Question about atmosphere at Dartmouth

Colleges and Universities A-Z Dartmouth College
21

<p>
[quote]
ps: if you check the national statistics, Williams actually has more alcohol-related arrests on a per capital basis than does Dartmouth.

[/quote]
You can readily check 2003-2005 campus crime statistics at the USDOE</a> website. But they don't appear to support your claim. The total number of liquor law violations reported at Dartmouth over that time interval was nearly three times greater than at Williams. Since Dartmouth enrolls nearly three times as many students, the "per capita" rates appear to be roughly equivalent.</p>

<p>On the other hand, campuswide "per capita" rates may be misleading, because alcohol violations are typically an undergraduate concern. It's not usually an issue with graduate and professional students, because they are normally over 21, and are (usually) more mature. But in that case, Dartmouth only has about twice as many undergrads as Williams, yet has nearly three times the alcohol violations.</p>

22

<p>
[quote]
and a letter from the student paper:

[/quote]
Most weeks, the "Police</a> Blotter" section of the Daily Dartmouth is way more entertaining than any story that the Williams Record can offer. But compare the archives and judge for yourself.</p>

23

<p>This is nonsense...Dartmouth is a totally awesome school with amazing open minded students..F*** the review...I am the opposite of a jock and Dartmouth was an absolutely amazing experience. All my friends would agree. I never let the a-holes get to me. they never got to 90% of us.</p>

24

<p>Oh, the irony... ^^^</p>

25

<p>"F*** the Review" ....</p>

<p>...not exactly indicative of an open mind.</p>

<p>Have you every actually READ the Review - beyond its cover. If you haven't, you ought to. Even if you don't agree with what you find there, it may suprise you greatly.</p>

<p>How can you summarily dismiss writers like half-baked as "A-holes"?</p>

<p>" #108
half_baked
Junior Member</p>

<p>Join Date: Nov 2005
Threads:
Posts: 148
Josh,</p>

<p>I'm able to write for and put my name on the Review because it's the courageous thing to do. I concede that sometimes in the pursuit of a better world, dirty tactics have to be used. However, I will not stand by and allow the system that, though not without flaws, is ultimately capable of making a near-perfect world be eroded from the inside. I sincerely believe that a capitalist liberal democratic society that adheres to the classical Western tradition of liberty ultimately has the potential within it to fix all of the problems the world faces today. I am committed to defending that system and thereby defending the potential for progress and a better future.</p>

<p>I am convinced that my thoughts, words, and actions are not only incredibly good, but also undeniably just. This includes, but is not limited to, my advocacy for the Review. This is not to say that I am so arrogant as to suggest that I think every individual action I and the Review take is ethical, nor is it to suggest that I believe that I am infallible. What I'm saying is that I believe that our fight against anti-liberal, anti-capitalist, and anti-Western forces is both a pure and ethical struggle; it is very regrettable, in my mind, that sometimes we have to stoop to using the base, crude tactics often employed by our enemies. I want to emphasize that I really do feel regret for some of the things that have to be done when considered in isolation; however, when I weigh the negative consequences of these actions against the positive outgrowths that result, I'm content. A prime example is the recent cover of the Review. While it is undeniable in my mind that what we did was an offensive shock tactic, the result was positive. The Review baited several of the groups that it is critical of into organizing and protesting free speech: there were a group of protestors on the green doing the equivalent of burning books and calling for the blood of the royal family. They staged a Stalinist mock trial in order to extract a false confession to all manner of wrongdoings. I cannot say how happy I am, though, that the Review refused to recant. You've already made it your Emmanuel Goldstein; it will never, however, be your Winston Smith - we are not the dead.</p>

<p>In the end, like it or not, the Review won. The arguments that have been made by the paper about the disproportionate amount of power and consideration that is granted to vocal minority groups came to life that day when a mob assembled outside of Dartmouth Hall to call for an end to not only free speech, but free thought. The result was that those who were either moderates or previously politically apathetic were disgusted by what they saw and were forced to acknowledge that the Review was right after all. It wasn't just a bunch of conservatives sitting around bi tching. There might actually be a rollback of the foundations Western civil society in favor of pandering to every "disenfranchised" group; it might actually be time to stand up and speak out against that trend.</p>

