SOURCE THE PRIMARY · 2 THE PRIMARY SOURCE, APRIL 3, 2003 THE PRIMARY SOURCE, APRIL 3, 2003 3 page 6 page 21 page 12 STHE PRIMARY OURCE Vol. XXI • The Journal of Conservative Thought

THE PRIMARY SOURCE, MONTH XX, XXXX 1Tufts' Voice of Reason April 3, 2003A Student Publication

THE PRIMARYSOURCEV E R I T A S S I N E D O L O

Course Reviews 2003:Let the SOURCE

light your path to understanding.

LIBERTÉ, ÉGALITÉ, VÉRITÉ!

V E R I T A S S I N E D O L O

2 THE PRIMARY SOURCE, APRIL 3, 2003 THE PRIMARY SOURCE, APRIL 3, 2003 3

Meetings every Tuesday at 10:00pm in the Zamparelli Room, Mayer Campus Center

ALL WELCOME!For more information, email [email protected], call Rob at (617) 869-6711.

w w w . T u f t s P r i m a r y S o u r c e . o r g

When peace is not the answer...

love is.


page 6

page 21

page 12

THE PRIMARYSOURCEVol. XXI • The Journal of Conservative Thought at Tufts University • No. 11

D E P A R T M E N T S

A R T I C L E S

C O U R S E R E V I E W S 2 0 0 3

From the Editor 4March Madness.Commentary 6Michael Moore gets creative in his directing...and his vocabulary.Fortnight in Review 8Top ten changes to “Why No Means No.”From the Elephant's Mouth 9President Lawrence Englasias.Notable and Quotable 24

Iraq 'em up Again 10by Brandon BalkindWhen Saddam is hiding behind the eight ball...Antiwar and Peace 11by Jason WalkerAn international peace movement of millions and all I got was this lousy tie-dye.Wait Your Turn 20by Robert ChirwaDo not confuse your family with your uninvited, thieving houseguests.Liz's Bogus Journey 21by Megan LiottaIf at first you don't succeed, blame the patriarchy.You're So Vain 22by Joshua MartinoYou probably think this war is about you.

Astronomy, Biology Chemistry 12Comparative Religion, Computer Science 13Drama, Economics 14Engineering Science, English 15Geology, History 16Japanese, Judaic Studies, Mathematics 17Music, Philosophy 18Political Science, Psychology 19New Course Reviews 23Courses that aren't actually part of the curiculum—yet.


Managing EditorsSIMON HOLROYD • Production

CHRISTIAN MILLER • Campus AffairsGERARD BALAN • National Affairs

J. SLAVICH • Business

Assistant EditorsJONATHAN HALPERT • Commentary

ADAM BIACCHI • Campus AffairsANDREW SINATRA • Humor

JORDANA STARR • Copy

Foreign CorrespondentsTARA HEUMANN • Europe

ALEX LEVY • Asia

ContributorsNICK ABRAHAM • ALEX ALLEN

BRANDON BALKIND • STEVE BLEIBERG ROBERT CHIRWA • GEORGE FRALEY

AARON HELD • STEPHEN TEMPESTA

JOSÉ VAZQUEZ • JASON WALKER

WebmasterNICHOLAS BOYD

Editor EmeritiSAM DANGREMOND

MEGAN LIOTTA

From the Editor

THE JOURNAL OF CONSERVATIVE

THOUGHT AT TUFTS UNIVERSITY

ROBERT LICHTER

Editor-in-Chief

THE PRIMARY SOURCE IS A NON-PROFIT, STUDENT PUBLICATION OF TUFTS UNIVERSITY. THE OPINIONS EXPRESSED IN ARTICLES, FEATURES, PHOTOS, CARTOONS, OR ADVERTISEMENTS ARE SOLELY THOSE OF THE INDIVIDUAL AUTHOR(S) OR SPONSOR(S) AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF THE EDITORS OR THE STAFF. TUFTS UNIVERSITY IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CONTENT OF THE PRIMARY SOURCE, NOR IS THE PRIMARY SOURCE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CONTENT OF TUFTS UNIVERSITY. THE PRIMARY SOURCE WELCOMES ALL LETTERS. WE RESERVE THE RIGHT TO EDIT OR TO DENY PUBLICATION TO ANY LETTER BASED ON ITS LENGTH OR CONTENT. ANY LETTER TO AN INDIVIDUAL WRITER CONCERNING WORK PUBLISHED IN THE PRIMARY SOURCE MAY BE PUBLISHED ON THE LETTERS PAGE. LETTERS OF 400 WORDS OR FEWER HAVE A GREATER CHANCE OF BEING PUBLISHED. PLEASE DIRECT ALL CORRESPONDENCE TO: [email protected] or THE PRIMARY SOURCE, MAYER CAMPUS CENTER, TUFTS UNIVERSITY, MEDFORD, MASSACHUSETTS, 02155. ALL LETTER BOMBS AND/OR MYSTERIOUS WHITE POWDERS WILL BE RETURNED TO SENDER. ©2003. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

March Madness

Special ThanksCHRIS KOHLER • JOSHUA MARTINO

COLLEGIATE NETWORK

USBIC EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION

FoundersDAN MARCUS • BRIAN KELLEY

EPLURIBUS UNAM

THEPRIMARYSOURCE

V

ERITAS SINE DO

LOM arquette University’s Golden Eagles have advanced into the

NCAA Men’s Basketball Tournament’s Final Four. Wow, it’s hard to believe I just wrote that. Marquette has not made it this far since they won the Championship in 1977. Of course, not too long ago, I would have been surprised for a different reason. The Golden Eagles? I grew up with the Warriors and was annoyed when Marquette replaced them with the Golden Eagles, a politically sanitized name with no connection to local heritage. You may find yourself wondering, “Marquette is in Milwaukee—isn’t Milwau-kee an Indian name?” Yes, it is. “In fact, it was originally an Algonquin term meaning ‘the good land,’” explains Alice Cooper in Wayne’s World. Of course, you’re probably as surprised as Wayne was; Milwaukee does not always come to mind when one thinks of Indian names. Instead, one thinks of the Atlanta Braves or the Washington Redskins. These names, like Marquette’s Warriors, are gen-erally based in local heritage, which is also the basis for non-Indian themed sports names, like the Green Bay Packers or the San Francisco 49ers. Warrior is an honor-able term, and Native Americans should be proud to be part of the local tradition. As I recall, the local tribes consulted before Marquette’s mascot change had no objec-tion to the Warrior name. But some activ-ists, who put political correctness before heritage, took offense, and Marquette’s Warriors were history. A graduate of another Midwestern university, Charlene Teters spoke at Tufts about “Prisons of Image: Native American Names and Images in Sports and Media.” At the University of Illinois, her classmates cheered on the Fighting Illini, while watch-ing Chief Illiniwek “prance and cavort at half-time in a mockery of Native ritual practice,” Professor Liz Ammons tells us in a Daily Viewpoint. Ammons used Teters’ visit to explain why we need a Na-tive American Studies major at Tufts.

According to Ammons, “What our education excludes sends a message every bit as important as what it includes.” She also argues that the omission of Native American Studies from a liberal arts edu-cation “perpetuates the system of colonial domination and erasure of indigenous people that the nation is founded upon.” Founded on a system of colonial domination? Uh, Professor Ammons, remember the American Revolutionary War? Perhaps Tufts does not offer enough American History courses. Nevertheless, many professors agree with Ammons. After all, Tufts already has Peace and Justice Studies and Women’s Studies programs. A Tufts graduate who cannot examine a situation from a femi-nist perspective or from a peaceful and just standpoint does not deserve his degree. A liberal arts education is designed to pre-pare students on a broad range of subjects so they are able to apply that knowledge to an even wider range of questions. The student, no matter his major, should be able to apply this methodology of thought to every new question posed to him. He does not necessarily need specific train-ing in every subject. Yet Ammons insists that understanding the racism directed at American Indians “is a mainstay of Native American Studies.” Racism is wrong, and it is the same evil whether directed at Na-tive Americans, African Americans, Jews, Arabs, or any other race or nationality. In a place beyond time and space, surely the late Warrior Coach Al McGuire would share a beer with the warrior Crazy Horse, two men united by a common bond of great-ness. Surely they would celebrate together. For one brief week, all is right in at least one corner of the world; indeed, the spirit of the old Marquette Warriors is back.


THE SOURCE Welcomes All Letters to the Editor

The SOURCE welcomes all letters to the editor. Please address all correspondence to [email protected]

Make checks payable to:THE PRIMARY SOURCE

Mayer Campus CenterTufts University

Medford, MA 02155

Name

Address

City, State, ZIP

YES... I’ll gladly support Tufts’ Journal of Conservative Thought! Enclosed is my contribution in the amount of $ _________ .

GET THE FINEST (not to mention most forthright and tell-ing) account of affairs at Tufts and elsewhere delivered to your doorstep. For a tax-deductible contribution of $30 or more you can receive a full academic year’s

subscription via first class delivery.

Everything You Always Wanted to Know About*But Everyone Else Was Afraid to Tell You TUFTS*EPLURIBUS UN

AM

THEPRIMARYSOURCE

V

ERITAS SINE DO

LO

we swear we are not making this up!

Under the new community rep system, they'll finally be able to get fair representation in the TCU senate.

AS SEEN IN

DEWICK


Commentary

I n another commendable bylaw, the TCU senate is improving the way student activities funds are handled. The recent

bylaw to prevent organizations from using TCU money while still collecting additional funds for events was a step in the right direc-tion. This has been accomplished by preventing forced donations from students for events they have already paid for in the form of the student activities fee. The latest bylaw the TCU Senate has enacted creates Rollover Funds for charitable donations, and takes the intelligent money handling a step further. The bylaw states that organizations can accept donations from sources outside the TCU and under strict, but easily followed rules, keeping the col-lected funds inside the organization from year to year. Donations must be in traceable check form, and cannot be “cloaked” funds collected at events. As it stands, unbudgeted income returns to the general surplus at the end of the year. Donations are made to groups so they can further their mis-sions. For example, if someone makes a donation to LCS without a rollover account, and the donation goes unspent (in the current school year), that donation would then go back into the treasury surplus, defeating the intent of the donation. The new bylaw counters many of the objections organizations had voiced about the previous financial bylaw preventing double charging. The new bylaw encourages student organizations to further their fundraising efforts by seeking off campus sources, rather than cash-strapped college students, since these outside sources are the only ones allowed to roll over. It will allow stu-dent organizations to amass larger assets, and that translates into smarter spending. Rather than throw money at frivolous items at the end of the year for fear of dollars going to waste, the bylaw allows the holding organization to do greater things for the Tufts campus or outside charity in return. If the organization is active, the rollover accounts will bring more money into student orga-nizations without draining TCU funds. It’s a win-win situation. The TCU should be praised for bringing in the reins and, at the same time, giving organizations what they rightfully deserve.

