Dartmouth Review Impresses at “Occupy Wall Street” Debate

The Dartmouth Society of Investment and Economics hosted a not-so-mediated debate in the Rockefeller Centre last night to discuss differing views on the “Occupy Wall Street” protests.  Two unorganized participants in the Occupy Dartmouth solidarity movement attempted to outwit a panel of six professionally dressed columnists of the Dartmouth and the Dartmouth Review, one of whom is a nationally recognized debating champion.  Unprepared and disheveled, presumably from spending nights singing campfire songs outside of Collis and supporting a movement with no internal structure and no set goals, the poor people on the other side of the room had no chance.

The audience members asking questions of both sides represented themselves as more concise and socially aware than the Occupy Dartmouth participants, who resorted to calling the Dartmouth Review “mean” and sharing personal stories rather than clarifying the meaning of Occupy Wall Street.  Granted, what were they expected to do? The people who occupy Wall Street are equally confused.

The debate hinted at real discussion about union versus corporation influence on politics as well as regulation versus deregulation, but only the “conservative” debaters were able to cite specific examples and use facts to express themselves clearly.  Often, the “mean” columnists had to help finish the opposing side’s sentences. The anti-corporation students’ floundering attempts to paint Review and D columnists as heartless, uncaring people undermined any points they may have made.

Interesting that the solidarity movement can only produce two people to explain what they are doing and why, and that these people can’t pinpoint any solid goals.  Occupy Dartmouth is perfectly fine with sitting in a tent with guitars and beanies and jamming out, but when it comes to saying what supporters actually believe in, they balk.  Even Lennon’s lie-in had a clear, concise message.  Is Occupy Dartmouth just facetime for people who think it’s cool to not be mainstream?  Or are they simply doing their best to support a movement with no definite cause?

–Meghan Hassett