<p>In an ideal world, I would be able to agitate for change while taking only the purest of ethical actions. However, the price that people like you and I pay for rejecting political apathy is that we're forced to get our hands dirty. In this way, I can both understand and empathize with why the NADs and other groups argued during the protest that those who write for the Review should be penalized for their actions. I'd like to think that you're not actually against free speech, just as I hope you realize that I'm not a racist. I'm a person of color myself and have been subjected to prejudice and bigotry as a result. However, I sincerely believe that my vision of the world has a better shot at fixing those problems than yours does.</p>

<p>I think that political efficacy and awareness confers a large amount of responsibility upon those who possess it. Think of it this way: everyone can agree that killing is wrong, but some people have to be soldiers who go out and do the fighting. Without them, the rest of us would have nothing. In a similar way, I think that 100% purity of conscience is a luxury of the meek and ignorant; I am neither. There are things that need to be done, written, and said that are not pretty. However, if I don't do it, who will? I do these things in the name of progress, and in the name of a better society for everyone. I think that being intimidated and beaten into submission in the face of resistance and criticism, as some Reviewers did in the wake of the protest, is cowardly. It's times like these that separate the true believers from the fairweather activists. I am neither a coward nor have I ever been afraid of a little bit of rain and thunder. The whole point of having genuine beliefs, and not simply being an opportunist, is that you always fight for what you believe in, not just it's when convenient.</p>

<p>I realize that all of this makes me sound like a really radical idealist conservative, and I'd say that's probably a fair characterization of me. I see myself as a defender of the West. I see myself as part of the vanguard against shortsightedness and the easy way out. I refuse to allow yet another well-intentioned, ill-fated idea add another cinderblock in American society's road to hell. I write for The Dartmouth Review because I'm convinced that it's the right thing to do.
Last edited by half_baked : 12-07-2006 at 01:19 AM."</p>

<p>Yes, Dartmouth is an "awesome" school with many diverse and "amazing" students. Included in those amazing students are those who write for the Review.</p>

26

<p>sorry, my bad, I meant disciplinary actions. Williams reported zero arrests and zero dorm violations which is rather surprising, IMO.</p>

<p>"alcohol violations are typically an undergraduate concern..."; concur, particularly since counting the grad students in med school and B-school is comparing apples and oranges:</p>

<p>2005 Dart - 76 arrests/4100 undergrads = 1.8%; liquor law violations 221/4100 = 5.4%</p>

<p>2006 Williams - liquor law violations- 144/2100 undergrads = 7.2% </p>

<p>Of course, statistics flucuate year to year, and 2005 was a down year for Dart and a high year for Williams, but the three year data do indicate plenty of drinking at Williams even without frats. If you wish to believe otherwise that is your right.</p>

27

<p>Sorry for the drunken rant, lol. Perhaps like Miss USA, the guy on Grey's anatomy, and Mark Foley I can enter Rehab and make it all go away. Or I can just chalk it up to an awesome Saturday night and leave it at that. I guess I'll do the latter.</p>

<p>Anyway, the reason I don't like the review is because I feel its innately selfish. I know NADs and like it or not, they do feel marginalized by the Indian symbol. I admire the review's incessant evangelism of the value of freedom of speech, but I find the usage of the Indian symbol a selfish mascot for their cause. I think if they dropped the issue the review would change from an antagonistic voice on campus to a viewpoint people might listen to.</p>

28

<p>I have not a single Dartmouth emblem emblazoned with an Indian Head, nor a cane nor any other such memorabilia as may exist. I have however observed official Dartmouth's position with regard to the Review since its inception and find it appalling. </p>

<p>I've posted this elsewhere, but it seems appropriate again...</p>

<p>Dartmouth has for the 25 plus years of my experience appeared to consider intolerance and vulgarity in almost all forms unacceptable. The principle exception being when the intolerance or vulgarity is directed at the Review or those associated with it. In those instances such attitudes seem to be encouraged and even theft and sometimes violence excused, because after all, it's the Review.</p>

<p>An Open mind? Long ago, the Review thought of a simple way to resolve the issue of the Indian symbol - send every Indian Tribe in the country a letter and ask them what THEY thought about it. As for the letter in question, its author, Dinesh D’Souza, is himself a person of color and its contents are about as plain vanilla as it gets. The letter seems rather straightforward, the 10-1 response in favor of the Indian symbol overwhelming, and the quotes (though likely cherry picked) clear and unambiguous.</p>

<p>Before you dismiss the Indian Symbol in such an out of hand fashion, perhaps you would like to read what the tribal chiefs had to say?</p>

<p>"
Dear Sir,</p>

<p>The Dartmouth Review, an independent weekly college newspaper, wants your opinion on an important issue.</p>

