nterview with Major Chaplain Lyn Brown,

formerly the Coalition Provisional Authority’s Senior Financial Advisor to the Iraqi Ministry of Youth and Sport

Major Chaplain Lyn Brown played an important role in the rebuilding of Iraq’s Ministry of Youth and Sport, which now heads the effort to redevelop children’s sports and athletic programs at the local level. Brown worked in Baghdad for one year as the Coalition Provisional Authority’s Senior Financial Advisor to the Iraqi Ministry of Youth and Sport. His responsibilities included drafting budgets, creating monthly spending plans, making spending forecasts, meeting with coalition and Iraqi personnel, and overseeing personnel issues. In addition, he was involved in the hiring and training of security guards, distribution of donated athletic supplies, and the planning of VIP visits to youth centers and athletic facilities throughout the country. The Dartmouth Free Press spoke with him recently about his experiences in Iraq and his perspective on the rebuilding of that country.

DFP: First things first$mdash;$mdash;are you optimistic about the future of liberal democracy in Iraq?

Brown: Yes. It is going to take a lot of time. Our country has been at democracy building for over 225 years, so we need to be patient with the Iraqis. They have a lot to overcome, but most Iraqis want freedom and security.

DFP: From your perspective as a former CPA official, do you think we need to adjust our approach to “fighting for the peace” in Iraq? How much is it about ‘hearts and minds’?

LB: Our commitment to Iraq needs to be long-term, and I think that we need to keep on doing what we are doing. We need to continue to train new police and security forces, continue to pursue the enemies of peace, and continue to rebuild the infrastructure of the country. The number one priority is security and that is not going to be solved overnight. We need to continue putting out our message that we are there to assist the Iraqis in building a country that respects individual freedoms no matter one’s ethnic origin, gender, or religious affiliation. The so-called “insurgents” want to return the country to a brutal dictatorship with a new “Saddam.”

DFP: What do you foresee as the greatest challenges to winning the peace in Iraq?

LB: As I said before, the greatest challenge is getting security forces and police in place. When we removed Saddam, we also removed a police state apparatus that kept criminals in check. A police force that respects civil rights is a foreign concept in Iraq and it will take time for people to adjust. Individuals and groups will have to take responsibility in removing the criminals from their communities.

The second greatest challenge is encouraging all religious sects to understand what religious tolerance is and to allow differences in beliefs and practice without killing. Religious leaders exert an incredible influence at this time and that needs to be restrained.

DFP: While you worked under CPA, how did American troops help you? How do you view the cooperation between Iraqi and US security forces?

LB: While I worked at CPA, I was also an American soldier. As an officer$mdash;$mdash;and a chaplain$mdash;$mdash;I had no difficulties in getting what I needed. Iraqi forces were very anxious to learn from us, as they knew that we were the best in the world.

DFP: How much say do Iraqis have in the planning process now? What is the extent of American involvement now in developing sports and youth projects?

LB: Iraqis are in charge, now. We simply serve as advisors. We are doing all that we can to solicit support from around the world from amateur and professional athletes to build programs, training opportunities, and secure supplies.

DFP: Are you doing any work with Iraqis now?

LB: I keep in touch by e-mail and telephone with five Iraqis on a weekly basis. I try to help on past issues and help with personal matters. I am trying to get at least one Iraqi to the US as a student. I plan to be that individual’s sponsor.

DFP: How do average Iraqi citizens really feel about Americans and American involvement?

LB: They would simply say, “Thank you”! They are optimistic. There are complaints, too, but that is human nature! We love to gripe and complain about something.

DFP: What can American students do here to help Iraqis?

LB: Reach out to an Iraqi student to get to know them and for them to get to know you. Iraqis need to learn that American students are not what Hollywood portrays. Invite dialogue and exchange of ideas. Become friends with an Iraqi.

DFP: What is the strongest feeling you took away from your experience in Iraq?

LB: I found that relationships are far more important than completing tasks. I became friends with many Iraqis even though I had to conduct business with them. I “adopted” several Iraqis as sons and daughters and many Iraqis adopted me as a son or a father.

ohn Carey, Government

Professor Carey is a great lecturer and enthusiastic professor who specializes in studying and teaching on democratic institutions, elections, and Latin American politics. (He previously taught at Universidad CatÓlica de Chile.) His passion for Government and teaching are reflected in his classes. He is a respected professor in his field and is known for bringing in guest speakers from various fields that relate to the class. If you take a government class, take it with Professor Carey.

