To the Editor:
The latest edition of The Dartmouth Review, one of the College's supreme right publications, states that I "ranted about the mythical systematic oppression of blacks in this country and proposed multiplying the SAT scores of black students by a factor of 1.2 in admissions decisions" in my column, "In Defense of Affirmative Action," which appeared in The Dartmouth on Feb. 2.
Well, indeed The Review is right but you have to scale down the tone of the editor's language considerably. When an ultra-rightist says "ranted" he means "explained in detail" and when he calls something "mythical" he means that it did happen but he would rather pretend it didn't. As for the second supposedly ridiculous proposal, you would have to read my editorial to make sense of it. When an unusual idea is surrounded with such bare background as it is above, it certainly sounds wacko. Seen in it's own light it makes sense.
I am almost always reluctant to come between individuals and their particular sets of idiosyncrasies, but when these idiosyncrasies run into the inexplicable and incomprehensible, they have to be put into proper context. Thus, a lot of the readership will be aware that The Review is best known for its characteristic fanatic dedication to malice and its unusual ability to work itself up into a feat of paranoia. So, a slightly differing opinion on a subject it considers sensitive is deemed wacko and destructive to the hallowed traditions of the great institution of Dartmouth College. I am willing to stand its uncouth language only because a strong response on my part will most likely prompt a digression from the original motion of the discussion: affirmative action or not. That would be most unfortunate but I am not careless enough to take the bait.
Those who read my original suggestion about ignoring racists should make a note of this amateurish attempt to sabotage debate. I hope the collective head of The Review can think up something a little more subtle in future.
