Page 1

Hanover Review Inc. P.O. Box 343 Hanover NH, 03755

Volu m e 3 7 , Is su e 11

Mond ay, Novemb er 1 3 , 2 0 1 7


DARTMOUTH HALL as the leaves begin to fall

Image courtesy of Dartmouth Communications

Conservative Perspectives Freshmen on the Frat Ban from Across the Pond Jack F. Mourouzis

Editor-in-Chief Editor’s Note: We sat down with Louis Hoffman, deputy editor of The Burkean Journal, an upand-coming conservative student publication out of Trinity College in Ireland. Given the many similarities between The Journal and The Review, we found it interesting to explore the ideas of a similar group of students in a generally dissimilar society. William J. Brandon and Alexander Rauda contributed to the transcription of this interview. The Dartmouth Review (TDR): Could you tell a little more about how the journal was founded? What motivated you? Why did you start it? Louis



About a year ago, this other guy (he since dropped out) and I bonded because we were visibly annoyed with the liberal domination of our campus. That’s a strong word, but Trinity is probably the most liberal of the colleges in Ireland; it’s very progressive, it tries to emulate a lot of American liberalism. We came together, it started off as an idea, and over a year we started to get together more and more often. We wanted to try and start a bit of a debate on campus. It’s been very grassroots; we were disappointed in the way our country was going. You’ve got to stand up for what you believe in. In Trinity especially, there is a lot of people who despise me as a conservative. They tell you the standard: “You’re a Nazi, you’re a homophobe, you’re

this and that.” Anyway, the whole principle is to start a paper, a publication, that will enable us to have a platform and say “This is what I stand for.” TDR: How has the journal been received by the university community?

LH: That’s an interesting one, because the reception is always going to be mixed, especially in a campus like this. It goes from a lot of Trotskyites, real socialists vehemently disagreeing with it, to a lot of people who genuinely see why we are doing this. Overall, it is surprising positive, even when other papers have tried to point us out as notorious and such. The majority of people think “I understand what you are doing; we need a little

debate on campus.” Conservatives are obviously delighted, because they’re like “Finally, you can stand up for what you say, it’s not that weird.” The idea is more important than anything for us: the idea of “Here’s a platform: it’s okay to think like this, if you don’t that fine, come here and set up your own paper.” That’s what has happened; a new far-left progressive organization called the Red Pen has been set up. But we are sort of in favor of promoting freedom of speech and dialogue. Overall, I’d say it’s incredibly positive, especially when it got set up and got going. Initially, we got abuse; for example, in nightclubs, people saying “you’re this” or a “disgusting a**hole pro-life prick.”


William J. Brandon Robert F. Carangelo Jacob M. Karlan Contributors Editor’s Note: In this piece, several of our freshman contributors offer their thoughts on the freshman fraternity ban, which this year lasted until October 23. Jacob G. Karlan Every alumnus remembers his first Dartmouth Fall Term. But, the experience of Dartmouth freshmen today would be hardly recognizable to most alumni. The administration has toppled tradition and enacted policies like the hard-alcohol ban, the new housing system, and the fraternity ban. These actions have fundamen-

tally altered the age-old Dartmouth experience. The administration has claimed that the intention is to make Dartmouth a “safe, sustainable place” with a community that is “more inclusive… with more options for social life and community interaction.” The administration is utilizing policies like the fraternity ban as vehicles of this change. When evaluating a policy, however, intention is only one of many factors. In the case of the Dartmouth fraternity ban, my experience was generally positive in the first few weeks of its enactment, but the actual effects of the policy do not, in the end, align with its intended effects.





Editor-in-Chief Jack Mourouzis discusses the triedand-true principle of innocent until proven guilty.

The Review looks at the Boy Scouts of America’s decision to allow female scouts to join.

The Review examines the deadly ideology around the one hundredth anniversart of its implementation.




2 Monday – November 13, 2017

The Dartmouth Review




For thirty-five years, The Dartmouth Review has been the College’s only independent newspaper and the only student opinion journal that matters. It is the oldest and most renowned campus commentary publication in the nation and spawned a national movement at the likes of Stanford, Harvard, Princeton, and countless others. Our staff members and alumni have won many awards, including the Pulitzer Prize, and have been published in the Boston Globe, New York Times, National Review, American Spectator, Wall Street Journal, Weekly Standard, Village Voice, New Criterion, and many others. The Review aims to provide a voice for any student who enjoys challenging brittle and orthodox thinking. We stand for free speech, student rights, and the liberating arts. Whatever your political leanings, we invite you to come steep yourself in campus culture and politics, Dartmouth lore, keen witticisms, and the fun that comes with writing for an audience of thousands. We’re looking for writers, photographers, cartoonists, aspiring business managers, graphic designers, web maestros, and anyone else who wants to learn from Dartmouth’s unofficial school of journalism.