Karen Fisher-Vanden, Environmental Studies

Walking into Professor Fisher-Vanden’s Environmental Economics, Policy and Management course, most Environmental Studies majors do not expect to walk out with one of their favorite classes of their Dartmouth career. Fisher-Vanden fosters an excitement and an interest in environmental economics and policy management concerns. Fisher-Vanden is thorough without being hand holding. Her teaching style is clear and she is easily available to answer questions or discussions on blitz or on her own time (outside of office hours). Even in a department known to take a personal interest in each of its students, Fisher-Vanden stands out, fostering interest in an unknown field and teaching it in a fair and holistic manner.

Susanne Freidberg, Geography

Professor Freidberg is an authority on food—which means her courses are interdisciplinary explorations on a host of subjects: labor relations in the farming and food industries, food’s power as a cultural force, food’s relationship with economic development, and food safety. Professor Freidberg demands a good deal of reading and independent thought, but students in her courses cover a lot of ground and learn to think critically and seriously about the most basic elements of substance, and what forces lie just beneath the surface of our daily bread. If you are at all interested in the globalizing economy, food, the environment, or the third world, try her courses, “Food and Power” or “The Political Economy of Development.”

Michael Fromberger, Computer Science

Michael “The Prophet” Fromberger (he’s not a full prof, he’s a prof-ette, get it?) is certainly the loudest of introductory CS professors—by the end of a term with him, you’ll know his full-bodied laugh well. However, computer science is as much an “Academic Discipline” as a goofy hobby for Fromberger. It’s entirely likely that he’ll off-handedly mention during class that he got bored last weekend and coded up the firmware for a flux capacitor. He brings great enthusiasm (and demonstrations) to his lectures, and finite automata and the C programming language will quickly become not only powerful tools in your toolbox, but also toys in your toy box.

Susannah Heschel, Jewish Studies

Professor Heschel is known around campus, and the nation, for having passionate beliefs about both her politics and her academics. Nationally, she is one of three co-chairs (along with Princeton’s Cornel West, and Rabbi Michael Lerner of San Francisco) of the Tikkun community, a Jewish based interfaith community dedicated to progressive change. Heschel teaches on the Holocaust and the history and culture of the Jewish people. She encourages interdisciplinary-based discussions between students. While she can be demanding, past students have praised her ability to keep class moving quickly and cover lots of material.

Jim Jordan, Art History

Professor Jordan’s classes are great because they function as an accessible introduction for students with no previous coursework in modern and contemporary art, while also serving as well-paced surveys for those with prior knowledge. The lectures are well organized, easy to follow and interesting while his assignments (usually two exams and a paper) are graded fairly and are good assessment of one’s understanding of the material. Students are assigned to lead a discussion as a group in a topic of their own choosing—this is one of the only times that Jordan requires students to participate. Jordan is very professorial during class hours, and is very helpful, friendly and accommodating when sought outside of class. His classes do require a fair (but not unreasonable) amount of slide memorization, but next time you’re in a museum you’ll be glad to have learned them.

David Lagomarsino, History

David Lagomarsino knows his history, he grades fairly, and at the end of the term you will find yourself knowing more about Early Modern Europe than you ever thought possible. However, the vice-chair of the History department gets a nod as one of Dartmouth’s best professors for a less strictly academic, if no less important, reason: his enthusiasm. Few other professors are able to convey his level of eager interest for the backroom dealings and skullduggery that fill the accounts of his specialty, Europe in the period from 1300-1650 and especially Spain during its Golden Age.

Professor Lagomarsino certainly has enough material with which to keep his classes entertained. Although the Early Modern period is perhaps less studied by undergraduates than others, he combines the analytical skill of a serious historian with the wit of a storyteller as he moves through ranks of Machiavellian politicians, ruthless generals and philandering popes. Professor Lagomarsino isn’t the only one doing the talking either; even in lecture classes, he manages to involve the entire class in freewheeling discussions—something of a rarity for classes held in a lecture hall.

