183 items found for your search. If no results were found please broaden your search.
I paused in surprise while I was reading an article on the effect Woodrow Wilson’s expression of and support for self-determination had on Asian countries. The author had just claimed that the significance of Wilson and the doctrine of self-determination in numerous non-European societies, including my own home country of South Korea, has received little attention in discussions of international histories.
As many of you know, New Jersey and Virginia will each be having statewide elections on Tuesday, Nov. 7. Every student registered in either of these two states needs to go out and vote on Election Day. These elections represent the first major opportunity for progressives since last year’s presidential election to push back against the current administration and the damage it seeks to do to many of us and our fellow citizens.
Merriam-Webster defines "health" as:
I was dismayed to read about Jon Ort’s conversation about privacy with a Princeton University librarian in his opinion column in the ‘Prince.’ I want to affirm that some, hopefully many, Princeton University librarians are keenly aware of and concerned about privacy issues, especially in an online environment. I have been a Firefox user for more than a decade, and I have exclusively used Duck Duck Go as my search engine of choice for several years. I’m concerned about tracking tactics such as browser fingerprinting, but also about wider issues such as how an erosion of privacy affects fundamental democratic freedoms of association and expression and even our capacity to sustain meaningful personal relationships. I also regularly attend talks at Princeton’s Center for Information Technology Policy, which has a robust research program on web tracking and privacy.
In a well-written response to my letter to the editor last week arguing for the live, radical space of the arts while questioning the monumental architecture of the new Lewis Center for the Arts complex, I was accused of threatening “to obscure the great good that the existence of this new center will do for the University.”
This past week, Kyle Berlin ’18 penned a letter to the editor in which he criticized the new Lewis Center for the Arts complex. From decrying the center’s allegedly garish architectural style to its supposed complicity in the Neoliberal Cooptation of the Arts, Berlin spared no aspect of the University’s newest project from criticism in his piece. As it turns out, not only are Berlin's accusations vague and unimportant, but they are wrong, threatening to obscure the great good that the existence of this new center will do for the University.
Last weekend, a mysterious procession of people weaved its way through north campus. From a distance, they emitted a collective murmur, like a moan of mourning. But if you got close enough, you could catch snippets of individual sentences. In their sudden intelligibility and idiosyncracy, the reader’s emergent voice blending with the voices of others, they sounded more like joy. A cacophony of words, embodied and reverberating and alive.
"Shall the undergraduates direct the USG Senate to establish a standing committee that works with the Interclub Council to annually collect and release demographic information, such as race, gender, and academic major, about the members of each Eating Club, and additionally, for each selective (‘bicker’) Club, its applicants (‘bickerees’)?
The Oct. 1 referendum on Catalan independence made headlines, but not because of its result. As CNN reported, “some 893 people were injured as riot police raided polling stations, dragged away voters, and fired rubber bullets during clashes.” International media published videos showing Spanish policemen beating people up, from teenagers to old ladies. Nonetheless, about 43 percent of Catalans managed to vote, and among those, 92 percent voted to secede from Spain. Three of the four main Spanish political parties, making up 70 percent of the members of Parliament in Madrid, failed to condemn police brutality. The Spanish government condoned it by calling it “proportionate.”
To the Editor,
Another Bicker season has come and gone, leaving some students overjoyed and some crushed. For some of those students, bickering was a way to increase their social status, to be part of a club that everyone wants to get into. During the year, the thought of Bicker nags constantly in the recesses of their minds. Students actively try to hang out with members of clubs, even at the expense of their old friend groups. Every social interaction with a member of a selective club is just that much more important, more consequential. But I’m willing to wager that most students who bickered, like me, were just looking to be able to eat with their friends.
When I walked onto the Princeton campus eight years ago, I wasn't sure what to expect. It didn’t feel right to step inside the perfect Gothic architecture in my flip flops and shorts. On my application, I promised to major in molecular biology, but after sitting behind a microscope for year years in high school, cells and molecules were the last thing on my mind. I knew I wanted to empower others in some way and decided that I could figure it out over the next four years.
The Harvard administration set off a firestorm when it rejected a formerly incarcerated woman who had already been recommended by the Department of History. Numerous media outlets have covered the case of Michelle Jones, who is now pursuing a Ph.D. in history at New York University. While incarcerated, she completed an undergraduate degree and then became a published scholar in American studies with her paper “Magdalene Laundries: The First Prisons for Women in the United States.” She also wrote a play to be performed in a theater in Indianapolis.
After Harvard University’s recent decision to rescind its fellowship offer to Chelsea Manning, following backlash from CIA Director Mike Pompeo as well as others, it has become evident that, once more, the fight for academic freedom and university autonomy is more important than ever. While Harvard’s decision demonstrates the university’s unwillingness, or perhaps inability, to grapple with difficult ideas, controversial figures, and important public debate, Princeton University should demonstrate its maturity and commitment to academic freedom by extending an invitation to Manning.
Just before Princeton students returned to campus this year, an open letter signed by 16 Ivy League professors appeared online, calling on inbound college first-years to “think for yourself.” Though the call to think critically and maintain an open mind is benign on its surface, the letter is in reality a thinly veiled call for resistance against progressive campus activism. Our own professor Robert George, a signatory of the letter, removed all doubt of this when he appeared on Fox News’s “Tucker Carlson Tonight” on a segment titled “Professors to Class of 2021: Stop being snowflakes.” Neither the letter nor George’s televised comments ever call out the social justice movement by name, but the dog-whistle is unmistakable.
I hope the conservative students at Princeton join us for the many events planned for Latinx Heritage Month. I don’t mean that flippantly, or even as a challenge, but more of an invitation. The events planned for this year’s month include film screenings, lectures, talks, gatherings, and many meals that attempt to both showcase and explore the rich cultural diversity of the Latinx community at Princeton and beyond. Many of the events speak to the social and political issues the Latinx community faces, providing the opportunity for members of our community to reflect critically on our history, our present, and our future. In this sense, the month is about making our community more visible to us, the Latinx students at Princeton, as much as it is about making our community more visible to Princeton University. Situated between the value of diversity and the ethic of inclusion, the events this month are for everyone.
This week, 17 student groups released a statement portrayed as seeking “unity and solidarity” in the aftermath of the senseless violence in Charlottesville. Yet the groups curiously seek such unity by listing contested and wide-ranging grievances against University policy that they insist must be corrected to help fight the evil seen in Charlottesville and other “oppressive structures and ideologies.” These Princeton-specific grievances have little to no relationship with the violence in Charlottesville. Moreover, they are unsettled matters the student body has debated passionately over the past several years. Many reasonable people of goodwill can and do respectfully disagree about these issues. Yet the statement invokes the Charlottesville violence to suggest that those who disagree with their complaints agree with and are “complicit” in the actions of white supremacists. This is false and could not be more counterproductive to unifying the campus community.
On Tuesday, Aug. 29, the Princeton campus was placed on lockdown for ten minutes while officials investigated reports of an armed person. Thankfully, the armed man turned out to be an out-of-uniform police officer with a holstered firearm and badge escorting teens to the University Art Museum. Because Princeton is a world-renowned university, this incident made national news.
As a single student, you may feel frustrated that you cannot impact world affairs, or that even if you really tried to, the time commitment would take away from your future career. My experience says differently. Student advocates can make an enormous impact with much less effort than any activist outside college, while still building valuable skills for their own futures.