Column too critical of Bush administration
Regarding 'The Global Gag Rule: A shameful policy' (Wednesday, March 7, 2007):
Max Wertzberger '08 is either disingenuous or simply careless with his logic in condemning President Bush for "callous disregard for impoverished women" through his support for the Mexico City Policy. He ignores the obvious implication that not a single clinic would need to be shut down if the organizations running them would simply agree to abide by the terms of the policy. Admittedly, these groups would have to accept the lesser of two evils by continuing to provide uncontroversial and valuable services in exchange for compliance with a policy they disagree with, but that doesn't make Bush a woman-hater. It certainly doesn't make him culpable for women being more likely to die for health reasons in the developing world than they are in America.
The fact is that the Bush administration increased funding for family planning by over $100 million compared to the Clinton White House. Wertzberger ignores this fact, in addition to failing to investigate how many clinics were opened by other organizations when Planned Parenthood closed their doors. The debate is a good one to have, but let's be intellectually honest about it. Jonathan Shine '98
Students should be grateful for alumni
Regarding 'Fredrich and Michel's high school reunion' (Wednesday, March 28, 2007):
Ignoring the huge (negative and exaggerated) generalization of the truly noble Princeton alumni, I find myself asking a question at the end of Johann Loh '09's column: If he hates and disdains Princeton's alumni so much, why then does he continue to attend Princeton? A quick search of the Princeton homepage reveals that Loh is lucky enough to reside in one of the newly renovated and nicest dorms on campus. I doubt that anyone will deny that this is only made possible by the very alumni that Loh disdains and criticizes in his article.
Loh's critique of our alums seems to reside in disdain for their academic decisions. "Teddy" sneeringly looks down on the alumni because they didn't read two thinkers who had nothing necessarily to contribute to their life experiences. Will Michel Foucault's grand theories affect the engineer who designs airplanes?
Maybe they didn't need to read them to know that their impact on their daily lives and actions would be next to nothing. I don't know about the rest of you, but I would rather have the internal combustion engine than a more nuanced interpretation of the foundation of Nietzschean ethics.
Aren't you, Loh, doing the same thing? Do you not reveal intellectual snobbery by belittling their knowledge of economics, engineering or medicine? And if you do disdain them, and if you do disdain their knowledge, perhaps you ought to consider giving up that tainted Hamilton room. Or, to take that point further, given that we all benefit so much from money given to the University by our alumni, maybe you should consider a school whose alumni you do respect. But, since I don't think you will be willing to give up either the room these good men gave you or the educational opportunities they've provided you, maybe you owe them a great deal more respect than you gave them in your column. Frederick Hall '09
Gore to blame for global warming hype
Regarding 'The beef between meat-lovers and tree-huggers' (Thursday, March 29, 2007):
With all due respect to Kathryn Andersen '08, the last thing I want to be thinking about when I'm eating a burger is global warming. Why must global warming fanatics attempt to take the joy out of every single pleasurable activity? I blame this trend on Al Gore, who, despite owning a house which consumes 20 times the energy of the average U.S. household, never ceases to find a way to criticize the way in which Americans live their lives. Ryan McInnis '07
Abortion column not well-supported
Regarding 'The moral importance of abortion rights' (Friday, March 30, 2007):
The ironic lesson of Christopher Moses GS' recent column is that antiabortionists clearly have no monopoly on "self-imagined righteousness."
More power to "a woman's right to regulate her own reproductive self." But society always limits individual rights, usually when their exercise treads on others' rights or on society's security. Because abortion deliberately kills innocent human beings, those against abortion argue that abortion as an exercise of the right to eschew childbearing violates a child's right to live, and it should therefore be restricted or prohibited. Thoughtful abortion rights advocates reply that because humans' sentient capacities don't completely develop before birth, prenatal life has no moral worth that pregnant women should be bound to respect.
Moses curiously dodges this crucial issue. Indeed, he barely even addresses abortion itself, harping instead on irrelevant side-issues like contraception and invoking ideals like "opportunity," "hope" and of course, "choice." Never mind that the very concept of "society" entails denying individuals certain choices that are harmful to themselves and/or others. Abortion unquestionably harms its pre-born targets. The best defense of Moses' staunch stance would be to explain why these particular victims don't deserve protection from this particular harm. Why do abortion rights advocates never step up to that plate unless challenged? Akil Alleyne '08
'Count me out'
Regarding 'The moral importance of abortion rights' (Friday, March 30, 2007):
I was left with chills upon reading Christopher Moses GS's defense of reproductive freedom. His vision of the future is both frightening and incoherent, for only with severely twisted logic can we think abortion expands the "possibilities of human existence." On the contrary, abortion robs the future of countless ideas and insights, the very things needed for our society to grow and prosper. This is not a moral position, but a brute fact.
