I pretty much though that I had cornered the market on idiotic columns in The Dartmouth. Today, however, the editorial staff has proven me wrong. I am talking about the "editorial", which was more like a ridiculous diatribe, written by Jon Meyers '96 and Shilyh Warren '96 ["The Homogeneity of the Senior Symposium," April 16, 1996] about the homogeneity of the senior symposium's speakers. While their points were absolutely irrational, they did bring up an important question. What is going to happen to a society which becomes increasingly populated by people like these writers?
This is not a personal attack on these writers; it is an attack on the people of their ilk who find a way to bring racism and sexism into every aspect of our lives, including areas in which such debate is ludicrous. The first argument they make on the symposium being an "intellectual gift which perpetuates and prescribes racist and sexist societal norms" is a case in point. The Senior Symposium was meant to give students a chance to hear from some of the most important and creative people in the world. They chose a theme and then topics that were diverse in nature that fit into the grand picture. This is the best way to give students an opportunity to learn about a broad range of issues. Are these radicals suggesting that it is these successful individuals fault that they are white? Should we not invite these obviously worthy individuals to share their experience with us because they are white males? Are they not worthy to be recognized as accomplished individuals because they happen to have been born with a light colored skin pigment? This is completely ridiculous. Are we so concerned with providing racial and sexual equity that we must penalize some to promote others? This argument reeks of racism on the part of these politically correct "warriors" of Dartmouth College.
Another great point the erudite engineers of equal education came up with was the fact that the symposium focused a lot on man conquering nature. How could they do such a thing? Well, to be honest, the evolution of man has meant an increased need to coexist with nature in a way beneficial to both humanity and the environment. What do they want: our population to live in 10 x 12 huts, coexisting with nature like people did thousands of years ago? I mean if that's what they want, they should graduate from Harvard and live with their fellow alum, the Unabomber, in his hut in the middle of nowhere. The fact of the matter is that these men have made contributions that have improved humanity. The artificial heart has saved thousands of lives, and it opened the way to research on transplant of many other organs which has saved even more lives. If this "ideal of success" is troubling to some people, then something is wrong. If saluting an individual for saving thousands of lives, and learning from this individual speaking has become "un-politically correct", it is time for a serious re-evaluation of values for society.
The aforementioned writers also proposed that the Senior Symposium write a letter to the Dartmouth explaining that they had tried their best to get diverse speakers but it just didn't work out. Imagine how this letter would go "Dear Dartmouth, we tried to get a diverse population to speak at our symposium so that we would not be viewed as racist, sexist punks by the bastions of PC on this campus. Sorry, but we failed miserably. We were only able to get the second in command in Bosnia, the guy who made the artificial heart, and the first man to break the four minute mile. I know these guys are white males, so we would once again like to apologize because we couldn't bring in other people. We are just regular people caught in the racial and sexist system that abounds." This would be THE most farcical thing I have ever heard in my life.
In conclusion, I would just like to point out that Meyers and Warren did make one good point. The Class of 1996 has left the college with a message, and it is a sad one. The message is that people are stepping over a line. In pursuit of their ideal they have tried to create controversy where there is none, and have crossed the line of reason. I pray to God that the rest of the Class of 1996 is not imbued with this same destructive spirit, for in fighting for their cause of equality, these wards of political correctness have themselves become racist and sexist; they themselves have turned into the evil they despise the most. And it makes me sad to think that people like this are going to assume the power positions in tomorrow's world. So, for the sake of the future, people must begin to stand up for the voice of reason.
