723 items found for your search. If no results were found please broaden your search.
“Isn’t it dreadful? Here we are, two officers of the German General Staff, discussing how best to murder our commander-in-chief,” said Henning von Tresckow, a major general in the Wehrmacht, as he plotted with his fellows to assassinate Adolf Hitler. This will not be a comparison of President Donald Trump to the forces von Tresckow and his contemporaries faced when they defied their government, their orders and their training as soldiers in an effort to bring about the end of Nazism. This is, however, a laudable example of the morality of government employees who stood up for their country even when it meant working against their leader.
“This House will in no circumstances fight for its King and Country.” That was a motion passed by the Oxford Union Society on Feb. 9, 1933. Argued by pro-Soviet students and philosopher C.E.M. Joad, the motion supported a pacifist United Kingdom, one built upon peace and tolerance. It was heartily opposed by, amongst others, Quintin Hogg, later Baron Hailsham of St. Marylebone, later a Conservative Party politician, who refused to shake his opponent’s hand at the debate’s conclusion, because he was so angered by what he saw as an unpatriotic resolution.
There is a literary motif of a line of thrones filled with carvings of kings and queens: the first rulers with wise, kind faces in a line that descends into an ending of cruel and twisted effigies. Here lies a metaphor for the sweep of history, with societies first valuing noble, gracious sovereigns, then — through strife and corruption — selecting instead those of lower moral bearing.
As if questions of so-called fake news could not get any more lurid and absurdist, on Tuesday night Americans were treated to a report published by Buzzfeed news that, amongst other things, claimed that President-elect Donald Trump paid a slew of Muscovite prostitutes to defile a bed used by President Barack Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama while Trump watched. Whether the claim is true is, ultimately, relatively immaterial: millions of Americans will hear it and believe it, many millions more will dismiss it as propaganda regardless of its provenance or any process undertaken to confirm or rebut the accusations.
Judging from internet memes, press coverage and the national election, 2016 was the year the world went mad. To paraphrase the Broadway hit “Hamilton,” the world seemed to have turned upside down. One piece of unity amongst a year of division came from grief, however. Celebrity death after celebrity death marred 2016 — and, as the baby boomer stars of our youth age, that trend will likely accelerate.
This election was about race. This election was about gender. This election was about sexuality. This election was about religion. This election was about inequality.
Tuesday is Election Day. After a presidential race that has taken the better part of two years, and feels like it has taken the better part of a decade, we can finally see the light at the end of the tunnel. A great deal of ink has been spilled in this section concerning the presidential election. As important and historic as the presidential race is, this editorial is not about that; endorsements were made and what needed to be said was said. However, there is a lot more than just the White House at stake this coming Tuesday.
Every four years, presidential candidates and their supporters stress the importance of the current election. Hyperbolic statements about the apocalyptic future that would be in store for us if the other person wins color every cycle. However, we can say, without a great deal of reservation, that this election is at least one of the most important in the last quarter century — or even in the last 80 years, according to some experts. Before us stand two candidates that seem to be diametrically opposed, if not on every single issue then at least in experience, values and demeanor. It is traditional for The Dartmouth to endorse a candidate for president. During this election in particular, we feel a responsibility to make the case to all of our readers, whatever their political affiliations, that there is only one choice to be made if our country’s prosperity, future and values are to be secured. That is why, after much deliberation, we the editorial staff have chosen to endorse Hillary Rodham Clinton for President of the United States.
In the weeks leading up to the election, we as potential voters are bombarded with a constant stream of messages and calls to action. From electing the proper presidential candidate to stave off impending doom to making sure that we vote on the newest amendment to “preserve family values,” every election comes with a tidal wave of contradicting directions from both sides of the aisle. One message it seems that everyone can agree on, however, is that everyone who can register to vote should do so to make sure that they can cast a ballot on Election Day.
Most Dartmouth students were introduced to the new house community structures, or “centers,” when they arrived on campus this fall. The new buildings, one of which is located behind Gile Hall and the other behind the tennis courts next to the Alumni Gym, are a product of the new house community system implemented earlier this year as a part of the “Moving Dartmouth Forward” policy initiative. The building by Gile, a wooden, two-story structure, is meant for School and Allen Houses, while the other is meant for South and North Park Houses. Both buildings were designed to be temporary spaces where students from those houses — and others, if they so please — can talk, work and create a social environment all their own. It is commendable that the administration is trying to provide social spaces for a student body that has had limited access to alternative options. This focus on funneling resources and time into the house community system, however, seems like an empty gesture when there is still so much to be done with the housing system itself.
Election Day is fast approaching. Between the campaigns to register — you really should, it isn’t hard — and the endless speculation over every interruption, fact check and sniffle from Monday’s debate, it seems like the presidential race is all that is on anyone’s mind at the moment. In getting to this point, several people’s preferred candidates on either side have been knocked out of the race. Many progressive, generally younger Democrats bemoan the end of Bernie Sanders’ quixotic attempt at the presidency, and scores of moderate Republicans have expressed uneasiness over having Donald Trump — a man for whom “problematic” is an understatement — represent their party. Because of the numerous real or perceived flaws in both of the candidates, many of which have been reinforced through specific media coverage, the narrative for this election for many Americans has become about choosing between the lesser of two evils.
