Dartblog

In the last post, Jenn discussed a number of attacks on the traditional (classical) liberal value of free speech, including a debate in the spring of 2006 over immigration here at Dartmouth. In the first post (!) on the fantastic, new and improved Dartblog, I would like to look in to that particular incident in greater detail, for the larger message and a bit of humor.

The series of events was precipitated by an Immigration Solidarity Rally, a series of speeches held in the middle of the Green. This event was coordinated with marches across the country in support of, variously, illegal immigration, particular bills before Congress, and more open immigration policy generally. The rally at Dartmouth would have been decidedly unremarkable were it not for a banner plane commissioned to fly over the event bearing the words, “Illegal are criminals, send them back.”

The intellectual (and anti-intellectual) conflagration that alighted thereafter was fueled by the vandalism of College Republicans posters advertising club meetings. Specifically, posters depicting a municipal roadside indicating something like ‘illegal immigrant crossing,’ were replaced by disgusting posters to the effect of ‘Remember when Blacks Voting was Illegal? Come to College Republicans to make sure things never change.’ Quite obviously the progressive College Republicans on the Dartmouth campus deplored the fraudulent posters issued in their name, and the non-CR, perpetrators were quickly found out.

These happenings set the stage for what was billed as a “U.S. Immigration Policy Discussion.” When venues were changed due to the overwhelming turnout of at least 200 students who finally packed in to Dartmouth 105, the ‘discussion’ got underway. The discussion, by the by, was to be mediated by two professors, who quickly revealed their lack of objectivity (to say the least) by calling students racists. If I recall correctly, the first student to be granted this moniker was an ostensibly Hispanic student who volunteered his personal experience of Mexico heritage. When the same student began to speak about the need to respect the rule of law, he was called a racist by one of the professors. Specifically it was the term ‘illegal immigrant,’ as opposed to ‘undocumented alien(?)’ that caused the professor to slur the student. This term was used, before and after by students seeking to demean the persons and distort the views of other students (read: conservatives) with whom they disagreed.

Perhaps my favorite moment came when Rahul Sangwan ‘07, then-president of the College Republicans and a fellow of Indian descent, made an eloquent equity argument—that it is unfair for some people to cut to the head of the immigration line while others lawfully wait their turn. About two rows forward the next girl was recognized to speak; she ostentatiously stood up, surveyed the crowd as though she were about to begin an inspiring sermon, and then turned her gaze patronizingly towards Rahul. Pursing her lips and clucking disapprovingly, she looked around once more and said, “I don’t know if you know this but (cluck)… you brown.” The girl gave a few self-satisfied nods and sat down as about half the crowd broke in to wild applause as though her statement had demolished Rahul’s well-reasoned argument and convincingly made the case for illegal immigration.

Here is another portrayal of this series of events from the time and some of my own views on the subject.