Theodore Levin, Music

When most people consider taking a music class at Dartmouth, they usually expect to be listening to decades-old recordings and reading about Brahms or Beethoven. Not in Professor Theodore Levin’s classes. An ethnomusicology specialist, Professor Levin has studied the relationship between music and culture in regions ranging from Ireland to Tuva (that’s in Central Asia, if you were wondering), and is active in efforts to document and preserve the indigenous music of developing countries. This fieldwork pays off for students in Professor Levin’s classes, which are appropriate for both musicians and non-musicians. He regularly invites guests into classes, many of whom he has worked with for decades. Instead of merely reading papers on the subject, students are asked to act as ethnomusicologists themselves, interviewing musicians (sometimes in their native languages) and analyzing the music as it is played in order to build up enough material to reach a conclusion, write a paper and tell the musician’s story. Although listed in the music department, Professor Levin’s classes carry a much wider appeal, as they combine facets of sociology, geography, history, and general investigative work. He also utilizes his students’ own varying musical talents, whether it be shaping a class around a class member’s demonstration of traditional drumming or teaching a room full of math, science and humanities majors how to throat-sing.

David Peart, Biological Sciences

As a young ecologist, having newly arrived in the Central American rainforest, Professor Peart spied an unusual flower that he’d heard about, standing nearly as tall as himself. It hadn’t opened yet, so he pulled the petals apart, stuck his head inside to smell it $mdash; and was knocked to the ground by the stench of rotting flesh, the flower’s method of attracting flies to pollinate it. Peart brings that kind of energy and eagerness to class every day. He’s very responsive to students (and attentive $mdash; he’ll catch you if you doze), and believes in explaining concepts until everyone can clearly apply them and link them to previously learned ideas. He’ll pause to mention why a certain kind of plant is so cool, or to feed the class seaweed from the tide pool he’s standing in, or to remind himself and the class of the wonder an
d complexities of nature. In short, he’s a fabulous and fascinating professor.

Walter Simons, History

Professor Walter Simons is Belgian. For those infatuated with waffles or bureaucracy, this might be enough to induce you to take his history offerings; for those harboring a grudge against BeNeLux entire, his excellent lectures and his sincere interest in undergraduate education should speed your forgiveness. Professor Simons, whose field of study is medieval European history, is an oft-published scholar, and he translates a deep understanding of history into an enlivening and well-organized series of lectures. By incorporating varied media into his lectures and discussions (including portions of a steamy video for those who, while ambivalent on the whole Belgium thing, are staunchly pro-sex), Professor Simons makes medieval history fascinating, digestible, and relevant. In his class, students are held to scholarly standards: if you are proficient in German, French, or Latin, Professor Simons will point you towards research material in your respective language. With his high scholastic standards, Professor Simons is more than a mediator between student and textbook; he is a colleague.

NOVACK PARTY DEMANDS REDO

To the Editor:

Last issue’s published letter lacked a critical paragraph (I originally placed it as off the record) that provides concrete evidence of Michael Valmonte’s impact on the race: A day before the SA election, Presidential candidate Ralph Davies sent a blitz to Michael, arguing that he stood for a lot of the things that were important to Michael’s constituency. Ralph specifically requested Michael to tell his supporters that it was okay to vote for Ralph as well.

Ralph Davies justified this indecent proposal by arguing that “its [sic] just this race is going to be really close.” To his credit, Ralph recognized the Novack Party’s increasing impact on the race and had simply tried to do something about it.

The Novack Party recognizes that many students might not take us seriously at first glance. The way our published letter in The Free Press was worded, it seemed that the Novack Party was making the ridiculous claim of deciding an election simply based on the number of votes we had won.

We hope that you print this clarification and help give Michael Valmonte and the Novack Party its due.

Till next year,

Eugene Oh and the Michael Valmonte Team

Novack Party Demands Respect

Hi D reporters and The Free Press,

I am one of Michael Valmonte’s campaign managers. The Michael Valmonte team and the Novack party feel strongly that an article about the Novak party’s impact on this race would serve as an interesting piece in The Dartmouth and/or The Free Press.

Julia Hildreth won by only 1 vote over Ralph Davies. Michael Valmonte took in 110 votes, (less than 5% of the vote) yet we strongly feel that we stole this election, classic Nader-esque style.

There is no question about the reality that Michael Valmonte’s candidacy was the crucial factor in Ralph Davies’ loss and Julia Hildreth’s victory. The Novack party refuses to be taken as a joke and demands to be recognized as a viable constituency in the SA process. From barely receiving any mention in the D’s and Free Press’s election staff editorials to deciding this election in classic Nader form, the Novack Party and Michael Valmonte’s candidacy, as Michael put it in his thank you letter to supporters, “shook the world.”

This is my official statement, on the record. Please feel free to blitz Michael Valmonte.Thanks for your fine coverage of this election.

