing entirely the reverse.

In President Wright's commencement address today, he invoked a former Republican president's call for the embracing of knowledge, education and free speech. Meanwhile, Wright's administration has trumped free speech and relegated it to ranks that would've shocked President Eisenhower in 1953 and must be making him roll over in his grave today.

Wright's "Principle of Community" is being used to burn books. He oversees a once proud liberal arts college turning mediocre research university in which guilty middle-class whites and 'everybody else who isn't racist' must go out of their way to deny history--the Indian was never really our mascot (it didn't appear on uniforms or in the daily student newspaper, right?), no Indians ever scalped anyone, etc.--and obfuscate current events.

In his speech, Wright espouses "openness to ideas" and "tolerance towards those with whom we might disagree." I suppose we all ought to do as he says, not as he does.

But then he also embraces "the resolution to face those broader matters that seem to be simply wrong, the courage to confront them." On one hand, we are to tolerate everyone with whom we disagree. On the other, he acknowledges that some matters seem to be "simply wrong" and they are to be confronted.

I am baffled, I am embarassed, and I would like a new Dartmouth College President to deliver an address at the graduation of my class of 2004 next spring.

A section of President Wright's speech:

In 1953 President John Sloan Dickey invited President Dwight D. Eisenhower to receive an honorary degree at that year's Commencement exercises. In an historic, well-publicized statement, President Eisenhower urged the graduates not to join "the book burners," an obvious and pointed challenge to the excesses of McCarthyism and a remarkably clear call for openness to ideas and tolerance towards those with whom we might disagree.

President Eisenhower's comments that day offered much more than the criticism of the book burners, which produced the headlines across the nation. He also told the graduates here that there were two qualities he wished them to embrace: joy and courage. Joy, that which makes for a happy life, is obviously personal, but it is critical. And President Eisenhower thought courage equally important. He described honesty and integrity as manifestations of courage -- the honesty to look closely at ourselves and what we do, the resolution to face those broader matters that seem to be simply wrong, the courage to confront them.

Full post and comments below the fold.

Posted by alex at 4:25 PM (0 comments)

Others

Mark P. Johnson has gone back and forth between the Mets and Triple-A ball, after coming over from the Pirates. Johnson, in addition to being a standout for Dartmouth on the diamond, is our second leading passer on the gridiron of all time after Fiedler.

I'm not sure whether Zach Walz is still on the Arizona Cardinals in the NFL.

IvyLeageSports.com has a fairly complete and accurate list of Ivy Leaguers in the pros.

Full post and comments below the fold.

Posted by alex at 3:45 PM (0 comments)

Alumni in the Pros

Sorry to the Yankee fans out there, but today's victory by the Cubbies got me thinking about Dartmouth alums in the Majors.

Mike Remlinger, RP, Chicago Cubs
All in a day's work for Remlinger
Season: 29 GP, 4-0 W-L, 3.12 ERA, 26.0 IP, 18 Hits, 20 BB, 34 K
Career: 469 GP, 48-41 W-L, 3.77 ERA, 737.1 IP, 642 Hits, 369 BB, 716 K

Brad Ausmus, C, Houston Astros
Season: .194 AVG, 34 H, 15 R, 2 HR, 19 RBI, 2 SB
Career: .256 AVG, 1038 H, 514 R, 61 HR, 402 RBI, 82 SB

I forget if there's anyone else out there from Dartmouth in the majors. I don't think so though. There's Fiedler in the NFL. No one in the NBA or NHL (yet).

Full post and comments below the fold.

Posted by Ben at 12:34 AM (0 comments)

Copyright © 1996-2008 The Dartmouth Review