For all the hustle and bustle surrounding student life, the Dartmouth plan and 10-week terms, the administration of this College is remarkably slothful. I am not just talking about Parkhurst, but also the alumni that have an important stake in Dartmouth's governance. While we are forced into a fast-paced schedule where sometimes only two weeks separate midterms and finals, the controversial alumni lawsuit is in its ninth month with no end in sight. In fact, it's not even moving toward an end right now.
This begs a very simple question: Has anything actually been done? Over the last year the Parkhurst-aligned loyalists and the rebels behind the Association of Alumni executive committee have laid bare the plains of war, drawing battle lines, devising tactics and applying their fierce war paint. You online readers can readily see this: Odds are there's a "Dartmouth Parity" ad to the top-right of this article and a "Dartmouth Undying" one below.
Today we're left with the various interest groups all blankly looking at each other in anticipation of the alumni election results. This important vote is expected to decide the fate of the lawsuit, but what thought has been given to life afterwards? What shall become of the countless alumni who support "parity" on the Board of Trustees, whose arguments will still bear merit even without a lawsuit? What about the other alumni who are willing to swallow or even support the governance changes?
Most importantly, what about us, the students? Student cronies from both sides have sent out rallying cries for their particular cause, but the student body has not been consulted. All I have seen is a few scattered attempts by the rebels to defend their actions and lecture us on the lawsuit in large, ineffective "debates." All I have seen are Ed Haldeman '70's occasional Blitz updates, telling us about Parkhurst's naturally negative view of the suit. All I've seen are two student petitions, followed by a period of destructive chaotic uproar that, like the Beta dispute and this term's "Hip Hop in the Hood" fiasco, quickly died away.
So what can we do to keep everyone happy? Well, call me crazy, but this concept of "discussion" might actually help! Everybody claims they've made extraordinary efforts to negotiate with their opponents, but if that is the case, then everybody has pretty terrible social skills. First, the alumni need to make peace with themselves. If the alumni do not come to an understanding about each other's views, especially surrounding the lawsuit, then the defeated group could easily have their opinions lost in the din of the victors' triumphal celebration.
Then, going even further with this wacky idea, perhaps the alumni could talk to students, and maybe Parkhurst would like to join in the fun! Students shouldn't have the only or even the largest vote on the matter, but certainly when our education is the central purpose of the College, we should be allowed to have input. It is oft forgotten that all of us are adults here, fully capable of maturely handling these situations. Maybe we students could even take our own initiative on these matters and conduct effective dialogue on our own terms.
Perhaps I preach a bit too much, but I am frankly tired of both the all-or-nothing strategy that has been adopted by our leaders and the general ignorance of student involvement. Everybody is doing what they think is in the best interests of the College, but defeating the opposing viewpoint in combat is not an effective diplomatic technique. If everyone -- students, faculty, administrators and alumni -- doesn't figure out how to communicate quickly, then the "vox clamantis in deserto" is going to be one of anguish, not reason.