Best,

Eugene Oh

Michael Valmonte For President

[Ed $mdash; For our SA Election Issue, the editorial board traditionally interviews each candidate before making our judgement. Mr. Valmonte napped through his appointment. While the DFP is a strong proponent of well-rested undergrads, we still did not feel well-informed enough to editorialize on Mr. Valmonte’s candidacy.]

Immelt Deserves Nary a Rouse

How does it go again, President Wright? “Dear Ole’ Dartmouth /Give a rouse…” Oh, but forgive me again, for what exactly should I really be giving a rouse? Oh that’s right, for the symbol of rich white patriarchy on the hill that is always perpetuated in this college even in this year’s 2004 Commencement Speaker. Ok! Just checking, thanks, James.

Frankly, there’s too much happening in the world today for an Ivy League College like Dartmouth to simply request that Jeffrey Immelt—C.E.O. of General Electric and Dartmouth alum who happens to be giving the college a lot of money—speak at the 2004 Commencement Ceremony this year, especially since he apparently spoke to the student body at the Amos Tuck School of Business just two weeks ago. Besides, not everyone graduating from Dartmouth is partaking of a “quintessential” profit-sharing market. Some of the future alums of Dartmouth actually have altruistic goals in mind. And I was hoping that my tenure with an Ivy League college education would afford me with the necessary words of wisdom, come June 13th, from a vantage point not limited to climbing a socio-economic corporate ladder. On a serious note, I have a proposal for President Wright: the next time he decides to use the word, “DIVERSE” in another boring Christmas speech or Dartmouth Minority pamphlet/panel during the “Festive” Spring Term Dimensions Program, I want him to remember, with gleaming eyes and his golden smile, the choice he made for the 2004 Commencement speaker…and then e-mail my Dartmouth Alum account and tell me just how “DIVERSE” Dear Ole’ Dartmouth really is.

Disclaimer: This letter is no more patronizing than President Wright’s decision to choose Jeffrey Immelt to speak at the Commencement Address on June 13th. I am simply conveying the angst and frustrations of myself and various students, faculty and staff members at Dartmouth College.

-Guensley Delva ‘04

y name is Mike Valmonte. I am running on the Novack Party ticket. There is one main difference between me and the other candidates: I represent the average Dartmouth student. The other presidential candidates represent a “model minority,” a stereotypically Ivy League group of overachievers who all claim, when elected, to shower you with vending machines and kegs. My goal in this race is to provide students the option of a different candidate, someone you’d actually want to hang out with. Wouldn’t you rather be represented by a president who doesn’t take him or herself too seriously? I know I would, and that’s why I’m running. When I looked at the other candidates, I thought, “You’ve got to be kidding me. How is this a fair representation of the student body here at Dartmouth?”

I am not running with a set agenda. I want to be as receptive as possible to what other students want. Issues that are important to me might not be important to other students. As president, I would go out and talk to people and learn what exactly they want from their student government. I will not make lofty promises to save this school and return voices to its students. I’m just running to give you a chance to be represented by a person with whom you can relate.

The Novack Party, which stands behind me in my candidacy, is a cohesive movement; it is not about the individual or seeking a personal agenda. More than anywhere else, Novack is a crossroads of this campus. Every kind of person at this school at one time or another hangs out at Novack, hence the students who work at Novack are witness to an amazing variety of the Dartmouth student body. Anna Zelinsky and Paul Heintz, both class of 2006, decided to create the Novack Party as a political representation of the microcosm that is Novack. The party aims to take student government back into the hands of the average student. As a Novack worker, I understand Dartmouth. Those who hang out at Novack understand each other. In this new age of student government at Dartmouth, vote for someone who is actually like you. Vote for Mike Valmonte.

taff of the Free Press:

When trying to make institutional changes, the pen may be mightier than the sword. Although I didn’t know it at the time, when the second ROTC article was run in DFP 4.10, the Dean of the College James Larimore was reading it and taking note at the dissatisfaction at the institutional quality of ROTC since ’98. While Dean Larimore may have seemed angry to me at first, accusing me of spreading disinformation about the adminstration’s support of the ROTC program here, after frank discussion, the facts stood up for themselves: the program at Dartmouth needed help from the administration and it hadn’t been receiving it before. Dean Larimore should be commended for the actions on his part, and in concert with CPT Eric Lowry, the assitant professor of military science here at Dartmouth, and Lynn Oelgart, the “beans and bullets”, go-to lady of Dartmouth ROTC, we were able to change several things about how Dartmouth functions. We were supported in our use of gym facilities and EW cluster classrooms for instruction. Because of the growth in the program, the current office no longer suffices in teaching classes of over ten cadets. Department of Defense physicals will be conducted in Hanover as well. Before, we had to travel hours to Northfield VT and Barre VT to get these completed. The administration will offer us more support for recruiting next year and trying to get Dartmouth on par with its Ivy League peers in scholarship monies. We are also fighting for 3-4 airborne school slots and full tuition scholarships next year, which the incoming freshmen will compete for to the tune of $28,000 per year, or roughtly $112,000 in scholarship monies. I look forward to helping to lead Dartmouth ROTC to a brighter future before my time in the “real Army.” For now, the current cadets of Dartmouth ROTC thank the Free Press for their part in bringing these problems to the attention of the College’s administration. Making our garden grow, its all we can do in the short run!

Thanks,

Welton Chang, MSIII Dartmouth ROTC

IBRARIANS SET IT STRAIGHT

We appreciate Ms. Grauer’s concerns about the Patriot Act. We, too, in the library worry that the legislation goes too far. Some of us individually have written our representatives in Congress about the Patriot Act, but in our role as librarians at Dartmouth, we have not thought it appropriate to take a public stand on the issue.

We especially wanted to say a word or two about the library’s privacy policy. The policy remains unchanged by the Patriot Act. An individual’s library account only records the material currently checked out, the entire borrowing history of an individual is not available. We do not share any information regarding an individual’s library account with anyone, other than that individual, unless we are served with a search warrant, court order, or subpoena identifying that individual. The FBI does not, in other words, contrary to Ms. Grauer’s suggestion, have anything resembling open access to library records. If an individual is subject to a FBI investigation, then an agent of the FBI can apply to a federal judge of appropriate jurisdiction for a search warrant, court order, or subpoena for information regarding that individual’s use of the library. This means that there is judicial oversight over the activities of the FBI as they might affect Dartmouth College Library users. There is also legislative oversight-activities undertaken under the authority of the Patriot Act are reported to Congress bi-annually.

We do not wish to defend the Patriot Act. And we certainly are aware that the safeguards in place to protect against the abuses under its authority are not fool-proof. Still, we thought Ms. Grauer’s article left an incorrect impression. And so this comment.

Jennifer Taxman

Head of Access Services

Cyndy Pawlek

Associate Librarian of the College

IN DEFENSE OF VERMONT’S INTELLIGENCE

I am writing in response to Aaron Schlosser’s review of Emma, which has been playing at the Parish Players’ Eclipse Grange Theater in Thetford. As a member of the production crew, I am grateful for the publicity and glad that the author found the play thought-provoking. However, rather than focus on the merits of the play itself, Mr. Schlosser chose as his theme his astonishment that the "cold and desolate hills of Northern New England" could produce ideas outside of its supposed "American flag-adorned pick-up truck … and … old-country Puritan" reputation.

As a lifelong Vermonter (though I happen to live just across the river now) and long-time member of the Upper Valley community, I humbly suggest that Mr. Schlosser revisit his stereotype of rural life as intellectually barren. Vermont is no stranger to political radicalism; Emma Goldman’s lecture tours frequently included Barre, where today you can still find the remnants of the anarchist group begun by Italian-immigrant stone workers. Regardless of politics, Vermonters have long welcomed independent thought and free expression. I hope that before he graduates, Mr. Schlosser will come to appreciate the vitality and creativity of the larger community in which he lives-or at least refrain from making assumptions about its ignorance.

Hannah Silverstein

Editor’s Note: Aaron Schlosser has lived in New England for 20 years.

hat was the problem, specifically?

Let it be known that if I wasn’t an insomniac, I wouldn’t be writing this letter, much less reading the Free Press. Generally speaking, I like the articles. I read in the DFP, whether I agree with them or not. They make a good point and are well written. Unfortunatly, that is more than I can say for the Dinnella-Borrego article that I came across in this weeks issue. This article deserves the stamp that many high school humanities teachers brand on their students work: "Too Vague". He makes no specific call to action against any specific evil, as effective articles of this nature do, but rather comes out with the cry, "Save the World." On some level, unless they have already become horribly jaded, all college students want to "save the world," or at least make it a better place, but realistically none of us will ever put an end to terrorism once and for all. And he is not even calling us to take action against terrorism, or racism or poverty. In fact it is most unclear what he wants short of a perfect world. He may as well have written an article pleading with some higher power for the coming of a Messiah-like ruler who would bring everlasting peace. It would have been much more effective if he had picked an evil, told us why it is evil, and then gave us specific suggestions on how to take action against it. Perhaps in the future your contributors won’t let their idealism get in the way of good writing.

