Letters to the Editor

Wednesday, February 3, 1999

Wright's Villainous Re-education

The following e-mail was forwarded to The Dartmouth Review.

To President Wright:

I am an educator. I teach law school at George Mason University. I teach my students to be independent thinkers. To think beyond mere stereotypes and to examine their views and defend their positions with reasoned analysis and arguments. An educator does not brainwash his students, but attempts to give them the confidence and tools to make up their own minds and to identify the good life.

You, sir, are NOT an educator. An educator does not engage in rampant stereotyping such as branding the entire single-sex fraternity system as 'sexist.'

An educator does not silence and censor opposing ideas and ways of life, an educator engages those ideas on an intellectual level and forces students to think about all aspects of an issue.

An educator does not deny students the right to choose their ideas and values for themselves. Forcing students to think your approved thoughts - and only your approved thoughts — is not the purpose of education. Reeducation is NOT education.

I would say that you don't understand the role of fraternities as an intermediary institution in the educational life of Dartmouth, as Toqueville would have recognized.

I would say that you fail to appreciate the role of fraternities in providing the 'little platoons' that link atomized students to the history and legacy of Dartmouth's greatness, as Burke would have recognized.

I would remind you that members of the Greek system provide the backbone of Dartmouth's spirit and traditions.

But that's not necessary, because you know all of that already. Indeed, it is because fraternities are intermediary institutions that stand between you and your re-educational goals that they must be destroyed.

It is because fraternities provide a comfort zone for students to consider and debate uncleansed ideas that they must be broken into atomized pieces, the better to remold them into the new Dartmouth mindset. It is because the fraternities carry on Dartmouth's traditions that they must be destroyed, as you see those traditions as evil.

Free speech and freedom of association are bulwarks of the American system of freedom. I am a law professor and an educator. I am a guardian of the law and its values, and a guardian of education and its values.

I am saddened to see you silencing dissenting opinions purely on the basis of their content. I am saddened to see you sacrificing the values of freedom of speech and association on the alter of censorship and political correctness.

I am saddened to see you give force to the most rampant and ignorant stereotypes about fraternities and fraternity members, with absolutely no empirical basis for your conclusions. I am saddened to see Dartmouth's future crushed under the weight of your narrow-minded and fanatical leadership.

Sincerely,

Todd J. Zywicki '88
Assistant Professor of Law
George Mason University School of Law
Fairfax, Virginia
Zeta Psi

Fraternities Legally Protected

To The Editor:

As a Dartmouth College '96 and loyal brother of Sigma Nu Delta Beta chapter, my first reaction to the Boston Globe news story 'Dartmouth fraternities going coed' was shock!

Upon further examination of the appropriate Dartmouth web pages, I have settled down somewhat — somewhat. The implied threat of force continues to agitate me.

I quote from Dartmouth's web site:

'The system should be substantially coeducational and provide opportunities for greater interaction among all Dartmouth students.'

As a principle for the Dartmouth residential and social system let me say that I agree with the conclusion of the Board. However... do not force this upon the Dartmouth community or any part thereof, the Greek Letter System in particular.

Dartmouth students may be young, and you may view them as 'kids,' but they are legal adults and how they choose to privately assemble is their business, and their right.

I fear that, in the name of this new principle, the College will strong-arm students into 'toeing the social lines.' This reeks of Big Brother, I am apprehensive and suspicious.

Dartmouth has the ability to (readily and without arbitration) de-recognize any groups deemed to be (in the eyes of the College) a 'part of the Dartmouth community.' De-recognition forces Dartmouth students to either abandon said groups or face expulsion!

Is this how the Dean and Board will 'implement' co-education in the Greek Letter System? Will groups that choose to remain single-sex be de-recognized on the grounds of violating the sacred 'third principle?'

Is coercion the new method of change at an Ivy League institution? If it is, you will convert this loyal alum into a bitter enemy.

If existing private groups choose to change from within, so be it. If the numbers of students interested in co-ed social groups increases, they can join the already existing co-ed houses or start new ones.

Why are you decreeing with whom Dartmouth students must socialize and assemble? Who forces you to do the same?