T his last week the Tufts campus witnessed more acts of intolerance—and daresay idiocy—from the anti-war pro-

testors. During a rally at the flagpole in support of American troops in Iraq, the anti-war advocates made sure to make their presence known. Members of the Tufts community that support the troops had gathered to make speeches and sing “The Star Spangled Banner” and “America the Beautiful.” While students spoke about their support for the troops, anti-war protestors shouted and tried to disrupt the ceremony. Not only was this disrespectful, but it also infringed on the rights of those at the ceremony to speak, some of whom were former veterans of foreign campaigns, citizens who had put their lives on the line to ensure the freedoms that everyone takes comfort in today. Several weeks ago anti-war protestors had created quite a hullabaloo that their right to speak at the Bush lecture had been infringed upon. They claimed that their voices were sup-

pressed. The truth of the matter is that they had and still have ample opportunities to voice their opinions in a civil and intel-ligent fashion. With utter predictability, however, the radical left has once again shown their true colors. Refusing to rise to the challenge of allowing their beliefs to be placed before the greater Tufts community for evaluation and criticism, they opted instead to hop on a bandwagon of childish antics. Their action at the flagpole ceremony demonstrates their hypocrisy clearly. They defaced the cannon after it had been painted with patriotic colors and had been guarded all night (a clear violation of cannon etiquette), and during the ceremony they tried at one point to drown out speakers with their own noise. The fact is the anti-war movement on this campus only wants the guarantee of freedom of speech and freedom of assembly when it is in their favor. Looking at their actions, it would seem that Tufts anti-war protestors do not wish to conduct meaningful dialogue with those who have a different point of view. After the Bush lec-ture, a forum was created where those who wanted to debate the different points of the speech and the situation with Iraq could be heard. Last Monday, there was a student run forum on the current war in Iraq. Two panels gave their perspectives last thursday. At all of these events, the Tufts anti-war move-ment did not show up in force to make their arguments heard. These examples show that the anti-war protestors at Tufts are more concerned with hooting and hollering about things that fit a certain “radical leftist student” criterion than engaging the other side and offering their criticisms in a civil debate.

C arl Jackson’s article in the March issue of Radix glorifies Louis Farrakhan, the leader of the Nation of Islam, which

is neither a nation nor Islamic. Jackson refers to Farrakhan as “one of the most prolific minds of the century” and calls the Nation of Islam a “source for spiritual uplift and discipline among African-Americans for over seventy years.” So what exactly is this organization? Wallace Fard Muhammad founded the Nation of Islam in Detroit in 1930. Although its leaders claim to be Muslims, the group’s beliefs deviate considerably from traditional Islam. They teach that Fard was the Messiah and Allah in physical form. The Nation of Islam creation myths are also unique. Former leader Elijah Muhammed preached that, “It was your fathers who created the heavens and the earth, while there is nothing that the white man has created independently. He did not even create himself. The Black Nation is self-created, while the white race is made by one of the gods and scientists of the Black Nation.” They claim that a black scientist created the moon 66 trillion years ago, and that another black scientist named Yakub created the white race 6,000 years ago. Another belief is in the existence of a “mother ship” of black scientists exploring the galaxy. That Nation of Islam considers whites to be not only inferior, but actually to be devils. Louis Farrakhan became head of the group in 1978. He is well known for his racially charged rhetoric and his hatred of Jews. He

The Intolerance of the Radical Left

Radix Takes a Trip to the Mother Ship

Roll Over; Good Boy


also has claimed to have been beamed up to the “mother ship” as well. Farrakhan has also expressed admiration for Hitler, who he refers to as “a very great man.” In a 1996 speech, he ranted about Jewish conspiracies: “You are wicked deceivers of the American people. You have sucked their blood. You are not real Jews, those of you that are not real Jews. You are the synagogue of Satan, and you have wrapped your tentacles around the US Government and you are deceiving and sending this nation to hell.” Carl Jackson’s admiration is clearly misguided. He makes a point of praising Malcolm X, but neglects to mention Malcolm X’s break with the Nation of Islam followed by his murder by members of the group. Jackson’s portrayal of Farrakhan’s Febru-ary Savior’s Day speech seems to miss the point. In this speech, Farrakhan made several outrageous comments. He blamed the Bush Administration for the 9/11 attacks, saying, “I hasten to tell you that the precious lives that were lost in the World Trade Center was a cover, a cover for a war that had been planned to bring a pipeline through Afghanistan to bring oil from that region, oil owned by Unical of which Dick Cheney is a stock holder.” Jackson says he was “impressed by Farrakhan’s insightful comments re-garding the hypocrisy of UN imposed disarmament of Iraq.” This of course means that he blamed the Jews. At the talk, Farrakhan said, “The warmon-gers in his [Bush’s] administration, the poor Israeli Zionists, have liter-ally gotten America’s foreign policy to protect Israel. Now many of you won’t say these things, but that’s on you. Daniel Perle or Richard Perle, Wolfowitz, Kristol—all of these are architects of policy and they are pro-Israel.” Even ignoring his confusion between Bush advisor Richard Perle and Daniel Pearl, a Jewish reporter murdered by terrorists, Farrakhan’s words are disgraceful. Carl Jackson calls criticism of Farrakhan “uninformed intolerance.” In reality, Jackson is the uninformed one.

A merican culture has always had an obsession with glitz and glamour. Of course, during wartime much of the pop-culture

mind set changes; Americans lose all interest in hairstyles and sordid love affairs, and take note of what celebrities have to say about war and war-politics. It’s no surprise then that during the Oscars (with cameras rolling and thirty million watching) most vocal anti-war celebrities chose forms of silent protest—sporting dove pins and mak-ing peace symbols. This unobtrusive form of protest allowed viewers to focus on the battle between Chicago and The Pianist, or longtime runner up Martin Scorsese and pedophile Roman Polanski.

The inconspicuous protest came to a screaming halt when the Academy presented its award for Best Documentary. As the award was presented, the crowd cheered for Bowling for Colum-bine director Michael Moore. The applause, however, quickly turned to shock, disgust, and eventually booing as Moore gave his speech. Surrounded by a posse of fellow nominees (directors acknowledged for their work with non-fiction film), a smirk-ing Moore proceeded to launch a diatribe against the current administration, insulting the very definition of non-fiction by claiming that a world run by George W. Bush is a fairy tale, completely devoid of truth. “We like non-fiction and we live in fictitious times…whether it is the fictition[sic] of duct tape or the fictitious[sic] of orange alerts.” Ironically, Moore’s own critics might level the very same complaints at him, only they would

speak quietly and coherently. The Oscar speech was an il-lustration of how Moore manages to take rational arguments and trans-form them into sensationalism. Such was the case with Bowling for Col-umbine. The film consisted entirely of half-truths, misused published facts, and misrepresented Moore’s intended targets. He spent much of the film labeling NRA president Charlton Heston as an insensitive imbecile who targets towns with recent gun tragedies for NRA ral-lies. In fact, Moore manipulates timing of Heston’s speeches to vilify the NRA. In some cases, his editors pieced together sentences of different Heston speeches (watch closely for his tie to change color mid-sentence). Moore’s “documentary” raises interesting questions about gun ownership in the United States. Much like Michael Bellesiles’ de-bunked book, Arming America, the

filmmaker’s premises are shot in the foot by his lack of con-sideration for fact. Moore cites unobtainable statistics of gun-homicides across nations and lies about connections between a Lockheed-Martin facility and weapons of mass destruction and between the NRA and the KKK. It is unfortunate that Bowling for Columbine should take the award for non-fiction away from a more deserving director. Moore may dislike fiction but, to be sure, he knows passing it off as reality can earn you big bucks and it seems, high praise as well. The celebrities who chose to keep quiet during the awards were probably also motivated by money; fans are too precious to risk by making foolish rants. His loud, incoherent ramblings should not be confused with bravery or principled behavior; Moore’s motives are entirely economic and fame-driven. His fans want in-your-face leftist propaganda, and Moore would hardly let tact, the Academy, or a few facts stand in his way.

Moore fiction from the Left.

Non-Fictitiousness


Comedy is allied to Justice. —Aristophanes

Fortnight in ReviewSM

PS The Women’s Union at Tufts (the other feminist group) has announced that they want student input on ways to improve the annual orientation indoctrination skit “Why No Means No.” As experts in the field of pointing out other people’s faults, the SOURCE presents:

Top Ten Changes We’d Like to See to “Why No Means No”:10. Merged with a cappella O-Show; Amalgamates sing entire skit.9. Same as above, replace Mates with Beelzebubs.8. An open bar.7. The actresses could stand to lose a little weight.6. Entire skit performed naked. Naked?! Naked!5. Lead actress forgets to say “no,” lead actor punches her in the face for forgetting her damned line again.4. Lead actor is accused of rape, then holds up THE PRIMARY SOURCE and says, “This magazine says I didn’t do anything wrong.”3. Post-show meal of battered shrimp.2. Get it? Battered shrimp.1. Audience allowed to keep intelligence intact for duration of the show.

PS MIT has seen nearly a doubling of plagiarism and cheating cases in the last year, according to a school spokesman. MIT administrators admitted Larry Bacow would have tolerated none of this chicanery.

PS Wilmington, Delaware may soon be home to a new children’s science museum, thanks to the Association of Children’s Museums in Washington. Delaware is one of a few states without a children’s museum. In fact, it is the only state without anything.

PS Kent French aims to be the world’s fastest clapper, having clapped 721 times in 60 seconds. After his feat was aired on TV, epileptic senior citizens filed a class action lawsuit against the makers of The Clapper.

PS Tulane University will offer a casino management course this summer, where students will learn about such things as food and beverage management and security. Supplementary credit will be given to those who intern with the Mafia.

PS Waffa bin Laden, a niece of Osama bin Laden, is launching a career as a pop singer after rejecting her Muslim background and throwing herself into the London party scene. For reasons unknown, Waffa was denied the use of pyrotechnics at her Wem-bley Stadium debut appearance.

PS Los Angeles nuns tried their luck at the horse track because their school was in need of money, winning about $200,000. The nuns’ success has inspired the Vatican to open up Saint Peter’s Casino, complete with a crucified Jesus bleeding every 15 minutes.

PS A Denver judge ruled that three nuns accused of vandalizing a nuclear missile silo can’t use a defense that they were trying to prevent crimes against humanity. An exasperated Pope John Paul II commented, “They should have been gambling.”

PS Former Green Beret Mike Linnane has sold thousands of his book How I Prepared My Family to Survive a Terrorist Attack, drawing on his own military experience plus government and military manuals to pen the hot seller. Apparently he prepared everyone except niece Megan Liotta, who first discovered his book on USAToday.com.

PS A group of Utah bikers have been warned to leave their leather at home when making court appearances. Members of Bikers Against Child Abuse attend trials to show support for victims of child abuse. The group is in court this time to defend friends charged with manslaughter after a deadly brawl with the rival Bikers For Child Abuse gang.

PS Top Five French Things to rename:5. The French Connection 4. French’s Mustard 3. French Doors 2. The French House1. French Stewart

PS US military-intelligence officials believe the Iraqi command circulated copies of the movie Black Hawk Down before the war as a manual for defeating the Americans. The Iraqis next plan to distribute copies of Carrot Top’s AT&T commercials to illustrate the worst consequences of American cultural infiltration that will come if the war is lost.

PS Top Ten Iraqi Freedom Terms that Can Be Used as Sexual Euphemisms10. Bunker buster9. Patriot missile8. Expeditionary force7. Softening the target6. Shi’ite uprising5. Southern front4. Shock and awe3. Friendly fire2. Embedded correspondent1. Donald Rumsfeld

PS One of Charleston, South Carolina’s newest walking tours is for adults only, organizers say. The Dark Side of Charleston will focus on scandals, rascals, and criminals throughout its history. The tour will start and end in the main lobby of City Hall.