SAFE space

“Because every student deserves a safe space”

– Inge-Lise Ameer, Former Vice Provost for Student Affairs

Meetings held Mondays at 6:30 PM at our offices at 32 S. Main Street (next to Lou’s in the lower level office space)

INSIDE THE ISSUE Conservatives Across the Pond...........................................Page 1


Reflections on the Frat Ban..................................................Page 1 Editorial: Truth Today, Gone Tomorrow..........................Page 3 The Week in Review...............................................................Page 4 Jack Stinson: Hanover Legend.............................................Page 7 A Eulogy for the Boy Scouts................................................Page 8 100 Years of Communism..................................................Page 10 Boys in the School System..................................................Page 11

SUBSCRIBE The Dartmouth Review is produced bi-weekly by Dartmouth College undergraduates. It is published by the Hanover Review, Inc., a tax-deductible, non-profit organization. Please consider helping to support Dartmouth’s only independent newspaper, and perhaps the only voice of reason left here on campus. Yearly print subscriptions start at just $40, for which we will mail each issue directly to your door. Electronic subscriptions cost $25 per year, for which you receive a PDF of The Review in your inbox at press time. Contributions above $40 are tax-deductible and greatly appreciated. Please include your mailing address and make checks payable to:

Or subscribe online at:

The Dartmouth Review P.O. Box 343 Hanover, NH 03755 (603) 643-4370


The Dartmouth Review

Monday – November 13, 2017



“Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win great triumphs, even though checkered by failure, than to takerank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in the gray twilight that knows neither victory nor defeat.” —Theodore Roosevelt




Truth Today, Gone Tomorrow

Jack F. Mourouzis

Executive Editors Joshua D. Kotran Marcus J. Thompson

Managing Editors Devon M. Kurtz Zachary P. Port B. Webb Harrington

Associate Editors Rachel T. Gambee Daniel M. Bring

Senior Correspondents Michael J. Perkins John S. Stahel


Robert Y. Sayegh

Vice Presidents Jason B. Ceto & Noah J. Sofio


Greg Fossedal, Gordon Haff, Benjamin Hart, Keeney Jones

Legal Counsel

Mean-Spirited, Cruel, and Ugly

Board of Trustees

Martin Anderson, Patrick Buchanan, Theodore Cooperstein, Dinesh D’Souza, Michael Ellis, Robert Flanigan, John Fund, Kevin Robbins, Gordon Haff, Jeffrey Hart, Laura Ingraham, Mildred Fay Jefferson, William Lind, Steven Menashi, James Panero, Hugo Restall, Roland Reynolds, William Rusher, Weston Sager, Emily Esfahani-Smith, R. Emmett Tyrrell, Sidney Zion

NOTES Special thanks to William F. Buckley, Jr. To all our Veterans: we salute you. The Editors of The Dartmouth Review welcome correspondence from readers concerning any subject, but prefer to publish letters that comment directly on material published previously in The Review. We reserve the right to edit all letters for clarity and length. Please submit letters to the editor by mail or email: Or by mail at:

The Dartmouth Review P.O. Box 343 Hanover, NH 03755 (603) 643-4370

Please direct all complaints to:

In 1794, George Washington wrote Instead, we have remained reliant upon that “Truth will ultimately prevail where the ancient tradition of Justinian: ei inthere is pains to bring it to light.” Gone, cumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat. however, are the days when such senti- The burden of proof is on the one who ments held true. In the age we live in, declares, not on one who denies. truth has lost its power, value, and even In recent weeks, the College has been allure. What, then, is the value of telling transfixed by its own similar scandal: the truth, or even asking for it? the investigation into psychology proIn the spookier days of October, I fessors Todd Heatherton, Paul Whalen, spent several enjoyable hours watching and Bill Kelley for allegations of sexual the Scream movies, a seemingly innoc- misconduct. Details have been painfully uous (though truly witty and well-pro- lacking since the initial announcement. duced) franchise from the 1990s. In At this point, the only information between Ghostface’s vicious slashes was available is as follows: woven a more subtle narrative about the violence of Hollywood, with • The College’s investigation the third film even explicitly regarding Heatherton is unreferencing the obsession related to the other two with sex present in the professors and concerned industry. This was espean out-of-state matter. cially striking because of • The allegations are unrethe recent breaking of the lated to research involving Harvey Weinstein scandal, human subjects. followed in more recent • Both the College and weeks by numerous stars’ various local and state falls from grace. But authorities – including how could this all have the Attorney General of come as a shock? As the New Hampshire – are Scream movies showed, conducting investigaallegations of abuse in tions into the matter. Hollywood are nothJack F. Mourouzis ing new; they have been Information is truly seemingly common knowledge in the sparse; indeed, it would be inappropriate public for decades, and now it seems as for anyone to pass judgement upon the though everything is coming to a head. three professors when so little is known. The most fascinating element, how- That did not, however, stop NYU from ever, is not the revelations concerning terminating Heatherton from his posiindustry giant Kevin Spacey’s predatory tion as a visiting scholar. While leave past, nor the long-awaited answer to the may be a more standard and appropriquestion of who abused Corey Feldman. ate reaction, termination begins to cross The most fascinating element of this the line into vigilantism. The investigastory is the ambiguity of truth, and the tion is still underway, which means that breakdown of one of this country’s most the authorities themselves still do not sacred principles: innocent until proven know the full story behind what may or guilty. This principle is – rightly so – in- may not have happened. The College tegral to the United States’ function as itself is in a similar situation. At this a free society. It becomes problematic, point, no one knows what even allegedhowever, when we reach the point we ly happened, let alone the truth. Why, are at now: what do we do when nobody then, do some feel the need to deal out has any idea what to believe? their own justice? An allegation is just that – an allegaThe theme of vigilante justice seems tion. Without corroboration as truth, to be growing in today’s society. Perit serves only as tarnish; today, how- haps this is due to the sheer ambiguity ever, it seems to be more of a rust, and of the times we live in. With fake news in the worst cases, a bullet to the heart. and general misinformation running There is little separating the accusations rampant, nobody knows what to beagainst Bill Clinton or Donald Trump lieve anymore. In a political arena so from those against Spacey and others bitterly torn by two emboldened wings, in Hollywood; why, then, has the vigi- vigilante justice is the new norm and lante reaction been so strong? Why do misinformation is the currency of the so many rush to justice when the truth realm. Those of us more reasonable folk is still not yet known? How do average are left on the sidelines, scanning the people develop the ideal that they are gridiron for the truth, the whole truth, allowed to pass justice on events with and nothing but it. It is our duty to upwhich they are not even tangentially hold the principles of the democracy associated? This ultimately plays into we have championed, and stand as the the greater concept of vigilante justice, last vestiges against any radicalization which has been explored by many in that threatens tradition. In doing so, we the past. However, it has never been a must always seek Truth – wherever it commonly accepted thread of justice. may be found.