Like Moses, I too have faith, but not in the "power of humanity to make choices." That power, if not exercised with integrity, leads to unchecked force and no basis for a just society. The dilemma Moses poses — that to oppose abortion is to oppose prosperity — is no dilemma at all. With our creativity and talents, we can bring about a prosperous future where the value of individual lives is celebrated and respected.
To Moses' vision of the future, therefore, I can only say "count me out." Matt Hoberg '09
Professors need to take students' evaluations seriously
Regarding 'Grade inflation, the other way' (Monday, April 2, 2007):
Anyone who witnesses the frantic eight-minute bubbling and scribbling process that encompasses current student course evaluations could hardly disagree with Grafton's assessment that they are lacking in critical rigor. I wonder if the lack of effort on the part of the students has to do with a perceived indifference on the part of the faculty and administration to student input. Many professors hand out course evaluations without any observation as to their purpose, though some particularly choice comments I have heard include: "We don't have the time to spare for this in class, but you can fill them out at home," "Not that it really matters as I'm tenured/retiring, ha" and "I don't really know what these are for, but you guys know what to do, right?"
The concept that "students lead with their feet," that is, that student satisfaction can be measured by course enrollment, creates the impression that a student's physical presence communicates more than her individual words. In addition, when students see professors who they consider to be master teachers denied tenure despite student efforts to communicate their appreciation of that instructor's skill in the classroom, it often seems that student opinion is of little import.
I don't actually believe any statements in the above paragraph. My academic department is one of the institutions by which I feel most grounded at Princeton. The department often actively solicits our opinions of professors, courses or programs by email or in-person. One professor even had her large lecture class fill out midterm evaluations for lectures and precepts so she could incorporate student feedback into the second half of the term.
Grade inflation garnered attention easily because it was an issue that concerned many students. I think if more professors and departments make it known that this "inverse grade inflation" is a central concern of theirs, students might be very amenable to helping out by providing critical feedback. Galen Laserson '07
Cartoon was disrespectful to troops in Iraq
Regarding 'Op Art' (Monday, April 2, 2007):
Stephen Hsia's cartoon was distasteful and inappropriate. The cartoon features a letter to "Mom and Dad" that the cartoonist implies could have been written by a U.S. serviceman in Iraq or by a Princeton senior working on her thesis. Setting conflicting opinions about the war in Iraq aside, by making such a comparison, Hsia demeans our troops' struggles aborad. The life of a Princeton senior at this time of year is difficult, as I know from experience, but it is nothing compared to the life of a soldier, who must risk his life every day in the service of his country. I respectfully request that in future cartoons, Hsia show more respect for the men and women who are fighting overseas to ensure peace and freedom at home. Stuart Lange '07
Read More
It’s time to step it up on diversity and inclusion
Christofer RoblesOver the last five years, Princeton never achieved parity in diversity and inclusion for Black students. Now, the University faces a conservative culture and federal government hostile to anti-racism. Now, more than ever, Princeton cannot abandon its students.
Over the last five years, Princeton never achieved parity in diversity and inclusion for Black students. Now, the University faces a conservative culture and federal government hostile to anti-racism. Now, more than ever, Princeton cannot abandon its students.
Class of 2029: Reject selective views of free speech
Charlie Yale and Siyeon Lee"Let us make an appeal to the entire Class of 2029: You can care about viewpoint diversity and free expression even if you don’t read the Tory. As liberals and progressives, you can understand that free speech is an issue that affects everyone."
"Let us make an appeal to the entire Class of 2029: You can care about viewpoint diversity and free expression even if you don’t read the Tory. As liberals and progressives, you can understand that free speech is an issue that affects everyone."
For a more effective USG, train newly elected members on the bureaucracy
Luqmaan BambaFor student representatives to make the change we can through the systems we have, we need a more onboarding process that prepares us to navigate these byzantine processes.
For student representatives to make the change we can through the systems we have, we need a more onboarding process that prepares us to navigate these byzantine processes.