PS Oregonian Jeffrey Cohen was charged with a hate crime for gesturing at a woman wearing a turban after pointing his index fingers at her, pretending to shoot. He claims he was making a “what’s up” gesture. In his defense, Cohen exclaimed, “I swear I thought it was a man, baby! Yeah!”


From the Elephant's MouthF Earlier this semester, the least diverse club on campus, Tufts’ Debate Society challenged the SOURCE to defend an article on affirmative action, since the master debaters were only willing to support the biased system. Ironically, Debate veep Vinda Rao proposed the Students’ Initiative Against Intimidation, suggesting that Tufts should not tolerate intolerance. Agreed, she must transfer to another university forthwith… More recently, when begging for co-sponsorship money from the Tufts Re-publicans, Debate Society prez Dan Mandell had the gall to claim that the Debaters have historically been strongly allied with the campus GOP. Oh, really? Are they allied when campus Republicans debate about culture reps? Or only when they debate Ben Lee for more moolah?

F Number games and front-page filler: In a Daily article, Brian Loeb tells us that over 70% of Tufts undergrads oppose a “unilateral war on Iraq.” That’s irrelevant since we’re about 50 allied countries away from being unilateral, Brian. It’s time to report the Daily’s front page coverage to the Bias Response Team… The Daily reported that Estella Pappassavas came to “collect her son” after he complained of asbestos in Metcalf. “Collect” may not seem like the right word, but maybe he was living with 50 brothers the Daily forgot to mention.

F Despite our nation’s large number of allies and recent polls showing that over two-thirds of Americans support military action in Iraq, Phil Martin alleges, “99.9 percent of the world is against” it. Maybe if we aren’t counting the millions of Americans and Iraqis who support it… Despite heavy advertising, TCOWI got less than 75 audience members at their “teach-in” during the open block last Monday. They even cancelled a rally after only ten protestors showed. So much for not being silenced…

F Last Monday, Class Dean Christopher Nwabeke wrote in an email to sophomore Jumbos, “Have a wonderful Spring Break.” Nwabeke must have been expecting 99.9% of the students to skip one more day of class with TCOWI… Or maybe he’s following the same calendar as Justin Race. F It’s lonely at the top: Junior Randy Newsom may be the only candidate for TCU president next year. If Newsom wins, he will be the only white male to hold the position in the past four years. What was that about culture reps? … Disaster pri-vented: Sparing THE ELEPHANT a year of head-aches, Pritesh Gandhi has decided not to run for president, telling the Daily, “I think it’s best for the Senate to move on,

and I think if I ran it would bring back a lot of things from the past.” Yes, a lot of things like sending student activities funds to India. You know, the little stuff… But don’t count on another uncontested election. Josh Belkin says, “I feel like someone will pop up from the woodwork.” Does this mean the return of the infamous Block of Wood?

F ¡Domingo Gigante! President Bacow has decided not to print diplomas entirely in Latin this year. Larry must still be bitter from his Menudo rejection…

F The Daily asks: what ever happened to Mike Ferenczy? THE ELEPHANT was wondering the same thing...three years ago.

F A Tuftslife.com ad for the AOPi Charity A Cappella concert read, “Come and support Juvenile Arthritis!” Seventy percent of the campus would have been there, but they were too busy supporting a genocidal dictator.

F THE ELEPHANT never forgets.


by Brandon Balkind

Mr. Balkind is a sophomore majoring in Computer Engineering.

Iraq 'em up Again

When Saddam is hiding behind the eight ball...

With the first phase of skepticism and protest

over, a new wave of criticism has appeared in the analysis of the

war as it unfolds.

D iplomacy has failed, and the Coali-tion of the Willing now has forces in

Iraq. There were 12 years of opportunity for debate over a peace-ful resolution to the situation. Those who denounced American military involvement in the days before the war began could not produce one viable alternative. With the first phase of skepti-cism and protest over, a new wave of criti-cism has appeared in the analysis of the war as it unfolds. General Tommy Franks, commander of the US forces in this conflict, is a shining example of the American military leader-ship. He has 37 years of military experience, and has served in several different theaters of combat, including Vietnam, Korea, and the Persian Gulf. Yet, despite his impressive credentials, his strategy in the conflict has come under immediate scrutiny. The Coalition experienced amazing success in the first week of the war. The 3rd Infantry is moving forward, the 101st Air-borne has deployed near Baghdad. The 1st Marines have secured southern Iraq so that humanitarian aid may be brought to Basra. Embedded reporters and under-informed analysts though, are portraying this war to Americans as no one has done before. Live footage of units under fire does not show Americans the war through the eyes of a soldier, but rather from the point-of-view of the terrified journalist who is not properly prepared for combat situations. Analysts are kept in the media war rooms around the clock. They snatch any unconfirmed reports and deliver several interpretations before any fact checking is done. The media has new methods to gather live data from the battlefield, but still they lack the proper means to process and analyze that data.

Before finding the truth, headlines read that Americans have struck Iraqi civilians in a marketplace. A day of research reveals

that the casualties were caused by the Iraqi military. Re-ports suggest that the Iraqi armies are nearly beaten, and expected to surren-der near Basra. In fact, the surrender was quite unofficial,

in that only a small percentage of 51st Iraqi division was taken prisoner. These “desert-ers” of the 51st later took up arms to fight the Marines near Basra. The media takes good news and looks at it through an optimistic lens. When defensive battles are fought, however, the entire strategy of General Franks is brought under fire. Those who have served in the military, however, are not so quick to make judgments on fresh, unconfirmed data. The military does not fully disclose the situation to the media, and people like General Wesley Clark, for-mer Supreme Allied Commander, realize this. Even so, CNN keeps him on hand and prods him for analysis on every tidbit they find. After several hours of repetition, CNN begins to take the uncertain analysis as fact. In the Gulf War, America’s last major military conflict, the ratio of casualties to soldiers involved was about 1 in 1500. In previ-ous wars, a 6-7% rate of casualties was common. This includes World Wars I and II, Korea, and Vietnam. Yet somehow, in a war that will bring Co-alition forces to the doorstep of Saddam

in Baghdad, expectations are far from the reality of the situation. In a recent poll, Americans estimated the cost of this war as only a few hundred American casualties. Coalition casualties will probably be under the 6% mark, yet to assume any fewer is surely over optimism. Journalists have been trying to push the idea that the Pentagon believed the war would be a “cake walk.” Hardly a press conference goes by where reporters do not mention the words “bogged down” or “un-expected.” Did these words come from the mouth of the commander? Certainly not. This is just another way the media controls the language used to describe the situation. Only miles from Baghdad, the Coali-tion may well be weeks or months from victory. When the generals said this war will not last long, they meant it. Not all wars unfold as quickly as the week-long ground conflict in the previous Gulf War. Previous conflicts of this scale have gone on for years, yet, here, the situation is progressing much more rapidly. The media may try to twist and analyze this war in ways that were never previ-ously possible. Al-Jazeera shows pictures of executed Coalition POWs in what is an obvious effort to demoralize the participat-ing nations. Such disgusting footage must not make Americans lose their resolve to remove Saddam’s regime. It is, after all, his regime that inflicts even more horrific butchery on his own people. With troops in harm’s way, the time for protest has ended. Unity and support will end this war soon, saving many soldiers and civilians. The outcome of the war depends not on the media, but on the strength and determination of a willing Coalition. q

Cue the missiles.


by Jason Walker

Anti-war and Peace

An international peace movement of millions and all I got was this lousy tie-dye.

The antiwar movement certainly is not finished

yet, but if it wants to survive and be a viable force to prevent future

wars, it should ask itself the hard questions

about its failure.

Mr. Walker is a graduate student in the Philosophy Department.

T he anti-war movement in America could scarcely be worse off. Having

failed to stop the war or even sustain their numbers, anti-war protesters have been re-duced to blocking traffic and entrances into financial centers to make their point that the war is wrong. Protesters succeeded only in making many who would otherwise be sym-pathetic to their point of view publicly dis-tance themselves from their protests. Worst of all, their attempts to grab media attention face a new brick wall—Americans in overwhelm-ing numbers no longer want to listen to them, according to the March 28th Washington Post. Over 70% of Americans support the war, and only a scant 14% feel that the media wasn’t giving protesters enough coverage. What happened? The anti-war movement certainly is not finished yet, but if it wants to survive and be a viable force to prevent future wars, it should ask itself the hard questions about its failure. The reasons are diffuse and complex; but here are some key principles the anti-war movement neglected: You are the company (and leaders) you keep. A fatal error of the anti-war movement consisted not only in associating with disrepu-table extremist groups, but also in allowing those groups to lead. International ANSWER, a front group for the Work-ers World Party (an explicitly Stalinist outfit associated with the Communist Ramsey Clarke), or-ganized some of the most massive pro-tests against the war. Their rhetoric, laced with apologetics for both Saddam Hussein and Kim Jong Il, fueled the perception of the anti-war movement as somehow being less than fully patriotic. For its part, the WWP may have been aware that it had no prayer of stopping

"It says here on page 374 that, ‘War with Iraq could devolve into a quagmire...’"

the war, but perhaps hoped that it could use a large anti-war movement as a springboard to drive bitterly disappointed protestors to its membership rolls. A viable anti-war movement would have followed the advice of Chris-topher Hitchens, and dropped ANSWER. Some leftists, like The Nation’s David Corn and Katha Pollitt, recognized this, hence the rival United for Peace. Nevertheless, The Nation’s own activism page still links to ANSWER, and while United for Peace may not carry the same Stalinist taint, it retains a heavily leftist spin on the war, when what was needed was a movement that rose above the left/right di-chotomy to offer reasons for which people of all political stripes could subscribe. Treat your opponents with the respect you want for yourself. Most anti-war pro-testers do not deserve to be called unpatriotic

or accused of being unsupportive of the troops. But neither do war supporters deserve to be ac-cused of harboring lust for money, oil or empire. Both sides gave reasons for their positions, and no debate was possible as long as the anti-war move-

ment kept its slogans and “reasoning” in the gutter of crass, unsupportable accusations of the “real” motives of the Bush adminis-tration or conservatives generally. The key example: “No blood for oil.” Not only is this recycled from 1990 (and subsequently refuted when the US restored ownership of

Kuwaiti oil to the Kuwaitis), it has virtually no evidence behind it. Indeed, there is far more evidence of Iraqi weapons of mass de-struction than for the sinister oil conspiracies alleged by the anti-war movement. It also speaks volumes that the pro-war movement offered positives (security, Iraqi freedom, etc.), whereas the anti-war could only argue negatives (risk, moral condemnation, how things could go wrong, etc.). Be realistic. This applies to both the in-tended outcomes of actions and how well the movement has done in the past. What, exactly,

did TCOWI expect to accomplish by disrupting Bush 41’s speech at Tufts? If it set out only to annoy students and trustees with their whistles and chanting, then mission accom-plished. If it aimed to bring attention to the anti-war cause, it did, but only in the way that a car

accident brings attention of passers-by. Realism also entails knowing what one can legitimately take credit for. For example, in what can only be a fit of delusion, The Nation’s William Hartung argued that the movement was responsible for forcing Bush to try to go through the United Nations first, as if Colin Powell, public opinion polls and Bush’s own common sense had nothing to do with it. Learn from history. Oddly, an ideal paradigm for the anti-war movement could have been found from the Republicans: their strategy in defeating HillaryCare. Republi-cans (and, admittedly, insurance companies) poured funds into television advertising, creat-ing the famous “Harry & Louise” ads which highlighted unseemly elements of Hillary Clinton’s plan to nationalize health care. The anti-war movement should have put together a similar effort, by pouring all the energy and resources for protesting into advocacy and lobbying on a broader and more persuasive scale. Advertising would have been one part, but writing letters to newspapers and Congressmen and women, and above all else articulating a coherent positive pro-peace (instead of “anti-war”) vision of how much better off the US would be without this war, would have gained them far more efficacy as movement to reckon with. q


THE PRIMARY SOURCE'S Course Reviews 2003 ● THE PRIMARY SOURCE'S Course Reviews 2003 ● THE PRIMARY SOURCE'S Course Reviews 2003

THE PRIMARYSOURCE

WARNING: This section of THE PRIMARY SOURCE features course reviews submitted anonymously by individual Tufts students. Reviews may have been edited for style and length but not for content. The opinions expressed in these reviews are solely those of the individual authors and do not necessarily represent the views of THE PRIMARY SOURCE, its editors, or its contributors.

