The bedrock of democracy is an organizationally strong and politically responsive civil society — a dense network among the people, formed through the bonds of community and interest groups.
Incredibly, the Board cannot seem to fathom that Princeton, a private institution, has reserved the right to enforce its own rules of conduct regarding speech that is clearly harmful to the values of the community. The First Amendment may protect propagators of unsavory rhetoric from government interference, but Princeton has no legal obligation to tolerate this behavior, despite the Board’s unwillingness to admit it.
Not enough Princeton students are committing themselves to service projects. As a campus community, we can and should be doing more to reach outside the Orange Bubble. Our informal motto, “In the nation’s service and in the service of humanity,” certainly implies that Princeton students have an obligation to bettering their community, even beyond campus.
In December 2016, Princeton’s men’s swimming and diving team made national news after University officials suspended the team’s season following reports of “several materials” deemed “vulgar and offensive, as well as misogynistic and racist in nature.” This announcement came shortly after Harvard suspended its men’s soccer team over a similar issue.
What Aronson doesn’t realize is that there is a highly complex and sophisticated system in place to ensure the selection of the most qualified and competitive athletes who can make the most of an Ivy League education. Athletics is integral to the lives of a large portion of our community, all of whom believe that athletics is, in fact, a central component to the educational mission that the world’s most prestigious schools are pursuing.
“Princeton needs a more legitimate, formalized system for spring extracurricular recruitment.”
“The presidential seal of the United States flashes up on the screen, and for a second, it seems like an official message from the White House. We forget for a moment that it’s 11:30 p.m. on a Saturday night, and let our imaginations run wild.”
After Donald Trump referred to the press as the “enemy of the people,” there’s been a lot of talk about keeping journalistic integrity and protecting the First Amendment. For all his blubbering, Trump won’t silence the media. But I’m afraid that, in some ways, the media has already silenced its own voice.
Without question, there are widespread misunderstandings about what free speech is, the protections that safeguard it, and its purpose.
Last week, I defended the legacy of John C. Calhoun after Yale renamed its Calhoun College. But the two-term vice president from South Carolina is only the latest target in a larger war waged on college campuses.
Princeton students rush to class with seconds to spare, finish papers in the darkest hours of the night, and cram last-minute for exams. And with these Ivy League habits comes a dependence: coffee.
On Friday, Feb. 17, I observed the most exciting college tour of my life. As a prospective Orange Key tour guide, I must observe several tours of campus — a dull requirement, for the most part.
Free speech and its implications seem like fashionable topics for op-eds lately. Debate over free speech is simply unavoidable, from fires in the streets of Berkeley, Calif. to renaming residential colleges in New Haven. That’s all without mentioning the dialogues surrounding fake news, social media, and the activities of the current resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
Maher makes a point of phrasing his arguments in the most blunt, quippy, and quotable ways, so that they have the greatest chance of making it into a soundbite on cable news shows and Facebook newsfeeds the next day. But it is wrong to do so in light of the views this particular guest has espoused, views that anyone with basic decency, of any partisan affiliation, would see as repugnant and untrue.
By Josh Stephens ’97 Short on spires and even shorter on gargoyles, Education City in Doha, Qatar, looks like a cross between a world’s fair and Area 51.
In his recent State of the University letter, President Christopher Eisgruber ’83 reaffirmed the University’s intent to expand the size of the undergraduate student body, with the hope of “grow[ing] enrollment while maintaining the distinctive character of a Princeton education.” We appreciate the University’s effort to offer the Princeton experience to a greater number of qualified applicants, and we do not oppose the expansion of the student body; however, we urge the University to keep in mind a number of considerations while planning for the expansion.
