I am hard pressed to think of a reason why politicians would want to come to a college to give a speech. They certainly do not show up to court our votes. We young folk tend to stay home on Election Day, and many of us who take the time to vote do so in other states by absentee ballot. Politicians would also have difficulty arguing that they speak on campuses in order to engage in meaningful discussion with politically active students. After all, virtually every elected official whose views run contrary to those of campus activists are met with deaf protestors and disrespectful conduct. Perhaps the most infamous example came when Yale alumnus George W. Bush returned to his alma mater as president to deliver the commencement speech and many current Yalies saw fit to turn their chairs away from him when he spoke.
We all have the right to protest against a speaker or the message that a speaker is bringing to campus. We even have a right to ask insulting questions. My question is merely whether the use of these tactics is the most effective way to convey a message to a powerful national or international figure. A good example of the type of questioning I am talking about is an incident that occurred during the question and answer session following Senator John Sununu's recent speech here at Dartmouth. One student came with a prepared question about the Patriot Act, which was passed quickly after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks in order to give U.S. law enforcement officials new powers to monitor and detain terrorism suspects.
Some civil libertarians are understandably concerned that the Justice Department will eventually ignore the intent of the law and trample on the privacy of average citizens. The student in question summarized four or five sections of the Patriot Act for the Senator and pointed out alleged abuses of each of them by the Justice Department. Senator Sununu stood patiently during this lecture as he waited for an actual question to be asked. After reading a full notebook page of information, the student essentially asked the senator if he was comfortable with this distortion of the Constitution or if he and his colleagues had simply neglected to read the law before voting for it. Sununu answered the question effectively but he was visibly annoyed at the tone with which it had been asked.
Democrats are certainly not exempt from this sort of treatment on college campuses. Senator John Kerry, who is running for president, spoke to a packed house in the Rockefeller Center earlier this term and was interrupted by shouts during two of his responses, one concerning his vote on the Iraq war and the other on his opposition to gay marriage. Admittedly none of these distractions could be classified as anything more than mildly disrespectful, but they are examples of a pattern of behavior that occurs whenever a national figure speaks at Dartmouth.
So why should we be concerned over whether politicians feel "respected" when they visit Dartmouth? Well, it is more for our sake than for theirs. The Class of 2003 is the only class currently at Dartmouth that has experienced the New Hampshire presidential primary. Starting next term and continuing over the summer and into the fall and winter of next year, each of the nine or so Democrats who want their party's nomination will likely come up to Dartmouth to speak at least once or twice. We are also likely to host a major debate just as we did in the fall of 1999. Many, if not all, of these events will be televised or at least written about nationally, and the conduct of the Dartmouth student body will be on display. Three years ago, Dartmouth's Republican debate was interrupted repeatedly by protestors who ultimately accomplished nothing other than embarrassing themselves.
Ours is the primary that shapes the race for the presidency. All of the candidates will field questions from Dartmouth students and we should be prepared to ask good ones. There is nothing wrong with asking hard questions or pointing out inconsistencies in the candidates' stances on issues, but grandstanding with speeches of personal opinions masquerading as legitimate questions is not necessary. The point of asking questions is not to show how much you know but to find out how much the candidates know and what they think about the issues. You may disagree with what someone thinks about an issue, but showing your indignation is not the only way to argue your point, nor is it the best. For example, if you disagree with John Kerry's opposition to gay marriage perhaps a good question to ask him would be why his religious beliefs dictate his position on gay marriage but not on abortion.
Incisive, intelligent questions are often more disarming than overtly hostile ones. There are good reasons for us to want to shape ourselves into a more thoughtful and respectful audience. Aside from drawing more prominent speakers to our campus, our conduct as a student body on the national stage has an impact on the reputation of our college.