P R O C E E D W I T H C A U T I O N : C O N T E N T S A R E F O R T H R I G H T A N D H O N E S T .

Course Reviews 2003V E R I T A S S I N E D O L O

A S T R O N O M Y

Astronomy 10—Wanderers in Space (Professor Ken Olum [now Kenneth Lang]) is a wickedly boring science class without much stress. Olum is really enthusiastic about the course, but somehow it still turns into a sleeper. You can pass as long as you go to some classes, turn in the majority of homework, and take some notes. The best part about the class is that Olum’s tests are open book and open notes, so anyone with a brain can get a B.

B I O L O G Y

Biology 7—Environmental Biology (Professor Michael Reed) is a fun, interesting class that fulfills both half of the natural sciences requirement and the biodiversity requirement for the environmental studies major. Reed uses dynamic teaching techniques, including relevant slides and plenty of class discussion. His class is perfect for anyone who has that insatiable curiosity about the natural

world but who is perhaps not a science major. He is witty and down-to-earth in his lectures, refusing to give in to any political environmental mantra; Reed asks students to come up with and debate innovative ways to help keep the Earth clean. He also manages to sneak in little life lessons about deceptive statistics, which are enormously helpful. Dr. Reed is very available, always replies to his emails, and is a genuinely fun professor. Two bits of advice: do the reading and come to class if you want to pass.Biology 110—Endocrinology (Professor Michael Romero) is a great choice for bio majors. The unique aspect of this class is that the emphasis is not on pure memorization like other biology classes, but on comprehension of the material. Romero always involves the class by asking students to think about how hypotheses could be tested experimentally. The tests reflect this emphasis on thinking—they are comprised of short answer questions only. The class is not easy, but it is well worth it because you begin to learn

how to think critically.

C H E M I S T R Y

Chemistry 1—Chemical Fundamentals (Professor Christopher Morse) makes 8:30am Chemistry bearable. His quick wit and obvious concern for his students’ understanding distinguishes his class from other intro courses. By the end of the first few weeks, he’ll know every student by name. He combines a love for the subject with innovative lesson plans and is always available to answer questions outside of class.Chemistry 11—Chemistry (Professor Robert Dewald) is a difficult course that requires a lot of work on problem sets, but almost no reading and no written work. Labs are boring, pointless, and take an hour of your time each week, but they ultimately have negligible impact on your

SOURCE ClassicsT eacher to 250 students each semester, Anthropology professor Stephen

Bailey concerns himself more with fostering personal popularity among undergraduates and useless TAs than with actual instruction. He commands a well-known someone-here-has-AIDS-and-doesn’t-know-it “lecture,” but never starts on time and often ends class well beyond the official limit. His exams have included questions not covered in lectures, and if you are looking for a little compassion, you had best try your luck with a TA—they may be useless, but at least they are not heartless. Bailey’s “Physical Anthropology” could use more organization and a more refined theme. The course begins with introduc-tory high school biology and needs to focus more on the actual evolutionary and anthropological aspect. If you’re looking to actually learn something, take Bio 14, which covers roughly the same stuff. If you just want to fill your science requirements, bring a crossword to class, and be prepared to meticulously read the text the night before the exam.



grade. Dewald is an excellent instructor, but people will tell you otherwise because he is unforgiving to laziness. You will learn the basics of chemistry, and you will pay for it in blood and tears.Chemistry 51—Organic Chemistry 1 (Professor Marc d’Alarcao [now David Walt]) is by far one of the most difficult courses you’ll ever take. The workload is sky high, the material is extremely difficult, and you’ll have to devote a great deal of time to the subject to succeed. Taking Orgo is like taking three classes, so take the class with Professor d’Alarcao. His passion and love for the subject is contagious and he is very thorough in his explanations. He is very accessible outside the classroom, and he tells a lot of funny anecdotes in class.

C I V I L A N D E N V I R O N M E N T A L E N G I N E E R I N G

Civil and Environmental Engineering 102—Probability and Statistics in Engineering (Professor Linfield Brown) will stand in place of Math 161 and 162 for many Engineering majors. CE 102 concentrates less on proving the validity of statistical and probability theorems and more on their application to engineering. There is less conceptual math required on behalf of the student while Professor Brown clearly explains the theory behind formulas and is attentive to student’s questions. However, the vast majority of examples concentrate on Professor Brown’s own interests and often seem quite foreign. The course covers probability distribution functions, sampling methods, estimation, hypothesis testing and regression.

C O M M U N I T Y H E A L T H

Community Health 1—Introduction to Community Health (Professor Edith Balbach) was both informative and interesting. I looked forward to coming to class every day because Professor Balbach was lively and engaging. She really reached out to her students and made herself very available. There was a large amount of reading, but it was definitely manageable. Also, at the end of the course there was a required paper, but it was interesting, and you had freedom of choice on the topic. Definitely a class worth taking especially if you are interested in anything health related or in social interactions.

C O M P A R A T I V E R E L I G I O N S

Comparative Religions 1—Introduction to Religion is by far one of the most creative classes at Tufts. In the past, Professor

SOURCE ClassicsI f you take Child Development 155, “Development of Language,” you

will be awed by the body of knowledge possessed by the so-called “socio-linguist.” Calvin ‘Chip’ Gidney’s talents lie not only in his linguistic mastery (his knowledge of countless languages), but in his ability to relate aspects of child development and linguistic theory to his students. Unfortunately, however, Gidney’s subject matter is inherently political and one-sided. A great deal of read-ing is required for the course, from the theories of Noam Chomsky to case studies of individual linguistic development. Professor Gidney, however, handles the abundance of information with aplomb and characteristic good humor. Strongly recommended for anyone who wishes to probe theories of the origins of language and their application to human development, but probably better taught by a person who understands that political tolerance is a two-way street.

Joseph Walser spent the first half of the semester covering three different religions, dividing the class during the second semester into groups that go on to invent their own religions, complete with scripture, funding, and conversion. Professor Peter Thuesen taught the class this year, and his curriculum is not quite the same, and it is not even certain that he will be teaching it next year. Both he and Walser are detailed, approachable, and just as interested in learning new things as their students are.Comparative Religions 21—Introduction to the Hebrew Bible (Professor Peggy Hutaff) is a class of smashed stereotypes. For starters, Hutaff has the demeanor of a Sunday school teacher and the politics of Gloria Steinem, a

potentially frightening combination. But she defies expectation again as she conducts her class with a mind open to wildly varying opinion on Judeo-Christian tradition. The class is not about theology but the history of the authorship of ancient Hebrew scripture. Hutaff’s highest priority is participation—she asks more questions than to which there are answers—and success on the exams requires close note-taking. Hutaff makes herself readily available to students outside of class for continuing discourse on this highly controversial topic.Comparative Religions 48—Qur’an and the Islamic Tradition was originally supposed to be taught this past Fall by Comparative Religions Department Chair Mohamed Mahmoud, who had to forfeit the course after having difficulty obtaining a visa back to the US after his sabbatical. Instead, the class eventually ended up with Alnoor Dhanani, a visiting professor from Harvard, who, while knowledgeable about Islam, does not count Qur’an scholarship among his expertise. Ultimately, the class ended up disjointed for the first half of the semester, and topically askew for the rest. Hopefully, Professor Mahmoud will return to teach for the entire semester next year, but the system is hardly reliable.

C O M P U T E R S C I E N C E

Computer Science 11—Introduction to Computer Science (Professor Jim Schmolze) was generally a good experience. The grading was fair on the projects and exams. The main problem with the class, however, was poor communication and a lack of understanding of the students’ abilities. Project assignments were often misleading and were changed frequently. The TAs did not seem to have been briefed by the professor on the goal of assignments, and there were situations when the grader did not seem to know what exactly he was testing the projects for. In addition, certain projects relied on code from earlier ones, creating a very confusing situation when old projects were not necessarily designed with later assignments in mind. Overall, this course is a decent introduction to computer programming in C++ and computer science concepts although it can be frustrating at times.Computer Science 15—Data Structures (Professor David Malan [now Alva Couch]) is taught by a man who went to Harvard and thinks all his students do, too. He is an extremely good lecturer and the class is very well organized. The amount of work he requires, however, is insane. Weekly problem sets will easily take 20 hours or more. If you have to take Comp 15 for a requirement and don’t have an intrinsic love for learning, take this course with another professor.



Computer Science 20—Multimedia Programming (Professor Alva Couch) should not be overlooked by any programmer interested in the Internet. The class is worthwhile if merely to hear Couch’s maniacal laugh. Unfortunately, the class attracts many students without sufficient programming experience to keep the class moving swiftly. Couch’s assignments are challenging but deadlines are often extended or changed due to complaints from slower students. Nevertheless, students are offered the chance to delve deep into Perl, php, and JavaScript with additional focus on database interaction. With the guidance of Professor Couch, this is an opportunity not to be missed.Computer Science 40—Computer Architecture (Professor David Krumme) is not for the faint of heart. Projects are intense, and tests are difficult. Krumme built an interface to a mock processing unit for students to learn the internals of computing and control through assembly language. The result is dazzling. Students are thrown in the deep end, forced to manually manipulate registers, memory, and input/output devices. The students are not without adequate help from the professor and TAs, but sometimes the projects are not fully thought through before they are assigned. A SECOND OPINION: If you think you are a hotshot programmer, this course will quickly give you a reality check. Krumme is always up for a fairly sadistic challenge. The grading is based on a few reasonable tests and several very difficult assembly language projects. The real-time online grader can be unforgiving, but after completing this class, you will have learned a great deal about computer architecture.

D R A M A

Drama 29—Scene Painting (Professor Ted Simpson) was previously taught by Judy Staicer, a lecturer in the Drama department and a talented artist who frequently lends her skills to Balch productions. The class is devoted to producing various large-scale paintings as they would be produced for an actual production. Assignments include painting different textures like marble, wood, and stone and producing depth illusions from a distance. Quite a lot of time is spent on color theory and art history, and Staicer required a research paper at the end of the semester. Be prepared to get dirty and to learn how to use a staple gun. Many students graduated from Staicer’s class to actually working with her and other students on scenery for Tufts shows. The class is a fun way to fulfill the art requirement and a great supplement to anyone looking to get into the tech side of drama.