Warily Watching,

Michael Zigmont '96
New York, NY

Administration Misunderstands Greeks

To the Editor:

It is with sadness that I note the changes that have occurred within the college over the past few years since I graduated, but nothing has saddened or outraged me more than this latest announcement by the College to remove the Greek system from campus.

I don't purport to know what current students lives are like at Dartmouth. I hope they are every bit as full as mine was, but I do know that there are a couple of points here that don't make sense.

The Greek system feeds off of voluntary choice to survive, not by pressing young freshman into service. They do not draft new classes. If the College truly respected students' ability to make ever increasingly independent choices in their lives, they would not be seeking to eliminate possible social outlets.

I find this to be a little coddling and condescending of the College. If there is so much outcry for 'other' things to do, why hasn't anyone done it?

Yes, the College has millions, if not Billions of dollars in its coffers, and yet it has not put anything substantial towards student life that I know of or used in my years at Dartmouth. Most importantly, what is student life?

As far as I can tell from other students at other colleges and universities, it appears to focus on socializing and most often drinking. GASP!

How could we possibly admit that part of the college world is going out and hoisting a few with friends. It appears to me that the College would like to improve its image as a hard drinking school by removing the focal areas where parties are. Trust me, it won't really make the problem go away.

The second inconsistency is in the proposed problem this action will solve: gender relations. I hate to say it, but if there were no options for women at Dartmouth, the College would be right. Fraternities would be an unfair, exclusionary social device.

I would be all for getting rid of them.

The truth is that both sexes have access to all forms of the Greek system. Aren't there at least 3 co-ed societies? If these are such good ideas, why aren't there more on demand?

If co-ed organizations are so sound and so much in tune with solving the college's social problems as it appears to be presented, I cannot wait to see all the female and male sports teams integrated in the name of gender relations.

In fact, I think that would then violate title IX putting the college in a little bind. In terms of the raternities, also remember something called the U.S. Constitution which forbids the restriction of association, or more commonly, Freedom of Assembly.

If the College wants all those wonderful Federal Funds it gets, it had better re-examine it's legal responsibilities. Free choice is the foundation of this country, and Free choice should be the foundation of a Dartmouth education. I fear for any decision where freedom of choice is curtailed in the name of 'social mores.'

I cannot wait to see people who have different views on society and social activities denied their happiness by the college for not 'contributing' to Dartmouth's 'diverse and tolerant' atmosphere.

Sincerely,

Joshua Grant Marks '96
Bronxville, NY

Don't Mess With the Greek System

To The Editor:

Don't mess with the Greek system.

The board's plan to weaken it (or get rid of it altogether) will do nothing to enhance the social life in Hanover.

For the most part, it will only serve to alienate students and alums like myself.

The College is playing with fire. If the Board has truly made up its mind about mandating a co-ed Greek system, then I have made up my mind about the College.

I don't think that I am alone in this regard - a number of us have already decided to retract recently made financial pledges.

If the houses are forced to go co-ed, you may take this as the opportunity to remove my name and address from any and all mailing lists, especially those designated for fund raising. I have no interest in being associated with an alma neuter.

I am dead serious about this. This is war.

Sincerely,

Benedict E. Shim '91
New York, NY

Keep Fighting The Good Fight

To the Editor:

Keep fighting the good fight. And, I think there may be a silver lining for the Review.

I have talked to quite a few friends in the past day and a half who were no fans of The Dartmouth Review in their student days and they finally now can see the wisdom is The Dartmouth Review's long-standing suspicion of the administration.

Sincerely,

John Mowat '97

Gamma Delt My Home

To The Editor:

I was disappointed to learn of the trustees' decision to attack single sex fraternity and sorority organizations on campus. As an alumnus, I find that my Greek house is the place I feel most at home when I visit campus.

It is unfortunate that I will not continue to have the same experiences in visiting campus prospectively.

I did not contribute a single penny to Dartmouth during President Freedman's tenure because I disagreed with his efforts to mold Dartmouth into a more Harvard-like institution, and had planned to include Dartmouth in my giving plans this year.

Now, I will probably increase my contribution but redirect it to my fraternity in
the hope that they will be able to resist this misguided change.

Sincerely,

John McWilliams '92
Gamma Delta Chi

Letters to the Editor

Article Tools

Related Articles