4 Monday – November 13, 2017

The Dartmouth Review

WEEK IN REVIEW CONTROVERSY SURROUNDING VISITING SCHOLAR MARK BRAY CONTINUES Visiting scholar Mark Bray has appeared in national news again, this time being interviewed by Vice News on the Anti-fascist “Antifa” movement. Back in August, Bray published Antifa: The Antifascist Handbook, which details the history and ideology of Antifa. Shortly after publishing his book, Bray defended Antifa’s violent tactics in an interview with the Southern Poverty Law Center. Dartmouth College released a statement condemning his words, prompting numerous faculty members to defend Bray. Last Saturday, Vice News conducted a live Facebook interview with Bray to discuss Antifa. He began the interview by explaining that Antifa uses a strategy involving “direct action from below that rejects turning to the State, the police, or legislatures to stop the far right.” He also claimed that Antifa is not about confrontation as portrayed in the media. Instead, the Antifa movement focuses mainly on research, doxing (publishing private information about individuals – neo-Nazis and members of the alt-right in this case), community education, and cancelling events by pressuring venue owners. Violence is allegedly used as a last-resort. And yet, Bray also talked about an Antifa tactic called “preemptive self-defense” in which Antifascists engage with right-wing protestors just in case the latter could become violent. Following Bray’s introduction, Vice began a Q&A and took questions from the comment section on live feed. The first question asked why violence is justified in the political arena. Bray opened by saying that “the political arena is violence” and “the most violent entity in human history is the State.” He then implied that Antifascists fighting back are similar to slaves and holocaust victims fighting against their oppressors. When asked if Antifa may not have been used violence effectively, Bray said “off the top of my head, I’m not entirely sure” and that he’s “reluctant to make blanket statements at a distance.” Bray went on to defend Antifa’s ideology and actions numerous times throughout the Q&A. When asked about why Antifascists have to cover up their identity, he admits that they engage in illegal activities including destruction of property. He compared Antifa violence to a slave rebellion and the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising. When asked about negative consequences of the Antifa movement, Bray says that Antifa is misunderstood and then dodged the question altogether.

Bray’s comments about Antifa are troubling to many. Equating the actions of Antifa to the desperate struggle of Holocaust victims and refusing to denounce the violent tactics of the movement only serves to show how out-oftouch Antifa supporters really are.

HANOVER FIRE CHIEF OFFERS THOUGHTS ON THE HOMECOMING BONFIRE Amidst swirling controversy and argument about the meaning of tradition, the annual Homecoming bonfire went on as usual. As always, after just a few short weeks on campus, the class of 2021 circled a fire and ran their 21 laps (or at least they claim to have). Upperclassmen urged young 21s looking to make a name for themselves to defy the efforts of the administration and touch the fire. Dartmouth Night and the bonfire were a scene that many students will never forget, and it is a tradition that the Dartmouth community has cherished for years. Hanover Fire Chief Martin McMillan added his thoughts to the bonfire debate recently, publishing a statement about this year’s successes in managing the bonfire. McMillan was quick to point out that not nearly as many 21s attempted to touch the fire as 20s did last year. “I have attended the last four bonfires and witnessed approximately 90 students enter the bonfire’s inner circle i.e. “collapse zone,” said McMillan. “There were two students in 2014, seven in 2015, with 2 DSS officers injured, approximately 75 students in 2016, and fewer than 10 students in 2017”. As many witnessed this year, no matter what safety measures are taken, there will always be a few brave members of the freshmen class who will attempt to touch the fire. Chief McMillan’s seems to be content with this year’s results. However, it remains to be seen whether the changes of this year are here to stay.