E C O N O M I C S

Economics 1—Introduction to Microeconomics (Professor Dan Richards) has a professor who is cool and loves his PowerPoint. He keeps class interesting by handing out random activities to do during class time. There is lots of work for problem sets, but grading and exams are pretty fair, and his notes are available online. I have heard that he is hard to contact outside of class, so if

you like to bond with your professors you might have a hard time doing that with him. Choose your TA wisely, because he/she will be answering all your questions.Economics 11—Intermediate Microeconomics (Professor Karen Eggleston) is great and really easy to follow. Eggleston presents really well and you can miss a class without breaking a sweat. All the notes are posted online at the Blackboard website. The requirements consist of a midterm, quiz, short paper, and final exam. You’ll learn a lot without working your butt off. Economics 13—Statistics (Professor Felipe Martin) Professor Martin

is a good lecturer. The material isn’t extremely hard. The problem with the class is Professor Martin’s absentmindedness. With only a few weeks of class left, he could not

make up his mind about whether or not he would curve the class’s first test, drop a test, have a make-up, etc. He did nothing, and I don’t think he will do anything until a student is persistent enough to keep bothering him and reminding him about it. A SECOND OPINION: If

you’re an economics major, you have to take this class, so you may as well take it with Martin. He is clear, methodical, and highly organized in his presentation of the material. Students will find the tests very challenging and lengthy, but generally fair. Exams are open notes and open book so attending class and reading through the text on your own is Martin is available for help in office hours.Economics 24—Game Theory (Professor Lynne Pepall) is a fun class on a confusing, sometimes mind-boggling subject. Pepall succeeds in engaging the class from day one. She frequently introduces games through full class participation. The atmosphere is

not completely relaxed, however; students are regularly left puzzled even after class ends. The class is fast paced, but the work is not difficult.

There is little emphasis on mathematics; Math 11 is the most advanced class required. The class therefore attracts many Economics and International Relations students not

expecting calculus. As soon as the first derivative appears, the class slows to a standstill. Quantitative Economics majors should rather consider Pepall’s higher-level offerings.Economics 74—Entrepreneurship (Professor George Norman) is quite possibly one of the worst classes I have ever taken at Tufts. George Norman is an arrogant, condescending bag of wind who has little more to say than what he can regurgitate from a bad textbook. If anyone is seriously interested in learning about entrepreneurship then stay away from this class. Instead, take as many classes in the new ELS minor as possible. They have better teachers who are fresh and interesting. They provide a much broader and in depth real world perspective than most classes I have taken at Tufts.Economics 150—Financial Economics (Professor Dan Richards) covers interesting stuff, but it’s too bad the class was so poorly run. Professor Richards gave problem sets that did not always have relevance to what was going on in class. The textbook was used for problem sets, and the professor’s solutions did not always match up with the procedure described in the book. This led to a lot of confusion for many in the class. In addition, Professor Richards was not often available to answer questions.


E N G I N E E R I N G S C I E N C E

Engineering Science 3—Introduction to Electrical Engineering (Professor Van Toi Vo) is a required course for most engineers, which makes the class size for each section somewhat large (about 40 students). Vo is the best instructor for the course. He is entertaining, always available outside of class, and teaches the material well.Engineering Science 3—Introduction to Electrical Engineering (Professor Mohammed Afsar) needs to be redone. In fact, the ECE department has decided to make this course revolve not around the speaker project, but around a speaker and amp/tuner project that will make a lot more sense to implement. For electrical engineers, this course is a cheap intro, and EE13 turns out to be much more useful. Afsar may be difficult to understand, but is very willing to work with you.

E N G L I S H

English 5—Introduction to Journalism (Professor Neil Miller) offers the basics for students who have always wanted to be the next Woodward and Bernstein. Professor Miller—a veteran journalist himself—establishes a workshop environment for the fledgling sleuth to show off his work. Because of this, the class relies more on the students than the teacher, as students are asked to give feedback. But all in all, Professor Miller’s eccentric personality usually stirs a decent flow of criticism in a remarkably laid-back atmosphere. That being said, a lot of the final grade depends on class participation, a fact that the professor often neglects to mention.English 11—Journalism (Professor Nan Levinson) is a good foundation for the aspiring journalist. The class covers the basics of reporting and writing with a journalistic style, while also touching upon finer points such as libel law and citing sources. The in-class exercises force the student to stretch his or her writing and editing abilities to work under a deadline and are generally quite instructive. Levinson is an engaging instructor with a solid background in journalism. The fairly small class size enables Levinson to give one-on-one instruction. Astute students will take advantage of the opportunity.

English 59—Continuity of American Literature (Professor Ronna Johnson) should be re-named Continuity of American Discrimination because of the class’s grading structure. Students have a midterm, a final, and one short essay. This is certainly not enough writing for an English course. As a result, the class is dominated by Professor Johnson’s take on the readings. Indeed, Johnson allows ample class discussion of the readings, but all the while inserts too much of her very liberal politics into literature that has nothing to do with sexism, racism, or homophobia. The experienced English student will be frustrated by the deconstruction of every white male author to a racist chauvinist. This course is recommended only to novice literature students, who must take the lectures with a grain of salt. Conservatives should be prepared to be horrified. Lectures are interesting but myopic, and while texts were well selected (ranging from Native American texts to classics by Hawthorne, Poe, and Melville), reading excerpts is not always the best way to learn literature.English 77—The Modern Mind (Professor Jay Cantor) reflects the professor’s inability to concentrate on anything for more than five seconds. The class focuses on three of the most intriguing people of the last two centuries: Marx, Nietzsche, and Freud. The assigned readings are fascinating but, Cantor uses class time to ramble on about his personal interpretations of the texts, a decidedly un-Nietzsche-an way to conduct this course. Cantor’s voice drones on with no direction and easy digression. He directs 99% of his lecture to the 10 people at the front of the class. Most importantly, Cantor essentially ignores one great thinker of the time without whose works Nietzsche may have been unable to say with courage, “God is dead,” Marx would have been unable to acceptably preach atheism, and Freud may have dismissed hysteria as the will of God. The man missing in action is Charles Darwin. The course’s assumption of the comprehension of Darwin’s evolutionary theories makes the connection between each of the three main authors and the general world a difficult one. Cantor’s class is, in a word, illegitimate.English 191C—Hemingway & Faulkner (Professor Alan Lebowitz) features two essential American writers. No

author has affected English prose style as thoroughly as Ernest Hemingway, and no author represents the American South like William Faulkner. This course highlights the finest novels and short stories of these authors with no fluff—don’t come to Professor Lebowitz’s class looking for the political dogma running rampant in other literature courses. Lebowitz analyzes and deconstructs these fascinating, dense texts, relying much on class participation. Even though the course can get crowded, Lebowitz’s friendly conversation makes a room of 30 students seem very intimate.English 191H—Vergil and Dante (Professor John Fyler) is a new class for the English department, but it appears to be a re-named version of Fyler’s old course, English 105—Literature of the Middle Ages. Before his


SOURCE ClassicsP rofessor Kevin Dunn’s sampling of great English literature is a joy to

experience. Dunn’s relaxed but enthusiastic teaching style makes his class something to look forward to every week. The format is open and informal. Students work together in an open discussion to plumb the depths of each day’s literature (the course title is accurate: Dunn chooses only true masterpieces for discussion). The grading is friendly; the only grades come from three papers, two of which are revised, wherein Dunn asks students to simply “make an argument.” While Dunn offers plenty of advice on possible topics, the ultimate decision is up to the student; something I found liberating, as I was able to discuss topics that genuinely interested me. What is even more refreshing and unique is that Dunn’s comments on the papers are given in the form of a personalized audiocassette. There is no sea of red ink to contend with in revisions and the aural format limits Dunn to offering editorial insight as opposed to your typical English professor’s proofreading. Masterpieces of Literature (English 50) is well worth taking for anyone, especially non-English majors. necessary for statistics success.



sabbatical this year, Fyler reorganized 105 to focus exclusively on the relationship between Vergil’s Aeneid and Dante’s Divine Comedy. The reading assignments are long but fun for anyone who likes epic poetry. Lectures are usually interesting, but often the class refuses to participate in discussion, probably out of intimidation; Fyler is sometimes way over the students’ heads in interpretation. If 191H is anything like 105, however, the student will leave with profound respect for Dante in particular and a new appreciation for the dead-white-male classics that are so frequently ignored by most English majors.

G E O L O G Y

Geology 1—The Dynamic Earth (Professor Bert Reuss) quite literally offers something for everyone. Those looking to major in the natural sciences will find this course to be an excellent introduction to the study of the Earth, and those dreading having to fulfill their science requirements will find a user-friendly experience with a manageable workload. Reuss delivers some of the most lively and animated lectures on the hill, each one with enthusiasm that belies the fact he has been teaching the same course for decades. Vivid demonstrations accompany the lecture notes, which are, without fail, written meticulously on the blackboard half an hour before the class begins. Although there are typically over 100 students in the class, Bert (as he insists on being called) will memorize everyone’s name within the first few weeks. Geology 1 will take up a considerable amount of class time each week; there are three lectures and one lab, which is usually a three-to-four-hour field trip to geologic formations in the Boston area. The reading load is always manageable, however; and the labs are always interesting. There are two hourlong examinations and one final. This is not “Rocks for Jocks;” success on each exam requires a good deal of studying. The material should be interesting even for non-science types, however, and the lectures and labs are so well done that going to class is never a chore.Geology 1—The Dynamic Earth (Professor Anne Gardulski) bombards students with a plethora of information about Earth’s geological history. Although extremely confusing at times, students who are able to keep up with the material are able to enjoy Professor Gardulski’s quirky antics as she enthusiastically teaches the large seminar class. The first six labs consist of field trips to area geological sites. Prepare for a lot of hiking and rock climbing!

H I S T O R Y

History 10—Europe to 1815 (Professor Stephen Marcopoulos) is a good choice for a course to fulfill the humanities requirement. It is interesting and not too demanding of your time. The course covers material from the fall of the Roman Empire to the defeat of Napoleon. Marcopoulos’ lectures are thorough and sequential, and he supplements the raw historical facts with anecdotes that serve to lighten the lecture and make the events more tangible. Marcopoulos and his TAs are knowledgeable about the period and are willing to talk and explain. The course has one recitation per week that is very helpful in mastering the material. This is the type of course in which even procrastinators do well because one night of cramming usually suffices if you have attended the lectures. History 29—Modern Russia (Professor Daniel Mulholland) will verify that stereotype you had in high school about the mysterious and eccentric yet absurdly knowledgeable college professor. Mulholland weaves the history of Russia as though recounting a boyhood adventure, complete with his own feelings on the personalities involved and excited grins when appropriate. The class is a fascinating account of one of the twentieth century’s most influential yet isolated societies. The lectures can get monotonous, but the accrued knowledge makes it worthwhile. You leave feeling like an expert in the field. His requests of students are simple: go to class, do the reading, write the papers. Do not let yourself get behind; he notices.History 47—Japan to 1868 (Professor Gary Leupp): Gary Leupp and THE PRIMARY SOURCE have rarely seen eye-to-eye on politics, but his History 47 is a top-notch class and a refreshing alternative to the sleep-inducing names, dates, and political parties covered by your typical history course. Japan is a nation that spent its entire history to 1868 in relative isolation, with only minimal contact with the West. Discussions include the struggle for religious dominance between Buddhism, Shinto, and Confucianism; Japanese feudalism; and the uniqueness of premodern Japan. The primary textbook is readable, but the other readings tend to be dry. Leupp, who has written three books on the subject, knows his stuff and is quite friendly and accessible.History 89—Rewriting America (Professor Martin Sherwin) is unusual among other history classes. Unlike outspoken liberal professors who bombard their students with history as they see it, Sherwin gives complete control to the student.