~Nathalie Garcia ‘05

(Editor’s Note: This letter was recieved at 5:07AM EST)

~~~

Brevity is the soul of compliments

Word.

~Justin St. Laurent,

Dartmouth Employee

Editor’s Note: This letter was in response to an article entitled “Democrat, Republican, Racist” regarding Strom Thurmond, originally in DFP 3.11.

~~~

Warmer than you think

In his editorial “Out in the Cold” Karsten Barde makes a number of alarming generalizations. While Barde’s intent appears to be of good nature, his editorial lacks empirical evidence while making sweeping assumptions about a large number of people.

According to the office of Undergraduate Admissions, 32.5 percent of the class of 2007 consists of minorities. This brings Dartmouth’s aggregate percentage of non-white undergraduates to nearly 30 percent. Out of approximately 4100 students, that’s over 1200 students of color.

Barde specifically discusses the apparent lack of minority participation in freshman D.O.C. trips, “…a dramatic proportion of the incoming first years who don’t participate in D.O.C. trips are minorities…” What is the proportion? My experience as a freshman was quite different. Out of nine students total, seven were minority; including Asians, a Black student, a Latino and a bisexual. In fact, since there were only 2 White undergraduates, they were the “minority.” If I utilized Karsten’s method of using anecdotes in order to make generalizations, I could presumably make the assumption that White people don’t like to camp, bathe, or take part in D.O.C. trips!

Barde concludes his article by urging Dartmouth’s white population to step out of its comfort zone, “…white students need to recognize their privilege of being ‘racially invincible’ and learn more how to leave their comfort zones. It’s only fair.” If Karsten is correct, let us assume so, despite a shortage of data, then every student at Dartmouth, White or Colored, must make strides to venture beyond his or her comfort zone. In an unfair world, that would be the only fair solution.

~Jamil Batcha ‘06

AKING OFFENSE

Honest and heartfelt though it was, Karsten Barde’s recent editorial, “Recognition: The New Anti-Racism,” manages only to diagnose some of the ills afflicting college campuses today. He’s right: Dartmouth should be tackling political correctness. But the nostrums he proposes to “warm and fuzzy multiculturalism” are inadequate at best. At the worst, they may even exacerbate “an issue that is neither naturally left nor right” (but that conservatives, of all people, have been instrumental in challenging).

Take, for instance, his proposal that Dartmouth recruit “more faculty of color” to help improve race relations in the classroom, the problem being that “people of color frequently have their intelligence questioned in classroom settings, are spoken to in condescending or patronizing ways, and are expected to be representatives of their race.” His logic is that “Minority faces at the chalkboard are role models for students of color, and they play an equally important role in reshaping the racial imaginations of white students.” How (ironically) patronizing! Mr. Barde would have more faculty of color recruited and retained, it seems, largely because he thinks they will help improve race relations in the classroom. As for their scholarship and ability to teach their subjects, he says nothing, presumably because, in the spirit of progressive correctness, he is more than willing to hire minorities as “representatives of their race” for the sake of gains that are by no means guaranteed.

The writer also believes that minority faculty are, or ought to be, role models for minority students, and that they are instrumental in “reshaping the racial imaginations of white students.” What was that again about being “spoken to in condescending or patronizing ways”? Mr. Barde assumes that I $mdash; who am, strictly speaking, a minority $mdash; take as role models professors (and by extension, others) who share my pinkish-yellow skin tone. Unlike him though, I don’t discriminate based on race. As for the second function he assigns minority faculty, I will only suggest, as a thought experiment, that readers of The Free Press substitute “white students” with “black minorities” as a means of understanding the statement more fully.

The best response to minorities being tokenized in the classroom $mdash; a situation, by the way, that I don’t recall having encountered in my time here $mdash; is not more minority faculty, but a return to basics. If professors teach Shakespeare, Roman archaeology, or differential equations with care and enthusiasm; if they immerse us in the subject material; if they treat us according to the tenets of traditional liberalism (long since seen as passÉ by progressives) $mdash; then time will not be wasted on race-thinking.