bia University issued a statement demanding that the Columbia University College Republicans (CUCR) lose their funding. The BSO reacted to the recent speeches given by conservative speakers Tommy Robinson and Mike Cernovich, whom the Columbia Spectator deemed “white supremacists.” In a statement regarding the speakers, the BSO said, “We do not support, in any capacity, giving a platform to beliefs that blatantly oppose our livelihood and humanity, and especially not in the name of intellectual diversity.” Students, New York residents, and Antifa activists organized Facebook events to protest Robinson and Cernovich as well. The BSO demanded that the Student Governing Board refuse to continue funding the CUCR, even though the school had only paid for security and the facilities. Out of the roughly $250,000 given to Columbia student groups annually, just $4,640 was given to the CUCR last year. Joseph Siegel for CUCR succinctly summarized these efforts as trying to allow “a heckler’s veto to whomever feels emotionally hurt by anyone” and equating certain views to “physical ideas of safety and violence.” Despite the BSO’s efforts, university representatives stated that Columbia will not begin vetting speakers invited by CUCR, regardless of student backlash.


This week the Women, Gender and Sexuality Studies 10 class opened their termly exhibit in Baker-Berry Library. As the display states, students were “required to produce creative work that encourages, incites, induces, or otherwise ignites new ways of thinking about or acting upon an issue or topic central to the ideas, materials, and discussions of this course.” The exhibition description does specifically delineate these central issues and topics; the range of topics is thus quite expansive, including racial microaggressions, gender-neutral bathrooms, and the problems with white feminists. The most eye-catching of these projects is an enormous portrait of President Trump constructed from hundreds of smaller photographs. The smaller photographs are, in fact, other portraits - these depicting the victims that lost their lives in major US shootings. The victims included come from the Luby’s Diner Shooting in 1991, the Virginia Tech massacre in 2007, the Sandy Hook massacre in 2012, the Orlando Pulse shooting in 2016, and the most


Stinson’s: Your Pong HQ Cups, Balls, Paddles, Accessories

(603) 643-6086 |

The Dartmouth Review

Monday – November 13, 2017

Erik R. Jones recent attack in Las Vegas this October. All of the victims are grouped into lists by shooting, attached to the sides of the larger image of President Trump for passers-by to read. In addition to the names of the victims and the date and location of these shootings, the lists also include the names and descriptions of the shooters themselves. The student behind this project, Samuel Fox, is a ‘20 at the College. In his personal statement about the piece, Mr. Fox wrote that this work intends to highlight the effect that “toxic masculinity” may have on the preponderance of mass shootings in recent US history. His use of President Trump’s portrait as the focal point of this project both condemns the President as an example of this form of masculinity, as well as begs the question: “could any white, middle-aged man appear in the place of Donald Trump’s face?” The crux of this project is the belief that heterosexual-white men, such as the President, are dangerous because they feed into a culture of “toxic masculinity.” Despite briefly mentioning the shooters in his victim lists, Mr. Fox’s statement does not address the fact that the Virginia Tech shooter, Seung-Hui Cho, was of South-Korean origins, or the fact that the Orlando shooter, Omar Mateen, was an Islamic Fundamentalist of Afghan origins. This appears to matter little to students viewing the piece. They are drawn in by the image of the President, but rarely stop long enough to read the names of the individuals that were actually involved in these attacks. To that end, the project has been quite successful in garnering attention for Fox’s chosen issue. Whether his defamation the President and use of victims is justified, however, remains to be seen.

Alexander R. Kaplan Jacob M. Karlan Rachel T. Gambee Jacob G. Philhower CARTOON

“I can’t believe it’s been a year and Trump is STILL our president!”



Signs have recently appeared on college campuses and public spaces across America with a very simple message: “It’s okay to be white.” The signs are merely blank, white sheets of paper with this message in large font, yet many describe them as evidence of the growing white supremacist movement in the United States. This trend has vague origins in the murky world of blogging sites such as Reddit and 4chan, but one of the first concrete incidences occurred when students discovered the signs at a Maryland high school. The principal of the school was quick to respond that she was taking the incident seriously as those who posted the signs possibly intended to “foment racial tension.” Incidences since then have been scattered, but signs have appeared at Tulane University, Harvard, and University of Alberta. East Grand Rapids First Ward Commissioner Chad Zagel said in response to the signs posted in the Michigan community, “With the kind of world that I’m trying to build for my son, I’m deeply offended. The outrage knows no bounds.” Even Harvard Law School Dean of Students Marcia L. Sells has spoken out on these seemingly insignificant signs, saying the people who posted the signs and stickers “intended to divide us from one another. HLS [Harvard Law School] will not let that happen here.” This general sentiment of outrage has prevailed on social media sites, although some have expressed confusion or indignation with regards to the outrage at what they perceived to be harmless signs. Many say that the purpose of this movement in the first place was to show that “American journalists and lefties” hate white people. This is of course too simplistic, but the outrage over the simple sentiment that being white is okay does suggest a serious problem with the way many progressives think about racial identity. Marcia Sells of Harvard Law School and others who have spoken out against these signs should understand that their reactions only play into the hands of those who posted the message. Their outrage demonstrates that identity politics has gone too far.


“What do psych professors and Hollywood big-shots have in common?”


6 Monday – November 13, 2017

The Dartmouth Review


Conservative Students in Ireland campus, we’ve got a socialist party. It’s a visible presence in Ireland, where it’s just not the same as in America. You’ve got Antifa, but they don’t really have any parliamentary power, thank God. TDR: What are your thoughts on Trump?

