Brown Band-Aids VS. Board of Education

By Ryan D. Gorsche | Monday, November 17, 2003

At the beginning ofthe term, I wrote myfreshmen-issue editorial, suggesting to our pea-green newcomers that the Dartmouth administration posed the greatest danger. The administration was tearing down institutions of liberty and soiling long-standing traditions. The professors, I said, "generally...are a reasonable group, intent on providing you with an education." But, perhaps "generally" was far too generous; I speculate the latest decision at faculty board meetings was to discard their antiquated Marxist notions of anti-competition. They'll be damned if the administration gets all the boobery; the professors are becoming the biggest boobs of all.

In a recent Daily Dartmouth article about the absence of conservative faculty members, government professor Linda Fowler said, "To blame the academy for a dearth of [conservative] people seeking degrees really isn't useful." Right, we're running a re-education camp here, and those pesky conservatives should have known it all along; for English professor and poetess extraordinaire Ivy Schweitzer (author of the JFK Jr. tribute Millenial Icarus...yes, Ivy, he flew too high), when it comes to undergraduate admissions, conservatives need not apply: "Is the general atmosphere here 'liberal?' Yes, because we are a liberal arts institution, and liberal arts education is supposed to produce 'liberal' attitudes that encourage forward thinking ideas about inclusion, equality and innovation." Screw those Shakespearian scholars and classical thinkers, we need more professors from the Protest Studies Department A.N.S.W.E.R.ing students' questions.

But, a classically liberal education became a politically 'liberal' education, because of natural selection. According to Professor Fowler, liberals are drawn to subjects like history, religion, and philosophy, while conservatives pursue the career path of private practice. Yes, it's true. Conservatives would like to ponder the imponderables, but we're too busy flogging peasants and defrauding investors to spend time discussing cultural matters. The works and articles of Jacques Barzun, Hilton Kramer, Russell Kirk, Theodore Dalrymple, and the New Criterion are filled with helpful advice on exploiting hourly-wage workers or hoarding tax-free income in the Caymans. Oh wait, no they aren't; they are all about history, religion, philosophy, and art. But I thought only liberals liked those things, right?

Perhaps the reason conservatives are opining in journals rather than the classroom is that most college professors have reduced their studies to politically-correct navel gazing. English professor Shelby Grantham recently lectured her English 5 class on the racism of Band-Aids—a view she shares with illustrious company, such as Marlin Pals, poet, publisher, and planner of the Lincoln, Nebraska space-port. According to Grantham, Band-Aids are just another tool of oppression; the flesh colored strips are keeping minorities down with every scratch, cut, and scrape. When one student suggested Grantham was incorrect, and that perhaps 3M and Johnson & Johnson produce bandages to match the majority of their customers' skin color for purely economical reasons, Grantham referred to his viewpoint as that of a "white supremacist." Twice. And, once in writing.

In an e-mail to her class, addressed "Dear Ones, particularly White Ones,"—shut up, whitey, teach is talking—Grantham said, "I see that argument...as deriving at least in part from a white supremacist set of assumptions." Grantham's words are typical of campus discourse: Disagree with me and I'll pull out the P.C. trump card. You're a racist, sexist, misogynist, etc. Grantham and her ilk have long since realized the effectiveness of name-calling in a racially-sensitive and politically-charged arena. Name-calling stops discourse dead in its tracks, and it has driven many conservatives out of higher education.

Shelby Grantham can make all the arguments she wants; she can argue that Mickey Mouse Band-Aids are nothing more than a front for Walt Disney's belief in eugenics. But, at the end of the term, more than a few students from that class will feel Dartmouth defrauded them of $4,000—the cost of one class—and little can be done to recoop their loss.

So maybe Ivy Schweitzer is correct; maybe liberal education has become a politically 'liberal' education. After all, at the end of this year, $140,000 of my parents' wealth will have been successfully redistributed "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need": a few Ivy League professors with outlandish ideas.

Brown Band-Aids VS. Board of Education

Article Tools

Related Articles