Race-thinking is, in fact, the problem that Mr. Barde fails to address. What we need is less of it. Part of the solution means learning not to react to “bias incidents” (an egregious phrase the administration has coined) in the ways we normally do, to an even greater extent than Mr. Barde proposes. He suggests that we “provide relief for the offended person or group and then $mdash; the sooner the better $mdash; encourage dialogue about the situation.” That is certainly preferable to making the accused feel guilty simply for being a white heterosexual male, but in many ways it is also not enough. For one, I’m not sure that the welfare system erected by groups like the Men’s Project, Women of Color Collective, and White Woman Against Racism is beneficial in the long run. It is useful to learn how not to let something offensive overwhelm your entire being, because the real world $mdash; which progressives like to claim Dartmouth doesn’t prepare us adequately for $mdash; can be a difficult place. This Mr. Barde seems to acknowledge when he trots out the familiar bugbear of “powerfully entrenched systems of racial (and other) difference” in his penultimate paragraph. If these hegemonic paradigms do exist, do we waste effort in seeking to purge them when more pragmatic solutions may be found?

Dialogue “about the situation” can be useful if it helps foster a benign neglect towards “bias incidents” and other federal offences. You can’t eliminate such situations, as history seems to suggest. But you can minimize their impact by not catering to what are usually innocuous jokes in bad taste or attention-seeking antics (both of which tend to be the byproducts of inebriation). Dialogue, alas, well-intentioned that it is, tends to only perpetuate hypersensitivity and race-thinking, the real germs to be extirpated.

By “advising the adoption of a laissez-faire attitude” towards race relations on campus, I guess that would make me a reactionary in Mr. Barde’s view. Yes, but there’s not much to react to, as Margaret Thatcher once said. It’s hard not to feel offended by some people.

CHIEN WEN KUNG ‘04

ASSIMILATION: THE ONLY ANTI-RACISM

Karsten Barde’s editorial ends on an optimistic note: "We’re not so naïve as to imagine that conversations about race are easy or sufficient solutions to powerfully entrenched systems of racial (and other) difference. Especially when these are systems so many would overlook, wish away, or normalize by reference to human nature and history.."

There is something to be said about hierarchy and privilege, expounded here as "powerfully entrenched systems." Focusing excessively on who has the power and money reifies the material aspects of the problem, which is primarily socio-psychological. Power, money, and privilege aren’t what the battle is–or should be–about. Rather, the battle is about acceptance and assimilation. As long as the discourse involves the privileged groups who socially interact with the marginal groups from one end of the totem pole to the other, engaged not as equals but as the morally guilty (in the case of whites) or tokens of diversity (in the case of ‘colored peoples’), the suppressive order will continue to exist. Whiteness needs blackness to exist; straights need gays; the socially acceptable gays need queens and dykes to remain acceptable; acceptably religious people need fundamentalists, etc. The struggle that I wage on campus is one for true assimilation. I don’t want to live my life as that black guy; I want to be John as I define it. It is the difference between either me being accepted as who I want to be (even if it is an identity that meshes nicely with the norm) or me being tolerated because I play an important role in someone else’s social vision(s). I fight so that the norm can expand and be defined by the variations. The outsider, the ‘other’, changes as well as the insider and, as Kristeva argues in Strangers To Ourselves, a hybrid culture is born from the interaction of the particularities of the two.

Karsten suggests that this problem–tokenism, racialism, muddled multi-culturalism– is "neither naturally left nor right" despite having been shaped by the conservative backlash. We should not conflate the conservatives and bigots here. Bigots substitute hate for discourse. Since no one is defending them, I needn’t deprogram their line of thinking. Conservatives are afraid of admitting that minorities actually exist as minorities–and maybe even as communities. Karsten’s suggestion of hiring more faculty members of color would seem paternalistic and condescending to them. And it is. Viewing a professor as a "person-of-color" obscures the actual social role they have chosen for themselves as pedagogues and prevents their true assimilation by forcing them to play in a redemptive racial morality tale. However, one would have to be either a fool or a liar to suggest that for some persons seeing another who superficially resembles them does not
enliven and strengthen their sense of community and acceptability. Moreover, it would be equally wrong, possessing this knowledge, to deny those persons their sense of community.

