Use the fields below to perform an advanced search of The Dartmouth's archives. This will return articles, images, and multimedia relevant to your query.
8 items found for your search. If no results were found please broaden your search.
(11/07/19 7:10am)
In the op-ed pages of our various papers of record and on cable news political talk shows, it’s not uncommon to see policies proposed by public figures like Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) referred to as high-minded and aspirational, but ultimately not pragmatic. For political pundits, the concept of “pragmatism” serves as a useful cudgel to wield against those earnest public figures with the aim of effecting meaningful political change. However, it is precisely this bold idealism that is necessary for effecting substantial, impactful change when it comes to tackling the climate crisis.
(05/17/19 6:10am)
There is a tendency to instinctively link the forward passage of time with the forward progress of society. It is tempting, and certainly reassuring, to rest one’s faith in the long arc of the moral universe. We have an abundance of new technological and social innovations that have dramatically increased the quality of life of people around the planet. But too often, accepting these innovations without skepticism leads to a failure to reckon with the nature of power and how it is exerted onto those with less of it. This growing trend of so-called progress has facilitated the exploitation of new technology by employers to further manage and control their workers in ways that range from merely annoying to deeply disturbing. Without the proper caution and concern for people’s fundamental rights and dignity, what we know as innovation can be weaponized to undermine personal sovereignty, subjecting people to the whims of corporate interests.
(04/18/19 6:15am)
There’s no shortage of pop psychological drivel that claims that one can tell a lot about people by what they eat. But in my experience, the more interesting question is how people react to what others eat. I have been Muslim my entire life, and I’ve rarely, if ever, experienced skepticism or pushback when I’ve declined to eat pork and bacon. What I chose to eat or not eat was my business, between me and my beliefs.
(04/11/19 6:00am)
In the wake of last month’s horrific massacre in Christchurch, New Zealand, all of the usual media phrases and buzzwords that have grown so familiar and tired were put back into circulation. First came the expressions of shock and sorrow, peppered with words like “unimaginable” that have not been applicable for a long time. Then came the discussion of the responsibilities of the news media, wherein a number of very serious-sounding people have the same conversation about not showing the video of the shooting for what seems like the 30th time.
(07/13/18 6:15am)
When someone’s entire career is predicated on ginning up controversy for the sake of attention, it is never really all that surprising to see them worm their way back into the media spotlight. Still, one could be forgiven for feeling slightly taken aback at seeing Milo Yiannopoulos’s name in the headlines again, given the ignominy of his departure from Breitbart News and the loss of his book deal after video surfaced of him repeatedly defending and downplaying the sexual abuse of minors. The capacity for shame, however, has never been much of an impediment for self-promoters of any political affiliation. Sure enough, Yiannopoulos made his triumphant return to the front pages of news websites in recent weeks with statements, characterized by his usual rapier-like wit and tact, that he “can’t wait for vigilante squads to start gunning journalists down on sight.”
(05/24/18 6:05am)
While it would be impossible to pay attention to every jumbled phrase that streams out of the President’s mouth, the impulse to ignore him is tempered by the sobering reality that his offhand statements often become the policy direction of the United States government. This seems to be the case with a comment he made recently in which he referred to MS-13 gang members as “animals,” a statement that the White House doubled down on Monday with a Breitbart-style press release entitled “What you need to know about the violent animals of MS-13.” Trump’s tendency to vilify all undocumented people and conflate immigrant communities with violent criminals is well-documented, and to parse his general incoherence in order to pretend he or his administration care to make any real distinction is intellectual dishonesty at its boldest. One only needs to ask what to make of the families of these so-called “animals” or the communities they live in to recognize the real intent of this rhetoric.
(05/10/18 6:15am)
The current political moment is mired in vulgarity, partly engendered by the election of a walking parody of a reality show host notorious for sexual indiscretions to the presidency following a campaign that started by calling Mexican immigrants rapists. It isn’t particularly difficult to see why calls for a return to dignity ring true in the minds of many Americans. This is especially true for a certain class of educated liberals who are largely shielded from the cruelest policies now being enacted by federal and state agencies throughout the country. For these people, the deepest defining characteristic of the Trump era is a sense of embarrassment, the profound humiliation of waking up every morning to some fresh bizarre horror and thinking, “we lost to this.”
(04/19/18 6:10am)
In a recent research report on the financial prospects of genome editing treatments for biotech companies, financial giant Goldman Sachs inadvertently sparked outrage by asking whether curing patients constitutes “a sustainable business model.” The report notes that while curing diseases is, in fact, the point of medicine, it is difficult to maintain “sustained cash flow” to developers and researchers when people do not require prolonged treatment. The reaction from the media and the general public was, predictably, one of immediate anger.