Letter to the Editor: Princeton’s disproportionate response to PETA’s exhibit shows their culpability
To the Editor:
Use the fields below to perform an advanced search of The Princetonian's archives. This will return articles, images, and multimedia relevant to your query. You can also try a Basic search
1000 items found for your search. If no results were found please broaden your search.
To the Editor:
The following is a guest contribution and reflects the author’s views alone. For information on how to submit to the Opinion Section, click here.
What makes Princeton students proud of their residential college? For many students, the answer is nothing.
In the spring of 2000, students in POL 316 and ENG 335 walked into old Palmer Hall — which had recently been outfitted with new finishes and equipment — talking over the din of construction from the unfinished Frist Food Gallery below. Not everyone felt enthusiastic about these changes. A September 2000 Daily Princetonian article highlighted the frustration of students with the “constant construction” that had been going on for four years. Another article from the ‘Prince’ quoted the project manager, who said, “I think people understand that we have to pursue the construction with vigor so we can get done when we’re supposed to.” This sentiment also applies to Princeton’s current renovation projects. Indeed, it is by looking at Princeton’s past projects that we can better understand — and redeem — the University’s current efforts.
Editor's Note: Since the initial publication of this open letter, The Daily Princetonian has been made aware that its author had been hired to start working at Duolingo in 2023. The author bio at the bottom has been updated to include this information.
On Sept. 12, U.S. News released its annual college rankings and my social media accounts were flooded with reposts celebrating Princeton’s 12-year reign as the country’s No. 1 national university.
The following is a guest contribution and reflects the author’s views alone. For information on how to submit to the Opinion Section, click here.
As Russia’s war in Ukraine grinds on through its seventh month since the escalation of the conflict by Russia on Feb. 24, great strain has been placed on the nations of the Caucasus and Central Asia that have deep economic, political, and cultural ties to Russia. While Princeton’s campus community has shown admirable solidarity with Ukraine against Russia’s aggression, there has been less attention devoted towards other countries that also face economic and political headwinds as a result of the war and Russia’s broader aggressive posture. Among the most vulnerable is Georgia, a small nation of more than three and a half million people on the eastern edge of the Black Sea. Its quest to join the European Union and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) against a backdrop of separatist conflict, Russian military intervention, and destabilizing domestic political polarization warrants greater concern and solidarity.
In 2021, then-Editor-in-Chief Emma Treadway ’22 challenged the student body to take the collective return from virtual-only learning as an opportunity to change Princeton. One year later, we asked our columnists one thing they’d want to change, big or small, about Princeton in the coming year. Their responses range from heavy-hearted calls for sweeping shifts in culture and policy, to humble pleas for changes in the University’s everyday life.
To the Editor:
Community Action (CA) has sparked a heated debate in the Princeton community since this school year began. Last month, an article published in The Daily Princetonian, “Some first-years, orientation leaders critique Community Action orientation program,” featured students who felt unfulfilled by their CA experiences at Princeton-Blairstown Center (PBC) and Trenton Central High School. In response, Vincent Jiang wrote a column about his time as a CA orientation leader of the Essential Needs of Refugees group at the Archdiocese Youth Retreat Center, defending the program.
The following is a Letter to the Editor and reflects the authors’ views alone. For information on how to submit to the Opinion Section, click here.
At Princeton, some campus conservatives have acted as if they have a monopoly on fighting for free speech. It’s time for that to change. During a first-year orientation event about free speech, only three people spoke: President Christopher Eisgruber ’83, USG Vice President Hannah Kapoor ’23, and Myles McKnight ’23, the president of the Princeton Open Campus Coalition (POCC). McKnight describes the POCC as “a group of students working to promote the values of free speech, intellectual freedom, and robust discourse on campus,” and on paper, this sounds good. No one should be against free speech on campus, right?
When people see the word “Indigenous,” who do they think of?
Content Warning: The following column references settler colonialism and violence against Alaska Natives and their cultures.
With the new academic year having begun, many of us are looking for a sense of normalcy following the COVID-19 lockdowns: masks are no longer required for a majority of classes, and the utilization of Zoom meetings (for class and club purposes, at least) seems to be dwindling.
The story of former Princeton professor Maitland Jones, recently terminated from New York University after students signed a petition calling his organic chemistry class too hard, is all too familiar. You can find similar complaints about professors throughout the course reviews of Princeton’s intro classes, in associate Opinion editor Lucia Wetherill’s deconstruction of weed-out pre-med classes, and in columnist Abigail Rabieh’s critique of MAT 202: Linear Algebra with Applications last spring. The complaints include midterms with absurdly low averages, seemingly nowhere near enough office hours to meet students’ needs, a lack of lecture recordings, among a host of other grievances.
To the Editor:
On Sept. 1, “Free Expression at Princeton,” a new first-year orientation event, was held in McCarter Theater Center, featuring speeches from University President Christopher Eisgruber ’83; Hannah Kapoor ’23, Vice President of the Undergraduate Student Government; and Myles McKnight ’23, President of the Princeton Open Campus Coalition. This event was a direct response to a private letter sent by 46 undergraduates to President Eisgruber that raised concerns regarding the ideological bias found in the mandatory programming for freshmen.
For some reason, Princeton’s administration thinks that it can completely change the University’s upperclass dining scene by radically revamping the eating clubs and co-ops through an opaque committee working in secret. It’s not going to work. If the administration really wants to reform campus culture, it has to work with proposals generated by the student body, not ones imposed unilaterally.