<p>Dartmouth College, New Hampshire, was founded about 200 years ago for the education of Indians.</p>

<p>For most of that time, Dartmouth had an Indian symbol, the profile of a brave, similar to that on the buffalo nickel, to represent its tradition and founding purpose. The symbol appeared on athletic uniforms.</p>

<p>However, 10 years ago, the Indian symbol was discarded because some Native Americans and others felt that it stereotyped the Indian race. So, for the past 10 years, Dartmouth has been without a symbol.</p>

<p>Currently, some of the alumni and students would like to bring back the symbol, again, to honor the tradition and purpose of the college.</p>

<p>Do you think Dartmouth should bring back the Indian? Do you feel that the symbol is an honor or a dishonor?</p>

<p>We feel your opinion in this matter is important and greatly appreciate your
comments and suggestions. Thank you.</p>

<p>Sincerely,</p>

<p>Dinesh D’Souza</p>

<p>Also in October, 1984, phone interviews were conducted to supplement the survey. Following are some of the remarks from those interviews.</p>

<p>Leaford Bearskin, Chief
Wyandotte Council
Miami, Oklahoma</p>

<p>‘Stanford changed their name some time ago because some idiot decided it was offensive to him.’</p>

<p>‘There are a lot of do-gooders in the Indian world. I’m not one of them.’</p>

<p>Lewis H. Barlow, Chief
Ottawa Council
Miami, Oklahoma</p>

<p>‘I think you should bring the symbol back.’</p>

<p>‘We have the Kansas City Chiefs. They use a designer from our tribe.’</p>

<p>‘I think it’s fine. I can’t see why anybody would object. We have 63 tribes in Oklahoma- the second greatest Indian population in the country- and I’ve never heard any objections like the ones you’re telling me about.’</p>

<p>Darwin Hill, Tribal Director
Tonawanda Band of Senecas
Council of Chiefs
Basom, New York</p>

<p>‘I was aware of the controversy at Dartmouth and at other colleges.’</p>

<p>‘I really like it at those schools.’</p>

<p>‘I was sorry to see the universities do away with it.’</p>

<p>‘Sometimes the Indian was used badly. But those were exceptions. The actual symbol was okay.’</p>

<p>Lawrence Astor, Chairman
Reno-Sparks Indian Council
Reno, Nevada</p>

<p>‘Bring the Indian back.’</p>

<p>‘There was a period in time when people protested everything.’</p>

<p>‘They weren’t against the Indian symbol so much as they were trying to get recognition.’</p>

<p>‘It is self-destructive for Indians to try and do away with their heritage.’</p>

<p>Ruth Harris, Tribal Secretary
San Carlos Tribal Council
San Carlos, Arizona</p>

<p>‘In my opinion, the Indian symbol is not just okay but good.’</p>

<p>‘Tell your friends at Dartmouth to bring it back.’</p>

<p>‘I think most of the people who object to the Indian symbol are not Indians. They are envious of the symbol, probably.’</p>

<p>Justin Lola
Indian Township Passamaquoddy Reservation
Princeton, Maine</p>

<p>‘I think it would be nice to bring the Indian symbol back.’</p>

<p>‘It reflects tradition and the college’s founding.’</p>

<p>‘It’s fine by me. It sounds good. I see no problem.’</p>

<p>Ralph F. Dana, Governor
Pleasant Point Passamaquoddy Reservation
Perry, Maine</p>

<p>‘As long as the symbol doesn’t depict Indians in a derogatory way, it’s okay.’</p>

<p>Charles Carlyle, Member
Ak Chin Community Council
Maricopa, Arizona</p>

<p>‘Bring the Indian back.’</p>

<p>‘The people who said, ‘get rid of the Indian,’ are probably radicals.’</p>

<p>‘Our people would not mind a bit.’</p>

<p>Clyde Sanchez, Governor
Picuris Pueblo
Penasco, New Mexico</p>

<p>‘I have no argument about the Indian.’</p>

<p>‘The people who are against the symbol are misinformed.’</p>

<p>‘You have to be careful not portray the Indian as a savage at all times.’</p>

<p>‘I would certainly favor a dignified Indian symbol.’</p>

<p>Clarinda Smith, Secretary
Fort McDowell Mohave-Apache Community Council
Fountain Hills, Arizona</p>

