Review Reviews The David Network’s 2024 Conference: The Swampy City

Academia has long been, if not captured, at the very least influenced by the left wing of American politics. The prospect of left-wing “indoctrination” is a source of much outrage on the right, especially among those members of the right whose children are currently or are soon to be enrolled in college. Yet parents should not be entirely pessimistic about the state of academia. There are conservative institutions on many college campuses, and powerful interest groups are working to build right-wing networks to rival even the pervasive presence of the left. Perhaps the most successful of these would-be institutions is the David Network, which hosts an annual conference of conservative students from the eight Ivies—apparently Cornell counts—as well as MIT and Stanford. Its stated purpose: to foster the proliferation of religious and socially conservative values. 

This year’s conference took place during what must have been the coldest weekend in the history of the Swampy City. Whereas most of the time D.C. is smothered in a soggy and oppressively humid blanket of air, on the weekend of January 20 it was veritably frozen. Icy winds whipped through the streets of the city, and at night temperatures dropped below twenty degrees. 

Upon arriving in D.C., we rushed to our hotel with all possible haste, not having anticipated that the climate at our destination would so closely match that of Hanover itself. But being Dartmouth students, we refused to be fully deterred by a mere chill, and so, after stowing our luggage in our hotel rooms, we set out in search of a late dinner. 

The David Network conference opened fittingly with a networking breakfast. Unfortunately, this breakfast was at 8:00am. While perhaps not too early for the conference’s more ascetic attendees, we in The Review were unable to make that time after having gone to bed so late the previous night. We were, however, able to attend the networking lunch. The food was typical political conference fair—decent looking but extremely bland. The dining room itself was filled with tables, placed so close together that the backs of the chairs almost touched. After about an hour of talking with various professionals, the lunch ended, and we members of the Dartmouth delegation beelined to different speaking events. 

In the mid-afternoon, a surge of eager students flooded towards the job fair, with aspirations of leaving a lasting impression on a Senate staffer or catching the eye of a prominent political journalist, all in the hope of securing an on-the-spot job offer. However, the harsh reality soon set in as they entered a modestly sized events room, packed to the brim with fellow attendees, sandwiched between a bustling hallway and a cafeteria. 

Like sardines squeezed into a can, students maneuvered into the job fair, scanning for any available spot at a table. Yet despite their rehearsed elevator pitches and infectious positivity, the majority of potential employers echoed the same sentiment: “We encourage you to apply online…” With that, it dawned on students that their carefully crafted pitches and optimistic demeanor had merely lumped them together with countless other online applicants.

One writer went first to a panel on conservative journalism. The three speakers—the National Review’s Jack Butler, the Washington Post’s Jason Willick, and the Washington Free Beacon’s Aaron Sibarium—were some of the most prominent among young conservative journalists. The panel covered a wide range of topics, from the problems of conservative journalism to why, despite those problems, young people should still go into the industry. The key problem they identified was the tendency to stray into cheap rhetoric and rabble-rousing in order to generate shock value for short-term gain. 

In the speakers’ narrative, much of modern conservative journalism has fallen into the trap of prioritizing “owning the libs” over communicating actual news or coherent and meaningful opinion. Sibarium discussed the left’s advantages in journalism, in particular its willingness to do “real work.” This concern factored into a broader worry the panelists expressed about a trend of anti-intellectualism on the right. Yet the panelists argued that journalism, if done right, can be rewarding. Because so much right-wing reporting is lazy and ultimately ineffective, there are in fact many opportunities for those interested in conducting real reporting. 

Following the speaking event, most of us regrouped and sought out other conservative leaders. Several attendees went to a talk headlined by Erik Prince, the founder of the private military contractor company Blackwater. Rather than regaling us with war stories, the mercenary focused instead on the idea of conservatism in business. 

While most of the topics were deemed unremarkable, there were a few points that resonated with the members of The Review. Interestingly, Prince warned about the establishment of a central digital currency, which fell in line with some of the baseline conservative values echoed throughout the conference. Another notable comment that Prince made was a suggestion that young people should acquire a “blue-collar skill,” because banking and consulting jobs are likely to fade away. This comment may have fallen flat for the many white-collar hopefuls in attendance, but it served as an impetus for discussion. Many students find themselves grappling with a sense of job insecurity, not knowing how the country, and by extension industries as a whole, will evolve. Automation seems to be replacing the typical jobs of corporate America, while blue-collar tradesmen become ever more sought after. Although most in the audience disagreed with the severity of Prince’s assessment, it still sparked reflection.

One writer also had the opportunity to attend an event delving into both law school and careers within the legal realm. However, this wasn’t your typical panel discussion revolving around law school admissions and resume-building; rather, it served as a warning. While every undergraduate is familiar with the classic warnings associated with pursuing law school—the stress-laden environment, the daunting pressure of passing the bar exam, and the immense workload—this panel primarily focused on the topic of free speech within legal education and the broader legal profession. 

Drawing from anecdotal experiences of navigating a prestigious law school as a conservative student, the discussion involved references to recent controversies concerning diversity of thought and free speech on law school campuses. The overarching conclusion from this event was as simple as it was disheartening: exercising free speech within the confines of law school is anything but simple, and those who are willing to express their beliefs must be prepared to face pushback from peers and faculty alike.

Following a day filled with enriching events and countless thought-provoking conversations, our time at the David Network drew to a close, signaling the onset of our journey back to Hanover. As we traveled back to campus, we found ourselves immersed in reflections on the speakers and the event as a whole, pondering the values that brought us to the event in the first place. 

We discussed the significance of religious freedom and its profound impact on our lives, as well as the pivotal role that belief plays in the fabric of civilization, either fortifying societies or leading to their decline. That value is inextricably linked with free expression, a fundamental value protected by the First Amendment. 

Yet, as exhaustion gradually crept in, our discussions faded away into silence. When we reached Hanover around 3 in the morning, we exited the bus and trudged back to our dorms, enduring one of the coldest nights of the term. While the comfort and warmth of our dorms beckoned, thoughts of the day’s events continued to germinate within us. Sparking such deep reflection was and remains perhaps the David Network’s greatest success. In sparking conservative ideals in the minds of young people, it ensures they will live on despite all efforts to erase them.