Students are assigned to groups and asked to produce a magazine of historic events. Those who love writing and journalism will relish the chance to cover World War II or Vietnam as if they were actually there, using primary sources and contemporary texts. Students more interested in magazine design will also have a chance to layout the student produced magazines, which are printed in hard-copy five issues per semester. The class isn’t difficult, but students should realize that grades reflect effort. Those who contribute multiple articles to each issue will fare better than occasional contributors. Extra advice: save yourself some money and don’t buy the textbook. It’s unnecessary and not helpful.

SOURCE ClassicsG erald Gill is unquestionably a liberal, but one who appreciates that his

job is to instruct, not indoctrinate. His treatment of American history is uncompromisingly fair; he presents both sides of all major debates and does not penalize students for holding opinions that contradict his own (unlike too many others in his department). He is a first-class orator, and his assigned readings are usually interesting and always informative. He is one of Tufts’ most popular professors, and for good reason. Despite his professional objectivity, however, students who sign up for Gill’s class may find themselves in unsavory company, campus leftists flock to his classes like winos to welfare. Even so, unlike other Jumbo multicultis, Gill possesses a great knowledge of and appreciation for the other side; a matriculation address of his a few years back on the subject made due mention of the conservative point of view.


J A P A N E S E

Japanese 80—Japanese Film (Professor Mitsuyo Wada-Marciano [now William Burton]) If you have an interest in Japanese culture or film studies, you would do well to consider Japanese Film. The Japanese national cinema, developed in relative isolation from classical Hollywood cinema and finding out how Japanese film techniques differ from those of Hollywood (and there are quite a few noticeable differences) is not only fascinating, but crucial to a film student’s experience. Those interested in Japanese culture will find interesting parallels between the national cinema and other media. Mitsuyo Wada-Marciano speaks English as a second language and some students have complained about not being able to hear her. Still, she is friendly, patient, and accessible after class, and makes a point to get to know each student individually.

J U D A I C S T U D I E S

Judaic Studies 73—Aspects of Sephardic Tradition (Professor Gloria Ascher) is an easy A. But don’t expect to learn a lot about the history of the Sephardic Jews who were expelled from Spain during the Inquisition. Though Professor Ascher’s enthusiasm exudes as she tries her best to engage the students, it is often difficult to take her lectures seriously. But the class isn’t entirely a dud. Professor Ascher hosts a “Sephardic Evening” at her house as the end of the semester celebration, where she prepares traditional Sephardic food and performs her original songs. The class a great option for students looking to fill the Judaic Studies or Spanish culture option, but I wouldn’t go out of my way to register.Judaic Studies 96—Introduction to Talmud (Professor Jeff Summit) is one of those classes that gives the student a lot more cultural insight than it’s advertising suggests. Rabbi Summit holds the class in a circular formation, forcing everyone present to participate in discussion, but the atmosphere is hardly intimidating. The readings are chosen for their relevance to modern life, making class discussion a lively debate about how ancient rabbinical law might serve today’s community. Yet previous knowledge of Jewish tradition, while certainly helpful, is not necessary for creative interpretation. Most classes become philosophical discussions about the application of tradition to an ever-evolving society. But the ease of the classroom can be deceptive; Rabbi Summit is a tough grader, so be sure to start papers and take-home exams with plenty of time for serious revisions.

M A T H E M A T I C S

Mathematics 9—Math of Social Choice (Professor David Isles) is no walk in the park. While Math 9 provides a welcome alternative to Calculus to fulfill that pesky math requirement, Isles can get downright obnoxious about the simplicity of the course. Contrary to popular belief, significant mathematical reasoning is required. But Isles does apply his lessons to real-life scenarios. Students will learn the math behind everything from fairly dividing cake (which Isles happily provides to those who volunteer), presidential elections, and estate apportionment, all the while thanking their lucky stars that they aren’t in Calculus.

Mathematics 13—Last year, Calculus III was supposed to have been taught by David Isles, who had unexpected surgery and did not return as promised. Consequently, this section of the course has been sitting in limbo. Several teachers in the math department tried to teach the course. The first of these was a young, and enthusiastic teacher who did not have a great deal of experience. After spring break, she was replaced with several other teachers. It seemed there was no one to rely on, even though Math 13 is one of the most challenging and fundamental classes for engineers and mathematicians.Mathematics 22—Discrete Math (Professor Glaser [now Murray Elder and Anton Kaul]) is simple enough if you read the book and do the homework, but like every math class there is a problem set due every class meeting. Professor Glaser sails through the semester with ease and at times makes a complicated subject feel like elementary school math. If you’re an engineer trying to fill that math/science fundamental, Math 22 with Glaser is a great choice.Mathematics 22—Discrete Math (Professor David Isles [now Murray Elder and Anton Kaul]) is for those in need of a math

elective credit. David Isles does not try to hide his personal agenda on this campus. He is, however, capable of

teaching this incredibly easy course. If you have ever taken a computer science course, you will easily understand the application of the material. The course

just scratches the surface of several areas of math and never gets that complicated. If you

are lucky, Isles might give you a refund for any classes he walks out on.Mathematics 38—Differential Equations (Professor Mauricio Gutierrez) is for you if you like teaching yourself how to solve

complicated math problems and using a poorly written textbook. The example

problems for each section are not accompanied by explanations. To make matters worse, the professor does

not make the material any easier to understand. Gutierrez does not prepare lecture notes. He prefers, instead, to stand in front of the class and pick problems from the text at random and spend the entire class period trying and retrying to get the solution. A SECOND OPINION: Coming from Calculus III, I found the material in Differential Equations to be pretty easy, which is fortunate since learning during class is nearly impossible. Gutierrez should definitely be given credit for always being available for extra help, often outside of his office hours. One-on-one he was very clear when explaining the material covered in class and leaving his office, I always came away with all my questions answered. A THIRD OPINION: Never take differential equations with Gutierrez! He never comes to class prepared, and he doesn’t explain things well. He will botch every example and claim that he is “rusty.” However, the subject matter is interesting and once you get the hang of it you can pretty much do every problem thrown at you. Overall, Differential Equations has the potential to be a very rewarding course and may be the most interesting math class that I have taken. Gutierrez, however, is the worst professor that I’ve had at Tufts.Mathematics 38—Differential Equations (Professor Jonathan Bihari) is the cornerstone of engineering mathematics, especially for electrical engineers. If you had a nightmare in Math 13,



do not fear; 38 is much better. The teacher, John Bihari, is as knowledgeable about differential equations as they get. (It is his research area.) Unfortunately, the Math Department has become one of the most liberal activist departments on the campus. Strange, but very true.Mathematics 46—Linear Algebra (Professor Mary Glaser) is not a difficult subject, but the tests can be confusing. Fortunately, Professor Glaser is far and away one of the most enthusiastic and intelligent teachers Tufts has to offer. Her lecturing style seems at times more like a standup comic’s than a math professor’s. No doubt her years as a drummer for a rock band feeds her classroom presence. Glaser does a good job of preparing her students for the tests and is frequently available for additional help. This class is a good choice for math majors, as well as other engineers. The material is especially applicable for computer scientists. A SECOND OPINION: Linear Algebra is a waste of time if you’ve taken Math 38, unless, of course, you just love to play around with matrices in your free time. Even David Isles admitted it was a waste of tuition money. It’s just another way that the Tufts Math Department leaves a lot to be desired.

M U S I C

Music 1—Intro to Western Music (Professor Teresa Neff) is not the class for you if you are expecting to simply memorize a couple pieces of music for each exam. Knowing the pieces is only part of being successful in this course; to succeed one must know the composer and the methods in which each piece of music was composed. Professor Neff is passionate about music and wants her students to appreciate music and understand how pieces of music are constructed. This course fosters an appreciation of composers such as Philip Glass. If you want to learn about Western music and get to listen to good music I would suggest taking this course.Music 64—Gospel Choir (Professor Idella Johnson) is a disappointment to anyone who has sung with a number of choirs before. To begin with, class is held on Fridays from 3:00pm to 5:00pm and during this time nobody is allowed to take bathroom breaks, which is utterly ridiculous. Learning the material is difficult because we do not have the written music; the conductor toys with the notes, but at the very least she could write everything down before giving it to us. Part of the failure of the group comes from the singers’ uncertainties about the notes. Some singers come from a classical music background, which hinders their ability to sing music in the gospel style. Other members have no musical background whatsoever, and that makes everything a bit more difficult because they do not have an ear for music or performing. At the end, the performances are the highlight of the entire semester. These performances are great but they are not worth taking the course. Professor Johnson knows a lot about music and is a phenomenal singer, but these attributes do not translate well when it comes to conducting an inexperienced choir. I would have to say that this class is definitely not fun.

P H I L O S O P H Y

Philosophy 3—Language and Mind (Professor Daniel Dennett) is a challenging course, but worthwhile for anyone to take. Professor Dennett is quite possibly one of the most interesting philosophers of our time (let alone Tufts University). Dennett forces his students to rethink the human mind and how it works. Dennett’s own philosophy is an integral part of the course and he forces comparisons between computers, evolution, and the brain. There is some emphasis on mathematics and introductory computer science that may upset liberal artists, but frankly, the emphasis is necessary for a full understanding of Dennett’s class.Philosophy 43—Justice, Equality, and Liberty (Professor Patrick Durning) is an excellent political philosophy course that introduces students to the works of Plato, Aquinas, Hobbes, Locke, Bentham, and Rawls, among other philosophers. By focusing on the topics in the course title, this discussion-based class delves into philosophical literature and dissects and explains texts which some may otherwise find obtuse. Grading is based on weekly reflection papers on the readings, four major term papers, and class participation.Philosophy 117—Philosophy of Mind (Professor Steven White) is taught by one of the best teachers you will ever have, but also one of the worst. The man is one of the most brilliant, thoughtful, insightful, and knowledgeable professors you will ever have the opportunity to learn from. Alas, like many geniuses, he suffers from a lack of organizational skills. We did not get through half the material we were supposed to, although somehow, Professor White makes the material you do go over so interesting that you find it hard to care. White speaks softly but powerfully, forcing you to rethink all of your intuitions about how the mind interacts with the world. This class will be heavily attended by graduate students, but don’t let that intimidate you. I found it (and the grad students) very friendly to undergrads. I highly recommend this class, but just be aware that White won’t be the best organized professor you’ve had. If


SOURCE ClassicsH ired to teach “radical philosophy” in the 1960s, Norman Daniels is more

like a Soviet Comissar trapped in an educator’s body. When he isn’t trotting around Europe lecturing state bureaucrats on how to create a socialist utopia, he’s in the Tufts classroom lecturing on pretty much the same thing. Daniels’ primary area of expertise is a quite disturbing field of philosophy that studies “the rationing of health care”—newspeak for “the government deciding who deserves medical treatment under a socialist health-care system and who doesn’t.” His fondness for this sort of totalitarianism earned him red-carpet treatment from Hillary Clinton’s ill-fated Health Care Task Force, but the main problem with his teaching is not his leftism (which in and of itself is all too common on the Hill) but his intolerance of dissent, which thankfully is somewhat less rampant. Norman Daniels’ idea of disagreement is a debate along the lines of “what kind of socialist health-care system should we have” rather than “do we really need one at all.” He appreciates polite disagreement on trivial details but entertains no dissent on fundamentals: the necessity of state control is a premise that invades all of Daniels’ lectures. His condescending attitude towards students who disagree with him, which often elicits little more than a chuckle and a polite dismissal along the lines of “but seriously, folks…” is unprofessional and biased even by Tufts standards.


this isn’t a problem for you, and you wonder about questions like, whether your mind is really independent from your body, you will love this class.