Any liberal arts college can be characterized by its emphasis on the written word. Be it literature, philosophy, mathematics, chemistry or anything in between, a liberal arts education places an explicit emphasis on the ability to effectively communicate, through writing, about whatever your area of study happens to be. As a liberal arts college, Dartmouth should be no exception, and it doesn’t claim to be. Indeed, two of the first nine classes a student ever takes at Dartmouth are supposed to be dedicated to ensuring that they can write clearly and effectively. After the much-lauded first-year writing requirements, however, it seems like the College’s emphasis on, and possibly respect for, writing declines significantly. It is treated as a means of getting ideas across about your subject of interest, and not much more. The fact that Dartmouth doesn’t have a writing, creative writing or communications major severely disadvantages us as students and makes us considerably less competitive going into the real world after graduation.
For many Dartmouth students, the beginning of the fall term is one of the most exciting times of the year. People are starting new classes, reuniting with friends and joining new groups or taking on new positions in their current organizations. For incoming students, that excitement (and nervousness) is often multiplied tenfold. Between the nervous excitement of a new place and new people, the Dartmouth centric fervor of Trips and all the amazing programming directed at first-years, it can be easy for all of us, new and returning students, to get swept up in the excitement of the beginning of the school year. Amid all that energy and celebration, however, there needs to be some somber consideration of some of the more sinister realities that come with starting a new school year. Perhaps the most frightening and tragic of those realities is that over a thousand people, and thousands more across the country — are at an age where they are much more likely to be the victims of sexual and relationship violence than in any other time in their lives.
Dartmouth’s mission statement says that the College “educates the most promising students and prepares them for a lifetime of learning and of responsible leadership.” The faculty, for the most part, prepare us by teaching students how to think broadly on a large range of issues. Yet the Center for Professional Development promotes the idea that there are only a few opportunities out of college, namely finance or consulting. As a college that touts itself as a liberal arts school, Dartmouth must extend its career services so that it truly prepares all students for “a lifetime of learning and responsible leadership.”
As the spring term comes to a close, there are various things on the minds of Dartmouth students. Storing their belongings and moving out of their rooms, preparing for final exams and final papers and wondering if their bodies will ever fully recover from Green Key may be just a few among them. As finals loom closer and closer, students prepare themselves not only for their tests, but for another, equally concerning possibility: that their final may get streaked. For decades, it has been a time-honored tradition for Dartmouth students to run through the biggest finals on campus completely naked, save for the occasional mask. Even though everyone who does this probably means to carry out a funny, well-intentioned prank, it can actually be a lot more harmful than people realize.
If you’ve been on Facebook over the past few days, you’ve probably seen the hashtag #fight4facultyofcolor. Started in part as a response to the College’s decision to deny English professor Aimee Bahng tenure, the hashtag encapsulates a conversation that is taking place at both the College and the national level. Various higher education institutions, including Harvard University and Yale University, have seen discussions about minority faculty attraction and retention.
One of the most interesting characteristics of a Dartmouth education that distinguishes us from other similar institutions is the famous — or infamous — D-Plan. Not only well known as a death sentence for college romances, the D-Plan even serves to set us apart from other schools that use a quarter system. The strangest part of our system, which has prompted many a question like “Wait, you have to go to summer school?” is Dartmouth’s sophomore summer.
Mental health is complex and nuanced, and therefore many aspects of mental health are widely misunderstood, then neglected due to a combination of outdated stigmas and a lack of comprehensive scientific understanding. People often assume that mental health means only the diagnosis and treatment of mental illness, ignoring the fact that everyone requires some mental upkeep, regardless of whether or not their specific experience fits the textbook definition of a mental disorder. There are few times in someone’s life when they are at greater risk of mental health challenges than when they are in college. Students face everything from experiencing loneliness, to dealing with, separation from one’s family to determining career paths. All of this exacerbates issues that many are already struggling with, and the data reflects this. According to the National Alliance on Mental Illness, one in three students reports having experience prolonged periods of depression, one in four students reports having suicidal thoughts or feelings, and one in seven students reports having difficulty functioning at school due to mental illness. The director of NAMI, Ken Duckworth of Harvard Medical School, highlights the importance of this issue, saying, “Undiagnosed mental illness can cause people to withdraw socially, drop out of school, engage in substance abuse, or exhibit other unsettling behaviors.” With the importance of mental health to our well being, as well as the risk that college students face regarding mental illness, one would think that this would be a top priority for schools all around the country, especially Dartmouth. However, the reality is that the College is not doing nearly enough to take care of us mentally, especially considering its stated goals in the past.
On April 20, the Dartmouth Entrepreneurial Network hosted a panel on the digital rights of artists. The panelists agreed that there needs to be a cultural shift in how we think about the value that content creators provide.
This weekend, the Dartmouth undergraduate student body will have the chance to decide which of their peers will represent them in Student Assembly for the upcoming year. The two most talked-about races, for president and vice president, involve six and four candidates this year, with each vice presidential candidate aligning themselves with a presidential one. In the past, The Dartmouth’s editorial board has endorsed a candidate. Two year’s ago we abstained from doing so. As this year’s election approaches, we have chosen to do so again. Instead, we want to discuss some of the troubling trends in Student Assembly elections and the future of our student government.