> CONTINUED FROM PAGE 1 There’s an abortion referendum going on, but I’m not prolife, I’m in the middle. Or I get told I’m a homophobic, or this and that. But that’s not what I care about, because they were deciding before they’ve even read anything. That’s why I tell people “Read what we are writing, and then you’ll see it’s not that different.” The more people have been reading us, and they’re seeing the ideas people propagate, they see we are not evil at all. One publication even pointed out we were “an utterly useless contribution to the world,” and there was some negative backlash against them. We are happy with it. TDR: What is your response to that article calling you “utterly useless?” LH: I commented on it and got 90 likes, saying what the journal was about. A lot of these people use hyperbole. We have conversation in Trinity, which is great, including left-wing, right-wing, center, communists, that sort of thing, and everyone just has a discussion based on what they stand for. It was almost like a genuine free speech safe space for debate, where you can say what you think and back it up. And [the author of that article] was there and didn’t say it to my face, which is quite a cowardly thing, because I know for a fact the Trinity News editors described the Burkean Journal as “the rise of fascism.” The Trinity News editors are just so scared that people may agree with us, they are desperately trying to name us as fascists and far-right. It’s not; we’re not doing anything wrong. We just see it as a positive; they don’t realize it’s free press. The more they put it out there and the more they react angrily against us the more people say “F**k these guys.” The more they react against us, the more peo-

ple are pushed toward us and see we are speaking sense. I think it’s interesting that the more people read, the more they realize we aren’t pushing one idea or one ideology; we’re just providing a platform for freedom of speech. It’s a good thing and I think a lot of people agree with that. TDR: Checking back at the article, I think they deleted your comment. LH: That’s hilarious. It’s sad, because we don’t mind when they write stuff about us because that’s their platform. Contradiction is inherently not going to be part of their paper. They’re just not happy because now there’s a visible outlet for people who disagree. They’re freaking out because they’ve had a monopoly on it for so long. They turn away articles that they don’t agree with and shut down anything they don’t agree with, but suddenly there’s something that they can’t deal with. We didn’t go for a grant because we wanted to remain independent; they can’t control us, there’s nothing they can do. At the end of the day, we’re a couple of students that are passionate about politics.

much more conservative than Ireland. Conservatism has a different meaning in Ireland than America. But we are so linked in to the American system, because of American cultural hegemony over the world; we are so linked in to your political system and your politi-

LH: European conservatism is very different to American conservatism. Even the Democrats would probably be a center right party in Ireland. Americans are inherently so

LH: I never really thought I was conservative until I came to college. I sort of consider myself a European neocon-

The more people read, the more they realize we aren’t pushing one idea or one ideology; we’re just providing a platform for freedom of speech.

cal battles. It’s so funny; when Trump won, there were people at Trinity crying, but he’s not even their president! In America it would be interesting to see if I’d be classified as a conservative, because in Ireland I am. The state is more involved in the daily running of citizens, and that’s just a byproduct of things like the French Revolution, the Enlightenment, 1848, all this steady progression. It’s always funny to Americans seeing the juxtaposition in Ireland. People are fiscally conservative – there’s inherent Catholicism – but socially are becoming increasing more liberal. Same-sex marriage passed easily here; there wasn’t a big debate, there wasn’t anyone really against it. Ireland is a weird country and Europe

In Ireland there’s such a plethora of different ideas. Your left wing is nothing compared to ours; we have genuine Trotskyites on campus, we’ve got a socialist party. It’s a visible presence in Ireland, where it’s just not the same as in America.

TDR: Tell me a bit about conservatism in Europe. It’s generally not something that Americans would think exists.

scribe your own personal brand of conservatism? What do you believe in and how did you come to believe it?

is very weird because it’s not conservative in the same way as America. Even the problems we face are very different from those in America. Nationalism is inherently different than in America; in America it’s based on ideals and values, whereas in Europe it’s based very much on ethnicity. TDR: How would you de-

servative, as it’s a new branch, so quiet center. I believe in the commission of a capitalist system, the economy before law. I find what makes people call me a conservative is that I just disagree with liberal domination of our popular culture. You’re told to accept things, you’re told you can’t think like this, you can’t do that. That’s always what bothered me; that’s what I stand up for. Freedom of speech is such a big issue for me. It’s easy to stand up with people you agree with; it’s harder against those who disagree with you. In many ways, it’s hard to quantify what I stand for entirely. I was pro-Trump in the build-up to the election, and that’s what made people think “Oh he’s so conservative, he’s so far-right,” because I genuinely stood for what he stands for. Post-election, I don’t agree with some of what he’s done, but in the build-up, the manifestation of what people want – populism, change, the break from corruption – that’s why I liked him. For me, since Trump came into power, he’s completely changed politics; the Democrats and the Republicans have to listen to people now. It’s so funny when people ask what you believe in, because in America it’s so easy, because you have a two-party system. In Ireland there’s such a plethora of different ideas. Your left wing is nothing compared to ours; we have genuine Trotskyites on