P O L I T I C A L S C I E N C E

Political Science 21—Introduction to Comparative Politics (Professor Conseulo Cruz [now Shinju Fujihira]) is enjoyable. The teacher makes a good effort to keep whatever partisan biases she may have out of her teaching. While much of the class focused on Marx and his theories, much emphasis was also placed on other famous political science theorists. The amount of reading assigned is extensive, but most of it is quite relevant and even interesting. I would recommend this class to anyone with an interest in politics.Political Science 146—Liberty, Morality, Virtue (Professor Robert Devigne) approaches political philosophy in a way that makes the densest texts available even to newcomers to the subject. He is also hysterically funny, and he won’t hesitate to regale you with his almost unbelievable life stories. Most students who take one Devigne class become groupies and take his classes every semester after. Don’t miss this opportunity.

P S Y C H O L O G Y

Psychology 1—Introduction to Psychology (Professors Lisa Shin, Dan Hannon, & Phillip Holcomb) is a seminar that is split up into three parts, each taught by a different professor. Lectures are interesting and successfully involve student participation, despite the large class size. The accompanying text is extremely well written, entertaining, and pertinent to subjects covered in lecture. Highly recommended is the optional supplemental review guide that engages the text and prepares students well for the exams. At the conclusion of each third of the course, a non-cumulative multiple-choice examination is given, along with an optional cumulative final upon completion of the course (if a

student chooses to take the final exam,

the lowest test score will be dropped). In addition to attending lectures, students are required to either fulfill three credits in psychological study participation and write a paper on one study, or write three short papers on psychological topics. This is an excellent intro course for students pursuing a psych major, and is also a lot of fun for those who are intellectually interested.Psychology 31—Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences (Professor Gutowski) was by far the worst class I ever took at Tufts. Professor Gutowski is dull, kooky, and just plain awful as a professor. He spends more time talking about his experiences on Cape Cod than teaching the material. He also provides the students with no practice problems before his exams. Consequently, the students go into tests and quizzes blind, not knowing what to expect. The worst part of the course is the lab, which is loosely based on the material being taught in class and completely unnecessary. If you take this course, get a tutor quickly because both Gutowski and the TAs are too incompetent to teach the material or answer your questions.

S P A N I S H

Spanish 31—Main Currents in Spanish Literature I (Professor Tamara Márquez-Raffetto) lets students put their reading and speaking skills to use to dive into some of the richest literature Spanish history has to offer. The course anthology provides students with a good mix of poetry and prose, and class readings are well selected. What makes this course so outstanding, however, is the energy and knowledge that Márquez-Raffetto brings to class. There truly isn’t enough praise for this professor. Her enthusiasm is contagious and her care for students as both scholars and people makes her a special member of the faculty. Márquez-Raffetto gives freely of her time, knowledge, and creativity in office hours and always pushes her students to take their thinking one step further.



by Robert Chirwa

Wait Your Turn

Do not confuse your family with your uninvited, unwelcome, thieving houseguests.

Mr. Chirwa is a graduate student in the Electrical Engineering Department.

Myopic segments of our society are quick

to describe those who condemn illegal

immigration as xenophobic and

un-American.

I mmigration has not only made the United States of America a culturally

rich nation, but has also helped it achieve its powerful position as a global leader. Despite the deluge of unfavorable views possessed by other nations about the US, millions around the world still desire the opportunity to be granted America’s greatest offerings: citizen-ship, constitutional rights, and the chance to live the American Dream. Cries of dismay and resentment have been directed towards the increasing tide of illegal immigrants mak-ing their way into the US. There are currently an esti-mated seven million illegal residents in the US and an estimated 300,000 more arriving annually. Public resentment towards illegal im-migrants has been exacerbated by a spate of recent events. One of the alleged “Beltway Snipers” is an illegal immigrant, and vari-ous pieces of legislation have been geared at granting undocumented individual’s privileges available to citizens. Numerous diatribes have been launched toward the burden these individuals place on the general public, but unfortu-nately, legal immigrants have been unjustly tainted by the actions of their illegal counterparts. Myopic segments of our society are quick to describe those who condemn il-legal immigration as xenophobic and un-American. Prior to 9/11, the Bush administration was entertain-ing the idea of providing amnesty, which would initiate the process of eventually obtaining citi-zenship, to the millions of Mexicans illegally present

within our borders. Various segments of the population, including legal immigrants, viewed this proposition with apprehension; it is egregious to reward the crime of illegally entering the country or overstaying a visa with a right and honor that men and woman sacrificed their lives to protect and guarantee to future generations. Legal immigrants would have a predicilation to view this prac-tice as biased against potential citizens and those who followed the right procedures to

immigrate to the US. The argument that is often voiced

by advocates for the illegal immigrants holds that immigrants take the job that

no else is willing to perform. There is some validity to this statement,

but it should not warrant turning a blind eye on the prevalent practice of illegal entry. The guest worker program that the

Bush administration was touting had the potential to mitigate the

problem with illegal immigration by allowing migrant workers to fi-nancially gain as a result of legally contributing to the US economy. Illegal immigrants often take “under the table” jobs where official documentation verifying

a person’s capacity to legally work is not required. These jobs generally do not report

the earned wages to the government, translat-ing into no income tax deductions. An unfair

burden is passed onto the average taxpayers who fund basic services such as K–12 education, health

care for the uninsured, and maintenance of

public infrastructures, all of which are com-monly utilized by illegal immigrants. Many states are already under financial duress caused by the economic downturn and are not able to carry the burden of illegal immigrants. Nevertheless, a plethora of legislation has been introduced in several State Houses, which grants illegal immigrants the same rights and privileges enjoyed by taxpayers. There is cur-rently a drive to introduce post-secondary in-state tuition rates to illegal immigrants in various states; this measure already achieved

success in California and Texas. It is unfair that US citizens pay more for tuition than illegal immigrants. Illegal immi-gration also creates lucrative niches for criminal elements. Elaborate people-smuggling networks have been established

to aid people from abroad to illegally enter the US. A major concern is endangerment to the safety of individuals being smuggled because smugglers do not care how they execute the operation as long as they are financially compensated. Immigrants relate horrific stories of being smuggled across the borders and being left to traverse the desert with limited rations. Operations for selling fake forms of identification, such as social security numbers and driver’s licenses, profit from the demand created by illegal immi-gration market; this should be even more alarming in a post-9/11 society. Legal immigration is still important, as illustrated by Congress lifting the cap on H1-B visas, which are granted to highly skilled professional workers, which aided in sustaining the longest running tech-fu-eled economic expansion during the late 1990’s. Foreign-born college students, primarily at the graduate level, make in-valuable contributions towards academic research, enriching the educational experi-ence at their respective institutions. Legal immigration to the United States is still encouraged and offered despite the hor-rific events of 9/11, while a lot of other nations’ immigrations standards are still harsher then the revised US regulations. Americans should not allow positive contributions by legal immigrants to be diminished by the adverse effects the undocumented have on society. q


E ach year Tufts University Alumni Association (TUAA) bestows Senior

Awards upon students who are nominated by faculty and staff for outstanding academics and campus leadership. In the TUAA’s 48-year history, they have never had reason to rethink their choice of recipients. This year, however, the campus left pushed TUAA to rescind an award, forcing them to send a letter to Elizabeth Monnin after she had been notified of her award, an-nouncing that her recent behavior had compelled them to change their minds. The letter cited her actions at the Fares Lecture in Febru-ary, where Liz sat with her back to for-mer President Bush and partook in a noisy disruption, forcing security to remove several students. To the uninitiated, it may sound like the admin-istration is stifling free speech to appease donors after an embarrassment, but, as with any newsworthy item coming straight from an extremist, the veracity of this account is questionable in its completeness. Liz sent a mass email telling of her plight, asking those on the list to “circulate this information.” Picking up the scent of oppression like sharks circling a plane crash, the Boston Globe reported on the story last week (“Tufts senior loses award after insult to elder Bush,” March 28), quoting Liz as stating, “People in power don’t have to get out and rally to make their points—they can do things like take an award away from a student who is making an argument they don’t support.” The Globe glaringly fails to include the fact that TUAA’s role is not to raise funds or to dictate Tufts policy, but to network alums, helping them make the transi-tion to the real world. Liz’s statement is cute

in its auspicious neglect of TUAA’s criteria for Senior Award recipients, which include, notably, the potential to lead the TUAA in the future, a position that current TUAA President Alan MacDougall says—rather obviously—requires the ability to listen. Certainly, Liz has done strikingly little of that in her four years on the Hill. When the SOURCE contacted Monnin, asking for her side of the story, she ignored

us. Why? Probably because the story she gave the Globe was more than a little trite in its al-legations. Monnin’s complaint focuses on the minutiae of her behavior at the Bush speech and the denial of obscene gestures. Indeed, any

one of the 4,800 who witnessed the protest knows that Liz, while part of the ruckus, was not the person who is seen waving her middle finger at the former president in all the press photos. Monnin is, however, guilty of doing her damnedest to prevent George H.W. Bush from exercising his own right to speak, a point MacDougall firmly renounced. Monnin speaks in her email about her pride in “acting with conviction,” yet she points fingers away from herself when these actual deeds be-come the issue. If she truly believed that the activities of which she was admittedly a part were acceptable and within her rights, then her argument should be, “Who cares if it was me who flipped Bush off?” Instead she blames an unnamed student who was conveniently “not available to comment” to the Globe.

Many leftists pretend that the First Amendment includes the right to free ex-pression, a mistake Carl Jackson made last year when he helped steal SOURCE issues. He even suggested that the SOURCE should support this indisputable “right.” Any strict Constitutionalist, however, knows that this is garbage. Nowhere in the Constitution is free-dom of speech considered in terms of actions. Assembly, yes. Infringement on the rights of others, certainly not. Imagine the killer who calls murder his freedom of expression, his art, and his inalienable right. The line is drawn at speech, and it should stay there. More than anything, the TUAA is guilty of granting Monnin the Senior Award in the first place. While she might have (according the Globe) an “A-minus average” in Women’s Studies and Peace and Justice Studies (how laudable) she has yet to demonstrate pub-licly her ability to work inside reality. She has established only a bogus reputation as an “activist,” applauded by the radical left and dismissed as insignificant by the rest. The only thing for which she is known at Tufts is trying to “imagine a campus free from sexual harassment” while serving a punishment for harassing a SOURCE editor. Fortunately, the TUAA was bold enough to admit its mistake, risking a PR debacle and taking a step few University administrators have the guts even to consider. The Globe calls her loss “predictable, since much of her campus leadership cen-tered on organizing confrontational protests.” Clearly the Globe has precious little respect for those who orchestrate real change on campus, who use their words as their actions, forcing people to think intelligently about the various aspects of issues. “We’re not ashamed of our decision,” MacDougall says. “In fact, we’re rather proud of it.” So am I. q

Girl, you know it's true.

by Megan Liotta

Liz's Bogus Journey

If at first you don't succeed, blame the patriarchy.