<p>‘No. We wouldn’t have any objections to you using the Indian.’</p>

<p>‘There is the Phoenix Indian High School here which has the Indian symbol.’
Robert Burns, Office Director
Houlton Maliseet Band Council
Houlton, Maine</p>

<p>‘My opinion is that provided the symbol doesn’t portray a parody, it’s okay.’</p>

<p>‘The Cleveland Indians were so named in honor of an Indian player named Louis Sockalexis.’</p>

<p>‘Previously, they were the Cleveland Spiders.’</p>

<p>‘If the symbol doesn’t denigrate Indians, I think it would be appropriate to bring it back, given Dartmouth’s commitment and heritage.’</p>

<p>Bonnie Stevenson, Tribal Officer
Delaware Executive Committee
Anadarko, Oklahoma</p>

<p>‘Personally, I don’t find the Indian offensive or discriminatory. I like the idea myself.’</p>

<p>‘It is something we Indians can relate to.’</p>

<p>‘Oklahoma University near us had the Big Red for its mascot. A few Indians found it offensive, but the majority of the Indian people didn’t.’</p>

<p>‘They did away with the Big Red at Oklahoma State. I found that an insult.’</p>

<p>Mildred Cleghorn, Chairman
Fort Sill Apache Committee
Apache, Oklahoma</p>

<p>‘I think it’s alright to have the Indian.’</p>

<p>‘Go for it all- Indian dances, Indian cheers. It is something we support.’</p>

<p>‘Some of the portraits I’ve seen I wouldn’t care for. But something like the Indian head on the nickel- that’s fine.’</p>

<p>Aquila Tilton, Secretary
Iowa Executive Committee
Hiawatha, Nebraska</p>

<p>‘I don’t have any problem with the Indian.’</p>

<p>‘I’m in favor of it.’</p>

<p>‘I’d play down the criticism. I don’t think it is valid.’</p>

<p>Truman Jefferson, Secretary
Crow Tribal Council
Crow Agency, Montana</p>

<p>‘I think, as a new tribal official, that the Indian symbol is dignifying to Indians.’</p>

<p>‘I was very diasppointed when Dartmouth got rid of the Indian.’</p>

<p>‘It is not a racial issue.’</p>

<p>‘I think it helps to educate people about Indian culture. Our culture is neglected everywhere else. I hope Dartmouth won’t be the same.’</p>

<p>‘I was planning on attending Dartmouth but I took the wrong turn and went elsewhere.’</p>

<p>‘There’s nothing wrong with pride in one’s past.’</p>

<p>Francis Allen, Tribal Administator
Kickapoo Council
McLoud, Oklahoma</p>

<p>‘I thought that Dartmouth was still called the Indians.’</p>

<p>‘What is the symbol now?’</p>

<p>‘If there is no reminder, people will forget who we are. They will forget what people did to us.’</p>

<p>Ken George, Chairman
Forest County Potawatomi General Council
Crandon, Wisconsin</p>

<p>‘Well, I think you should keep it.’</p>

<p>‘Maybe have something like the eagle beside it.’</p>

<p>‘It’d be an honor.’</p>

<p>Franklin McLain, Member
Kaw Business Committee
Kaw City, Oklahoma</p>

<p>‘I would venture to say, the symbol is good. I’m proud to be an Indian. I don’t have any problems with it.’</p>

<p>‘The federal government has been trying to do away with all Indian treaties. But we’re here to stay. And we plan to be here for a long time.’ "</p>

29

<p>OdysseyTigger, most people I know at Dartmouth have come to the conclusion that the Review LIKES to provoke the student body. Thus, it is obvious that the insensitivity of the Review's covers and condescending remarks incite student reactions. However, I don't know what you are referring to when you mention theft and violence towards the Review. Also, the Review isn't a person born with a certain color of skin or heritage -- I don't think it deserves any apologies for the "intolerance" it has provoked.</p>

<p>Also, have you actually spoke with any Native American students at Dartmouth? I wonder what they'd say about the football team's "Holy Cross Sucks" t-shirt. If you haven't seen it, its a picture of a Holy Cross crusader bowing in front of a Dartmouth Indian. I honestly don't care what these people the Review interviewed have to say about our symbol -- I want the students at Dartmouth to fully embrace it before it becomes official again. However, I really can't imagine that happening any time soon.</p>

30

<p>Another "open mind" trying to restrict, as half-baked put it, freedom of thought? "I don't know" and "I don't care", is that it? ugh</p>