LH: Obviously, that’s what gets the most attention because he’s such a divisive figure. Post-election, I don’t agree with so much of what he’s done, but what he represented at that time for me was change. People wanting to take positive change, the idea of him during the election, and my hatred of Hillary Clinton drove me to him. Hillary Clinton’s no fly zone over Syria, the Clinton Foundation, all of this I just found so ridiculous. It annoyed me when people claimed “Hillary Clinton didn’t win because she’s a woman,” or that “Trump got in because people are racist.” That’s not the case. People are starting to realize now that it’s this sort of language that actually pushes people to Trump and away from traditional parties. You can’t freely express yourself and say “This is what I stand for” without being shouted down. You’re never going to be able to complete yourself politically and you just end up getting more and more radical. When you get told “You’re wrong,” you get more stubborn and more determined. It’s a dangerous trance; I liked him at the time, I don’t like him so much now. It was the idea he stood for more than the policies he’s implemented since then. TDR: How is conservatism viewed in Irish society in general? Not just in campus, but on the scale of the whole county. Are their stigmas against being a conservative in Ireland? LH: It’s not conservatism in the same way as in America. The ideals of the Catholic Church still dominate our society, and people are trying to overthrow that. When Ireland sought its independance there was a lot of left-wing socialists involved, like James Connelly, unlike the American Revolution; George Washington was a landowner in Virginia, and so on. These were ordinary people struggling for themselves and from that there’s a sort of strong tradition of hatred of conservatism, but it has a more accepted place in our society.

The Dartmouth Review

Monday – November 13, 2017



Sitting Down with The Burkean Journal

TRINITY COLLEGE Ireland’s top uni. With same-sex marriage, there was a small minority that opposed it, but most people accepted that it was just normal and no one would have batted an eyelid. The abortion campaign which is dominating politics right now is seen as Mr. Mourouzis is a senior at the College and Editor-in-Chief of The Dartmouth Review.

Image courtesy of Trinity College conservative issue, but I don’t think it is. But not everyone who is generally conservative is pro-life, and vice versa. Especially in the millennial generation, conservatism is not a particularly popular thing, but I still think that Ireland deep down has this sort of inherent conservative anger that just won’t go away.

TDR: What do you see as the future of The Journal and of conservatism in general at Trinity and in Ireland going forward? LH: Well I see the future of The Journal as incredibly positive. It’s gonna grow, we’re getting more and more people involved either as writers

or contributors or people involved on the editorial team. We have people from other colleges coming to us because there’s just no one with a platform like us in ireland. Even in the UK there’s not a platform for it and it’s getting increasingly more popular. We’ve had a professor from Yale and a professor from Emory write, more and more people are realizing that we are serious. On our Facebook page, we’ve only been up like a month or two now, we’re at like 800 likes and are trying to get to 1000 by the end of the month; we just keep growing. Because it’s smallscale, and we’re all college students, we don’t have specific office hours, so it’s all coming out of our free time. But the more people want to get involved the more promising it is. It’s so positive. The future is in online publications; no one really reads papers anymore. So we’re just gonna keep doing what we do, and it’s great to see the reaction. I think the European brand of conservatism is

just going to become steadily more entrenched within Trinity. We’re happy we’re making progress. It makes it easier for people to speak their minds and disagree, and it makes it easier for people on the left to see more conservative ideas. This isn’t putting forward my ideas; it’s about putting forward a platform for dissent, for discussion, for debate, and to make our country better, it’s a small step. We’re not to change the world, but if we can change the way twenty people think, then it’s been a success. If you can change the way people who will someday run our country think, than you’ve made positive change. We’re trying to get younger people on board to make sure this has longevity. I think our European brand of conservatism is only going to grow stronger, as this has been a rallying point for people who disagree. I think that has been more important than the publication: this idea that you can disagree, and still be successful.

Jack Stinson: Hanover Legend to those in the Hanover area. Through his store and his personal work, Jack has given so much to others, expecting nothing in return. Through his volunteer work, he has aided countless organizations in the

served. For the Dartmouth student, he welcomes the freshmen class with a delicious and homemade dinner and breakfast before they depart for their freshman trips. His welcoming act (and deli-

Jack never hesitates to lend a helping hand. His influence in the community is unmistakable. You would be hard pressed to find a community event that Jack has not left a positive mark on.

Brian A. Morrison


A staple of Hanover and Dartmouth alike, Stinson’s Village Store and its proud owner, Jack Stinson have been an integral part of the Hanover community for years. As Mr. Stinson celebrates his 60th birthday, it seems fitting to reflect upon the life of a man who has had such a profound impact on the community he cares so deeply about. The life of this incredible man is defined by his deeds— his service and care for those around him. Mr. Morrison is a freshman at the College and a contributor to The Dartmouth Review.