Miss Liotta is a senior majoring in English and Comparative Religions.

The TUAA was bold enough to admit its

mistake, risking a PR debacle and taking a step few University

administrators have the guts even to consider.


by Joshua Martino

You're So Vain

You probably think this war is about you.

Mr. Martino (LA '02) is a former Editor-in-Chief of THE PRIMARY SOURCE.

Precincts sent officers from neighborhoods where crack

is easier to find than a parking spot to Saks Fifth Avenue to cuff a kid who

would have been disappointed if he had

not been arrested.

M y anti-war buddy exclaimed, “Isn’t it funny how when we do it, it’s called

‘shock and awe,’ and when they do it, it’s called terrorism?” I explained the difference: American bombers attack military targets and terrorists seek civilians. Nonplussed, my pal muttered, “Well, it’s still all about oil.” He stepped into his SUV, and we parted ways. Thousands of Americans cannot make this distinction. During the past few months, they have staged vio-lent anti-war pro-tests, disrupting the lives of mil-lions and wasting countless taxpayer dollars. Just as terrorists attack indiscriminately, scores of war objec-tors destroyed private property, snarled city traffic, and confronted police officers—all on America’s dime. Overwhelmed by the cost of Orange Alert security, our cities languish in debt and cannot afford jail cells, court ap-pearances, and police department overtime to protect citizens from collective tantrums. One wonders why they punish anti- and pro-war Americans alike. Is it anger? Are the streets clogged with a wave of uncontrolled rage towards an unpopular government and an unjust war? I thought so until I met a few of these protestors and found myself asking them, “Are you wearing Chanel?” On my way to my midtown Manhattan office last week, I found a protest: hundreds of anti-war New Yorkers were lying in the middle of Fifth Avenue while hundreds more crowded sidewalks, chanting and holding signs. The po-lice had diverted traffic, and a cop escorted a commuting crowd and me across the chaotic boulevard. In front of Rockefeller Center, I no-ticed a group of young women holding signs. Much to my surprise, they were dressed like girls

out on the town: short skirts, elaborate makeup, and generous sprays of perfume. Many more demonstrators were also dressed to the nines: lots of leather and suede, colorful early-spring knits, designer labels a-go-go! “Vanity,” exclaims Al Pacino, playing Sa-tan in The Devil’s Advocate, “is definitely my

favorite sin.” Can vanity drive a per-son to ignore the danger of plastic handcuffs, endure the barely padded seats in a police van, and suffer the humiliation of arrest and release-at-your-own-recognizance? Yes—protests

don’t save Iraqi civilians (American soldiers do); they are events at which to be seen and heard. Shout, push, get cuffed, eat a moldy sandwich at central booking, get scolded, and home in time for Friends. Sounds more like a night at the club. Narcissism isn’t an anti-war phenomenon. A New Jersey man has vowed to tie a yellow ribbon ‘round every tree in his small suburb to support our troops. Hundreds of country music fans organized a boycott of the Dixie Chicks after the lead singer ridiculed President Bush. And, most famously, our Congressmen com-manded Capitol Hill cafeterias to rename French fries to protest France’s stubborn anti-American diplomacy. From violent demonstrations to “freedom fries,” ges-tures of self-admiration flood our country. And to what end? None, it seems, except to afford a sense of importance

while we feel so desperately helpless. Those against the war watch horrified as America’s bravest are wasted on a cause they do not support; those who defend the war know the Free World cannot stop Saddam Hussein’s madness without American bloodshed. Still, the angst-ridden protests and pointless pro-America symbolism accomplish nothing for either cause. Almost none of the war-objectors have supported the cause of peace by demand-ing accountability from European regimes that fund Saddam Hussein. Nor have the “no blood for oil” cheers become a campaign to boycott oil companies that support Arab dictatorships. Likewise, the New Jersey ribbon-buyer would do better to spend his money on snacks, cards, or gifts to send to our troops. Every disgruntled Dixie Chicks fan ought to send the cost of a CD to organizations that benefit disabled vets or the families of POWs. But self-righteousness trumps common sense. Over two thousand people were arrested at an anti-war riot in San Francisco. Dozens of police officers were injured. Although the New York protest that I witnessed was far more civil, police arrested hundreds. Roving gangs of bellowing children frightened a city already on edge. The mayor closed some of Manhattan’s busiest streets. Police precincts sent officers from neighborhoods where crack is easier to find than a parking spot to Saks Fifth Avenue to cuff a kid who would have been disappointed if he had not been arrested, or else they gave an aging hipster a chance to relive his collegiate glory. And while the Midtown crowd dressed well, they felt even better. We’re making a dif-ference, they said. We’re making our voices heard! But as I walked home from work and sanitation crews cleaned up their wrappers, fliers, and pamphlets, the world was not one step closer to peace. q

"Are you wearing Chanel?"



Protesting 101—Manipulating the Legal System explores the Constitutional rights of demonstrators and legal problems they might encounter while protesting any number of noble causes. Escaping indictment after getting arrested at a protest guarantees an A. The unlikely

scenario of jail time is discussed so one may have cable

and hot showers (if de-sired). Bonus features include learning how to aggravate a riot

officer so it results in a lucrative police brutality tort

suit. Outside work includes actually staging protests and attending fellow

students’ court hearings. Military support rallies will not count toward

this portion of the grade.

Economics 56i—Theories That Don’t Work But Should is an excellent study of so-called “failed” economic theo-ries, which everyone knows will work if we all just agree to try a little bit harder next time. Communism and social-ism work in theory (even if that theory requires man to act against his own nature), and that’s good enough for Tufts. Class discussions are based on texts by the great economic masterminds Lenin, Marx, and Chomsky. Strategies for abolishing capital are explored, and students are encouraged to write their final paper in spray paint on local sidewalks. One copy of each required text is on reserve in Tisch, and none are ordered for the bookstore. Students must find a way to work together to get all the assignments done with minimal resources. Expect a line for pizza at the end of the semester party.

Criminal Law 1—Introduction to Crime is a must for anyone who wants to show the Man who’s boss. It covers all the basics of criminal life, from petty misdemeanors to white-collar larceny, and how to avoid getting caught. Expect guest lectures from students who incriminated themselves by sending out mass emails announcing their intent to commit campus crimes and how other students can learn from their mistakes. A seminar on shoplift-ing is always intense, as students learn to screw over the evil capitalist machine for the first time. The unit on excuses is usually students’ favorite part. Everyone should take this class because no criminal wants to find himself in the Observer’s Police Blotter.

Journalism 78—Biased Communications helps students reclaim the talk radio industry, which has of late come under the control of malicious conserva-tive talking heads, including Laura Ingraham, Sean Hannity, and Bill O’Reilly. Budding broadcasters are expected to slander their foes to achieve personal agendas and to gradually phase out their senses of humor. Students are equipped to effectively cater to the insatiable demand for left wing talk radio hosts. High-lights of the course include guest speak-er Al Franken, who provides insight about the vast possibilities as a liberal radio host and discusses why right-wing radio will see its imminent demise.

THE PRIMARYSOURCECourse Reviews 2003

V E R I T A S S I N E D O L O

Courses we wouldn’t be surprised to see added to the Tufts curriculum:

24 THE PRIMARY SOURCE, MONTH XX, XXXX

NOTABLE AND QUOTABLE

NON-PROFIT ORG.U.S. POSTAGE

PAIDBOSTON, MA

PERMIT NO. 1161

Tufts UniversityTHE PRIMARY SOURCEMayer Campus CenterMedford, MA 02155

Get money, then cash that check for me.All my niggas just bust yo’ tech for me. —Busta Rhymes

All of us have a responsibility to make sure that the oxygen of democracy—the justice system—functions properly. —Margaret Marshall

You’ve been tellin’ me you’re a genius since you were seventeen.In all the time I’ve known you, I still don’t know what you mean.The weekend at the college didn’t turn out like you planned.The things that pass for knowledge, I can’t understand. —Steely Dan

Free speech is crap! —Ariana Flores, 2002

It’s about dissenting and acting out our con-stitutional rights. —Ariana Flores, 2003

Look at it this way. No matter how bad it is, we will not all die. We have hoped for some other way but nothing has worked. Twelve years ago it went almost all the way but failed. We cannot wait anymore. We want the war and we want it now. —Anonymous Iraqi

I have known Richard Perle for many years and know him to be a man of integrity and honor. —Donald Rumsfeld

Has it ever occurred to you how lucky you are to be alive? More than 99 percent of all the creatures that have ever lived have died without progeny, but not a single one of your ancestors falls into that group! Not a single one of your ancestors, all the way back to the bacteria, succumbed to predation before reproducing, or lost out in the competition for a mate. —Daniel C. Dennett

Anyone who in discussion relies upon au-thority uses, not his understanding, but his memory. —Leonardo da Vinci

A man may fight for many things: his country, his principles, his friends, the glistening tear on the cheek of a golden child. But person-ally I’d mud wrestle my own mother for a ton of cash, an amusing clock, and a sack of French porn. —Edmund Blackadder

What do you expect from a culture and a nation that exerted more of its national will fighting against Disney World and Big Macs than the Nazis? —Dennis Miller

You know why the French don’t want to bomb Saddam Hussein? Because he hates Americans, he loves mistresses and wears a beret. He is French, people. —Conan O’Brien

I think anybody in their right mind, anybody that has a brain at all, wasn't too excited with the concept of going to war—but once we're in it, I think you're a f***ing a**hole not to f***ing root for our side. —Axl Rose

Nothing is more fairly distributed than com-mon sense: for each man thinks he has enough of it. —René Descartes

No power of government ought to be employed in the endeavor to establish any system or article of belief on the subject of religion. —Jeremy Bentham

Kevlar: even scientists can’t explain its strength. —Fox News

Although prepared for martyrdom, I prefer that it be postponed. —Sir Winston Churchill

Our modern wars make many unhappy while they last and none happy when they are over. —Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

You can fool too many of the people too much of the time. —James Thurber

You’re looking at a couple weeks of bombing and then I’d be astonished if this campaign took more than a week. Astonished. —William Jefferson Clinton

We can live by a higher standard. Indeed we must because, well, we are the good guys. And what makes the good guys good is be-ing better than the bad guys. If that sounds too simplistic to you, all I can say is: shame on you. —Jonah Goldberg

There are four characteristics which brand a country unmistakably as a dictatorship: one-party rule, executions without trial or with a mock trial for political offenses, the national-ization or expropriation of private property, and censorship. A country guilty of these outrages forfeits any moral prerogatives, any claim to national rights or sovereignty, and becomes an outlaw. —Ayn Rand

I mean to live my life an obedient man, but obedient to God, subservient to the wisdom of my ancestors; never to the authority of political truths arrived at yesterday at the voting booth. —William F. Buckley, Jr.

You can prevent your opponent from defeating you through defense, but you cannot defeat him without taking the offensive. —Sun Tzu

The next time a Saddam Hussein takes over a Kuwait, or North Korea brandishes a nuclear weapon, will we be ready? —Ronald Reagan, 1994

SOURCE THE PRIMARY · 2 THE PRIMARY SOURCE, APRIL 3, 2003 THE PRIMARY SOURCE, APRIL 3, 2003 3 page 6 page 21 page 12 STHE PRIMARY OURCE Vol. XXI • The Journal of Conservative Thought

Documents