ast fall, we began publishing The Dartmouth Free Press in order to initiate and support reform and activism at Dartmouth. Naturally, we were excited and pleased when we witnessed the “Speak-Out” rally two weeks ago outside Parkhurst Hall. Since the rally, there has been a great deal of speculation about the future of the movement to implement the protestors’ demands, and we have watched attentively. It would be easy, at this point, for this loosely constructed band of juniors and seniors to pack in the cardboard and markers and call it a career. This would be a tremendous mistake. The issues raised at the rally are important, they are pressing, and they demand progressive solutions.

In the weeks since the rally, we have heard and read a great deal about its weaknesses and failures, and almost as much about its successes and its significance to the community. These are important concerns. After all, Dartmouth has not seen substantial activism for some time, and if these efforts create a sustained movement, analysis of the activists’ methods will make that movement more effective in the long run. But if we focus only on its methods without addressing the central issues, its efforts will have been meaningless.

With that in mind, the editors of The Free Press have begun to solicit articles from the organizers of the rally. We hope that by publishing fully developed arguments, we will convey to the community that the demands of the protestors arose not from misdirected frustration, but from serious consideration of social problems at Dartmouth. The first two of these articles, one by Gary Weissman providing insight into the motivation of the organizers, and one by Charles White detailing the need for socially responsible investment of the College’s endowment, appear in this issue. We hope this is only the beginning of our collaboration with the students behind the Speak-Out.

Please do not confuse our excitement over and support for the rally with blind acceptance of the protestors’ positions and methods. The editors of The Free Press have discussed and debated the merits of each of the demands individually, as we hope other students will, and we have not come to many definite conclusions. It is important for students to feel pressure only to consider the activists’ positions, not to agree with them. The organizers and supporters of the protest and future protests must become accustomed to resistance not only from the administration, but also from their fellow students. Many of these individuals disagree not out of malice or apathy, but out of sincere convictions of their own. If the movement is to survive this resistance, it must do so through superior effort, superior numbers, and superior arguments, not through the suppression of free speech. The April 6 protestors made too much use of this language of suppression and too little of the language of tolerance and constructive dialogue. The counter-protesters and their allies are hardly the downtrodden victims they make themselves out to be, but they have rights that progressive activists cannot ignore. Recognizing this fact, we have therefore also included several articles addressing the issue of free speech.

We must also question the determination and commitment of the activists, not to discourage them from continuing their campaign, but to challenge them to maintain their efforts over the long term. Problems such as those raised two weeks ago are solved through a complex, difficult process. Gathering outside Parkhurst and bringing one-line demands to the Trustees will not solve anything; students concerned over these issues must organize, gather support, set goals, and create an environment of consistent activity both inside committee rooms and out on the sidewalks. This will take energy, perseverance, and sacrifice to accomplish. Protests must take place regardless of whether the Trustees happen to be visiting or the alumni are around.

This process must begin with those involved in the April 6 rally, but it must not end with them. Regardless of their level of organization, they must reach out, individually and as a group, to the entire community, especially underclassmen and the faculty. The classes of 2003 and 2004 were almost entirely excluded from the April 6 event, not because of apathy or lack of support, but because they were not as actively approached. Similarly, many members of Dartmouth’s faculty have a wealth of experience with activism in general and the issues at hand in particular, but they have not been offered any role thus far.

That having been said, The Dartmouth Free Press and its staff would like to publicly applaud the organizers of the April 6 rally, and we look forward to working with Dartmouth’s agents of change in the coming weeks. We believe that progressive activism is a necessity in our community, and we will continue to support it whenever we have the opportunity.