Born in Boston, Jack attended Davis and Elkins College, graduating with a degree in business. He then moved to Hanover and purchased the store that would become his life’s passion. Since 1979, the Stinson family has owned and operated the legendary store on Allen street, Jack working each day open to close to build the little store just off of main street into a special part of Hanover. A testament to small business owners everywhere, Jack embodies the entrepreneurial spirit. His store is so much more than its shelves of products, rather it is a fundamental part of Hanover’s and Dartmouth’s identity. Constantly giving back, Jack always lends a helping hand

Hanover area. From grilling for suicide prevention, to helping local sports teams supplies for their cookouts—he also provides the grills for the local boy scout cookouts—Jack never hesitates to lend a helping hand. His influence in the community is unmistakable. You would be hard pressed to find a community event that Jack has not left a positive mark on. Never one to take the spotlight, he works behind the scenes giving whatever he can, whenever he can—it

cious root beer floats) makes freshmen feel at home and gives Jack the chance to meet the new personalities of Dartmouth. Students everywhere are always happy to share memories of Jack. “His subtle sense of humor and no nonsense attitude always leads to some laughs at the register,” Longtime Customer and Review Correspondent John Stahel ‘18 said. “Above all his generosity knows no ends— he continues to keep keystone in the basements at affordable

seems that no is not a word in his vocabulary. Serving Hanover, Jack has been a proud member of the Hanover Recreation Board for 11 years, promoting programs for youth sports and other popular community events. He was also once named Hanover’s Man of the Year, an honor well de-

prices for the Greek system.” Just steps away from Dartmouth’s campus, streams of students have flowed through the door of Stinson’s Store. His caring personality is evident in the profound ties he has formed over the years with students and others who work with the store. “He has been there forever, I

The relationships he has forged with generations of Dartmouth students are incredible and numerous.

am always impressed with how the alumni always stop by and say hi.” said Scott Swain, a longtime vendor of Stinson’s. “I am amazed at the relationships he has. He is such a great guy and he is always there for the students.” Students everywhere sing the praises of this deserving man. The relationships he has forged with generations of Dartmouth students are incredible and numerous. He has even been known to make special shipments of plastic cups, paddles, and ping pong balls for nostalgic alumni in desperate need of a game of pong. “We at The Review have always had a strong relationship with the Stinsons and their eponymous store. Jack has been taking care of the beverage and food needs of both students and the school for years,” said John Stahel ’18. “I hope to see Jack and Donna behind the register for many years to come.” Stories like these seem limitless whenever Stinson’s and its benevolent owner arise. It is rare to find such a selfless and kind person, and we here at Dartmouth are lucky to have Jack as a member of our community. All of us at The Dartmouth Review would like to wish Jack a very happy and healthy birthday. We hope he continues to thrive as an important part of the Dartmouth community— we will undoubtedly be cracking open a few keystones in his honor.

8 Monday – November 13, 2017

The Dartmouth Review


A Eulogy for the Boy Scouts

Daniel M. Bring

Associate Editor On October 11th, 2017, the Boy Scouts of America (BSA) announced that in 2018, their junior program, Cub Scouts, will be opened membership to girls. They also announced that another initiative allowing girls to attain the Boy Scouts’ highest rank of Eagle Scout would be added in 2019. To justify this change, the BSA stated that their programs are capable of benefitting girls as well as boys and that it would make it easier for busy parents to manage the participation of their children. This decision was met with dismay and outright condemnations from many members and allies of the youth organization, which is the largest in North America. For some, including this former Cub Scout, the announcement is nothing less than the dissolution of the organization as we knew it. The BSA was founded in 1910 by a coterie of gentleman including publisher William D. Boyce, Scouting leaders Ernest T. Seton and Daniel C. Beard, and Dartmouth alumnus Charles Eastman, Class of 1887. Since its foundation, over 110 million Americans have participated in the BSA; the organization currently boasts over 2.4 million members and 1 million adult volunteers. It was part of a widespread Scouting movement inspired by Lord Robert Baden-Powell’s “The Boy Scouts Association,” conceived in the United Kingdom in 1907. This first Scouting organization set a precedent for countless others around the world and was based on the precepts of Lord Baden-Powell’s groundbreaking “Scouting for Boys,” published in 1908. The Scouting movement was predicated on assisting in the mental, spiritual, and physical development of boys, with a keen focus on involvement with the great outdoors. Scouting organizations around the world have been, since their inception, a major independent force in civil society. In some cases, this has put them at odds with authoritarian regimes seeking to dominate aspects of private life. In 1920, the Soviet Union, striving to control the country’s youth, banned Scouting. Leading up to the Second World War, Italy and Nazi Germany dissolved their nations’ Scouting organizations, replacing them with fascist youth cults, which often became paramilitary. Cuba’s established Scouting association was disbanded in 1961 following the Communist revolution, and to this day, Cuba remains one of the few nations in the world to lack a Scouting program. It is Mr. Bring is a freshman at the College and an associate editor The Dartmouth Review.

joined by North Korea, Laos, and the People’s Republic of China. It is unfortunate, then, that such a historical and leading organization is waylaid by the kind of phony, pop-culture progressivism that requires arbitrary gender equality, especially at the cost of young boys. There is already the Girl Scouts of the United States of America (GSUSA), which having been founded in 1912 has existed for nearly

rated Scouting experiences have to offer. However, the nature of this whole debacle places the onus on the boys of the BSA to repent and reform. Will there be a drive to open the GSUSA for male members? Can we expect that soon young boys will be a part of the Brownies? Almost certainly not. The BSA’s programs have long offered maturing boys escape from the increasingly gender-sensitive realm of Ameri-