<p>try reading “The Dartmouth Review Pleads Innocent: Twenty-Five Years of Being Threatened, Impugned,Vandalized, Sued, Suspended, and Bitten at the Ivy League’s Most Controversial Conservative Newspaper” (ISI Books), edited by James Panero and Stefan Beck.</p>

<p>or going back a lot further, try Ben Hart's "Poisoned Ivy"</p>

<p>The Review and its writers deserve LOTS of apologies. </p>

<p>Oh... by the way... will it still be "your" symbol when you become an alumni?</p>

31

<p>ummm peace everyone? <em>waves white flag</em>
i'm glad to hear such a variety of opinions, i will admit that.
but i dont want things getting hostile ^^;
i believe i might have started quite the mess...</p>

32

<p>:)</p>

<p>should be demonstration enough that Dartmouth is a place where a diversity of opinion can and will be heard....(though not necessarily listened too :) )</p>

<p>yes there is a conservative voice of long standing on campus
but by no means is it the voice of the majority there</p>

33

<p>Im listening! love to the diversity of opinions at Dartmouth.</p>

<p>OdysseyTigger, are you a current student, an alum, or a parent? </p>

<p>Also, yay to me for almost being done with my take-home lit essays.</p>

34

<p>:)</p>

<p>alum ...hence my question about "your" symbol</p>

<p>and parent (although S1 is headed to Harvard not Dartmouth)</p>

35

<p>So, this is a bit off topic, but I have a few questions.</p>

<p>First, where can I find a "Holy Cross Sucks" t-shirt? I looked all over and didn't find one until they stopped selling them.</p>

<p>Second, where can I find one of those shirts passed out by one leftist group or another depicting the "Dartmouth White Man" or something like that? It was absolutely hilarious, I really want one.</p>

<p>Yes, I confess: I own an Indian shirt. I took possession of it in a moment of weakness; I allowed myself to brutally oppress an entire race of people simply to put off the laundry for one additional day. I also own an Indian head cane. I'm a squash player, you see - the constant hither-tither of running after a flat rubbery ball extracts quite a toll on the knees, and the cane was the only thing that allowed me to have any mobility at all. And besides, if I'm going to be labeled a villian for my affiliations anyway, I might as well look as diabolical as possible, I suppose. I strike quite the pose, I think, when I walk down Webster Avenue with my Indian shirt, my cane in one hand, and the still-beating heart of a young orphan in the other hand.</p>

<p>It is true, we do drink. But we don't do so because we are boorish or crude; no, it is thirst that drives us to alcohol. Those who have never tried New Hampshire tap water cannot begin to fathom the depths of despair that we who brave the North Country experience before turning to Keystone and cheap $7 vodka. Not for entertainment, mind you, but for survival.</p>

<p>The one major downside of the College that I love so much is that the people who come here really tend to have neither a sense of humor nor any appreciation for sarcasm. I know I personally possess neither of these gifts... perhaps I should have gone with my gut around this time last year and have enrolled in my second choice: UC Berkeley. Given my current social and political inclinations, I feel certain that life out West in full view of San Francisco would have been perfect for me.</p>

36

<p>"leftist."</p>

37

<p>Loved that post half_baked! congrats !</p>

38

<p>Hmm i've never read the review myself, so this just conjecture on my part, but it seems like the reputation the review has right now is unwarranted if it's source is an argument over mascot symbols. I'd say it comes to the same thing as the cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad in the Danish newspapers. They were obviously seen as offensive by a cultural minority, but the reaction to them was completely over the top. I mean, yes, the cartoonists probably should have taken care when messing around with the subject, especially given recent events, but to have them labeled heretics and putting out a hit on their heads was obviously NOT justified. The analogy applies perfectly to the review. While it probably should take care that what it publishes could offend certain groups, the negative stereotypes sound a bit exaggerated.</p>

39

<p>oh, oh! Paloma!</p>

<p>I'm a straightlaced quasi-conservative boy... perhaps we should continue the miscegenation proposed by our Spanish ancestors! (Sorry Elisabeth, we have cultural similarities. Sweden? ABBA! A-Teens... and Mexico?)</p>

<p>But yeah... The Review... What's up with that? Can someone give me a sparknotes version of the whole Native American thing in the newspaper?</p>

40

<p>Go back to the posts on this forum from November of this year and read up on it. Some vocal opponents of the Review as well as some of the staff members of the paper commented at length on this subject. This topic is more or less at the center of the campus political dialogue, so it's worth looking into.</p>