Liberals, unfortunately, are as much a part of the problem as the reactionary bigots and the conservatives. Liberals are very welcoming of the minorities on the surface. Liberals want a representative assortment of diversity– Justice Thomas rightly calls it window-dressing and aesthetic balancing– but fear the loss of privilege, power and social hegemony that true pluralism would create. Minorities who play the perfect gentlemen, who tell about their ‘cultural experience’, who enrich a privileged education by breaking the monotony of white, have played their part and are rewarded with the deceptively warm liberal embrace, and if they play nice, may be allowed into the elite. While liberals often make noises about the populace (supporting gay marriage, housing projects for the poor, affirmative action for the less fortunate) but when it comes to social equality only the most radical of the progressive want the hordes and masses to join the ranks. Like the conservatives, liberals want a few good men to represent the marginal groups, for their conscience’s sake, in the elite that they themselves will always define and control. The mission of anti-racism will only be fulfilled when persons can act as self-defined persons whose identities (no matter how problematic or discomforting for others) are accepted irrespective of whose social vision(s) they validate. This can only happen when the bastions of the elite, that is mainstream liberal and conservative philosophies, decide to relinquish their grip on the systems of power to the average person.

JOHN STEVENSON ‘05

N OPEN LETTER TO JANE

Dear Jane Doe,

Thank you for that poignant first-hand account of date-rape drug victimization. It discusses a painful topic truthfully and eloquently enough to move me to tears of sorrow and anger. Perhaps the most touching part of the piece is that Jane Doe can still love Dartmouth and appreciate its beauty even after her terrible treatment here.

In case you worry how your words have made a difference, let it be known that I’m only one of the many who have been privileged enough to be moved by your honesty and bravery. May your words continue to move the hearts of others and hopefully, sit upon the consciences of the guilty and unsympathetic.

Annie Chung ’07

A CALL TO GREEKS

Jane’s story (Issue 4.4) is a troubling story for many reasons. But, as a member of Sigma Phi Ep- silon and vice president of the IFC, what troubled me the most was the fraternal aspect of the story. I’d like to think that I know at least several good guys in each and every fraternity and I’d like to think that this college is full of them. Where have we been when sexual assaults have taken place?

While it’s hard to think that we can stop every single instance of sexual abuse on campus, I’d like to think we should try. Yes, there are many things that need to be changed in the way that the administration handles sexual abuse on campus. But there are also ways that we, as fraternity members, need to change too. If we can stop sexual abuse in our houses before it starts, the administration never has to get involved.

It’s been done before and I’m sure it’ll be done again, but I’d like to call my fellow Greeks to action. Start thinking about how you, as a man and a member of a fraternity can change your house. Talk to your brothers about what you can do to stop sexual abuse, and then do it. When you’re walking around your house during a party, don’t just assume that everything is perfect—look for problems and make the effort to solve them. To put it simply, we all need to work to foster an atmosphere of respect and safety within our houses.

It seems that the first step towards this solution is to start talking about it. If we can discuss sexuality and sexual abuse amongst our friends, we can see problems before they develop and we can find ways to solve them before they become problems. We all know that fraternities play a major role in the social side of Dartmouth, so let’s start playing a major role in making that side a safe one.

David Turnbull ‘04

THINK ONCE, THEN TWICE

The treatment of rape at Dartmouth, sadly enough, is downright progressive compared to much of the rest of western civilization. Instead of talking about it as statistics and politics, I think we should let the men of Dartmouth know just what are the psychological impacts of rape on women. As there’s more concern amongst males about testicular cancer (one of the least lethal of cancers) than about breast cancer (much, much more lethal), so it is with the issue of rape. The tacit message: it’s not important enough to address because it’s women. To rectify this, I suggest that we have male survivors of rape committed by other males to come to the College and share their experiences with the campus. I think the talks might help men of Dartmouth think first about how it would feel to have someone fuck you in the ass à la Deliverance, and twice about casually raping a woman.

Anthony Bider-Hall ‘05

MORE TALK STILL NEEDED

I just wanted to thank you for your “Jane’s Story.” I think it’s really important that women on campus realize that this type of thing DOES happen at Dartmouth—and more often than we think. I was a UGA in the Choates last year, and I was off in the spring. I know right now I am hoping that this wasn’t one of my residents—and wishing that if it was, that the other girls on the floor would have come to talk to me about their experiences.

I just want to commend you for highlighting something that we often don’t talk about. I also want to encourage anyone who has gone through this to contact Abby Tassel or a SAPA. If we can show the administration, fraternities, women on campus, and everyone else in the community that this is a large problem on campus, maybe we can all work to make this campus safer.

Jodie Neukirch ‘05