(2/5/05)
The vagaries of campus politics are the subject of much news in our time, and precisely in these past several days. Much of the debate this week has revolved around Ward Churchill, professor of Ethnic Studies at the University of Colorado. In one of his classes, he referred to people who work in the finance industry as “little Eichmanns”- Nazis. He also said that those who died on 9/11 were not innocent victims. There is no need to discuss just how wrong and misguided this man is. It has been well established by writers on both sides of the political spectrum. The debate is over whether or not he should be dismissed. The university seems to be leaning in that direction. I, and many other bloggers, have inveighed against that. While these prominent professor/bloggers are better qualified to explain why, I am able only to offer the simple explanation that professors, like scientists and writers, ought not be confined by the social memes that constrain every day life. They are, after all, in pursuit of something just a tweak better than every day life. That is why we teach, research, and write. And, frankly, I want my government professor to have the right to call Saddam Hussein a dictator on par with Hitler, which he was, without fear of reprisal. If, in return, I have to hear anti-capitalist bunk from my sociology professor, so be it. I can make up my own mind.

So, we should have free speech on campus. That goes for conservatives as well. But why is it, then, that nearly all professors are liberal, and 90% of the student body is liberal? If we have free speech, and if we have the equality and diversity that bulwark freedom of speech, why is there only one side?

The answer is not “because that’s the correct side.” History doesn’t quite bear out socialism. It is because, to its detriment, the academy has become the citadel for extreme views. Ideas that don’t survive elsewhere. Ideas that need to be subsidized. And this, in turn, is the fault of college administrations everywhere.

Dartmouth, it pains me to say, is an exemplar.

As I member of the College Republicans, I attended a meeting recently where several members voiced their exasperation at COSO- the Council on Student Organizations. They are a college department charged with recognizing, administering, and funding student groups. Dartmouth has the 21st largest endowment in the country (and, bear in mind, it is miles away from being the 21st largest school) so things here tend to be well-funded. COSO is no exception. To give but one example, a recent e-mail they sent out offered an arbitrarily determined $100 to entice representatives of groups to attend a meeting. Each group who sent an envoy had $100 credited to their account. This is in addition to the significant levels of funding that groups can request for travel expenses, events, et al.

I was at this College Republicans meeting, listening with perked ears. I was truly a lurker- a first-year student trying to find the ropes of a new jungle. But I never expected to hear of rampant bias in the funding of student programs. Given COSO’s history, the College Republicans were projecting that they would be unable to secure funding for a dance. Several people spoke of deafening hemming and hawing from COSO on each and every proposal. But what is more pure, what is more harmless, than a simple dance at which young adults may enjoy themselves for a night? It certainly beats hard drinking in the basements of fraternities. But Dartmouth said, ‘no thanks’ to the ball.

I’ll offer one additional example. Several groups and individuals on campus struggled for three years for Dartmouth to extend an invitation to Daniel Pipes, who has been a professor at Harvard and University of Chicago. But, for his pro-Israel positions, he is shunned in this citadel of open-mindedness. It took three years of struggle to get an invitation. In the last days before his arrival, those organizing his appearance and speech were under heavy pressure to cancel. They did not capitulate, and Pipes gave a calm lecture on the Middle East conflict. He incited nothing.

Like COSO, each academic department has a budget. The Department of Film and Television Studies is no exception. And, like COSO, the decisions made on how money is spent seem to be heavy-handed and hard-headed.

COSO and the Film Department collaborated to bring “The Lost Film Festival” to Dartmouth. They used College money… my money, my friends’ money. And, by all accounts, it was a breeze. There is absolutely no telling what it cost to have this single man, his laptop full of MPEG files, and a cheap LCD projector, come to campus and play a few files.

It is just past nine o’clock as I write this. I was at this festival. As the man in charge set up his Apple notebook, he streamed a few pirated episodes of an HBO comedy show to the projector. He was unkempt, clad in loose black clothing. He spoke with a drawl. His speech was slow, unsure, removed. I’ve been around enough altered individuals to divine his pre-film fest activities. Turned out that the entire film festival consisted of him double-clicking MPEG files from his computer. Turned out, also, that these were videos downloadable for free at various internet sites. (What, I ask, is the college paying for here?)

I watched the proceedings bemused. ‘These are college kids’, I thought. ‘They are doing what college kids do.’ Then the films began.

It was standard fare to begin. Edited clips of George Bush slurring words. Nuk-u-lar. Collages of how many times he used the words “terror”, “Iraq”, and “weapons” in a speech he gave about terrorism, Hussein’s Iraq, and illegal weapons. Then a clip from an anarchist mocking the political circus that was election cycle 2004: Kerry’s drone and Bush’s twang.

The first clip that caught my eye was this. It is a ten minute justification for two teenagers who are currently being sued by several companies for their website, which gave detailed instructions on how to steal by printing out fake barcodes and sticking them on products in stores. The website actually generated these printable bar codes. Worse, the website also functioned as a clearinghouse for UPC records. You could actually access confidential information on what code a certain retailer uses for a certain product and produce a barcode to match it. News coverage of this debacle is here. The video combined anti-Bush rhetoric (“Why should I be punished for stealing when there is an illegal war on?”) with propaganda aimed at “liberating capital”- the organization’s goal. Their site has since been reduced to a screenshot.

The next video is what hurt and infuriated me. View it here. To some, it may simply be cause for a chuckle- in certain venues and in certain contexts. But I cannot describe what a sense of dread I felt after seeing his presented on a big screen- being beamed into the eyes of my peers. It was scary, to be frank. This “film” is a work by Barry McNamara. It explains the US conspiracy to take over the world. Compares America to Nazi Germany. Says America is beginning the 3rd World War. That we “have an insatiable appetite for conflict.” That “this ghastly molecule” - American corporations- “aim to turn the world into its very own enslaved global market. And the plan is well on the way.”

Then: “The attack by al Qaeda is on the World Trade Center is one response [to that plan].” (Image of burning Statue of Liberty)

When it ended, there was silence. Unlike the other films, which garnered chuckling, applause, exclaims, or murmurs, this one generated silence. Were my contemporaries internalizing what they had seen? Analyzing it? Or were they buying it? Or, like me, were they simply stunned?

There were more. A short Lord of the Rings parody in which the seductive “ring” is capitalism. The falling Twin Towers are superimposed over that film’s dark fortress.

There were more. But, frankly, my stomach turns to think of them.

This may be academic freedom. It may be equality and diversity. It just might be a good use of funding- of alumni money, of my gracious parents’ money.

More likely, this the latest example of something seriously wrong with the administration, when we cannot even get an evening soirée funded.