Scouting organizations around the world have been, since their inception, a major independent force in civil society. In some cases, this has put them at odds with authoritarian regimes seeking to dominate aspects of private life.

as long as the BSA. In fact, the first female Scouting organization, the inspiration to the GSUSA, was founded by Lord Baden-Powell’s sister, Agnes. Girls have long had the opportunity to develop most of the same skills as Boy Scouts. Indeed, not even a lack of participation disadvantages girls; for the 2.4 million boys in the BSA, there are a considerable 1.8 million girls in the GSUSA. It is therefore utterly unnecessary to “integrate” the BSA with a fresh crop of female enlistees and degrading to the longstanding mission and purpose of the GSUSA. Not only is it wholly unwarranted to enroll girls in the BSA, but it will also be detrimental to the experience of the boys currently and hereafter participating in the ranks of the Cub and Boy Scouts. “There is a value in activities restricted to men. There is simply a camaraderie that exists among men that can never form across gender lines. Boy Scouts taught me much of what I know today. I wonder if it will be able to do this in the future,” an anonymous Eagle Scout told The Review. It goes without saying that the presence of girls will alter the group dynamic of Cub and Boy Scout troops permanently. Having had both coeducational and single-gender classes over the years, I can say from experience, that in gender-separated classes, boys are not only more focused but also more eager to participate in discussions and the learning process. My admittedly truncated tenure as a Cub Scout was reflective of those observations. A Boy or Cub Scout troop with a significant female presence will undoubtedly have a mutated experience from its former “No Girls Allowed” iteration. Additionally, the experience of the girls who join the BSA will be worse than that of those who opted for the single-gender experience of the GSUSA. They too will be deprived of many of the benefits that gender-sepa-

ca’s public classrooms. At Boy Scout meetings, trips, and larger gatherings, young men are permitted, nay, encouraged to indulge in the less-than-sanitary activities that frowned upon by educators and other such ideologues. There’s fishing, fire building, shooting, and worst of all, the kind of banter that can land an unassuming schoolboy a suspension these days. Unfortunately, those days of Roosevelt-inspired outdoorsy masculinity and experience will soon be behind the BSA.

to girls and punishes the playful and rambunctious virtues of boyhood, this coeducational policy strikes at one of the last environments where boys were able to grow and learn by themselves. Though some may be reluctant to acknowledge it, this whole notion of coercive gender inclusion in civil society’s private organizations is based on the ideological dictates of thirdwave feminism and gender theory. Both of these doctrines are rooted in the myth that the difference between men and women is the ultimate social construct. The increasing presence of their tenets within America’s popular conscience has been guiding people and organizations, like the BSA, towards the compromising of their fundamental values. This trend is dreadfully eroding long-standing institutions for the sake of “inclusivity” and “diversity.” This decay is affecting the very foundations of our civilization as societal pillar after societal pillar collapses. And so, the question stands: why is this change being imposed upon the Boy Scouts? There ought to be more pressure on the GSUSA to offer girls the opportunities the BSA apparently denies them. The Boy

This trend is dreadfully eroding long-standing institutions for the sake of “inclusivity” and “diversity.” This decay is affecting the very foundations of our civilization as societal pillar after societal pillar collapses. The external drive to force gender inclusion upon the BSA, an American institution and societal bastion for young boys, is aimless progressivism at its worst and little less than a grave cultural disorder. It is also the latest victory in what Christina Hoff Sommers has accurately termed “the War against Boys.” With an educational system and cultural dogma that subordinates the development of boys

Scouts’ policy change and its “feminist” proponents disregard not only their values but also their sister organization. The GSUSA has long been a force for female empowerment and leadership development, but that is apparently insufficient for some of America’s gender activists. Of course, girls deserve the opportunity to mature in a single-sex setting, where their gender-specific developmental needs may

be prioritized. A real female pioneer, Agnes Baden-Powell, understood like her brother that there are considerable differences in young boys and girls and that the two genders ought to be afforded the opportunity to learn and explore in separate environments. There is a pragmatic argument that by accepting girls, the BSA can stave off a decades-long decline in their image and participation. In the late 20th-century, a slew of harrowing child sex abuse scandals led to the general disgrace of the Boy Scouts and accordingly, participation fell from around 5.5 million youths in 1987 to today’s level, which hovers slightly above 2 million. Through this change, the BSA is now competing with the GSUSA for membership, with the intention of cornering the Scouting market. It is also possible that BSA’s National Council think that by leading some egalitarian charge, they may able to rehabilitate the organization’s reputation. Of course, that would be a foolish thought. A return to glory for the Boy Scouts would necessitate a return to principle, a return to the values and traditions that made the Boy Scouts such a hallmark of American civil society. The BSA would have to commit itself once again to the advancement and development of boys, instead of faltering to pop-culture progressivism. An unwavering moral and societal imperative is the only thing that can restore the BSA’s character, integrity, and value. Unfortunately, this does not appear to be the path that the National Council has chosen. Instead, they have selected a winding and rocky trail down into the forgotten annals of a resentful history, and it seems they have no intention of turning back. Then, it is with great regret and sadness, that I must pronounce the death of the Boy Scouts of America.


The Dartmouth Review

Monday – November 13, 2017



Freshman Retrospectives on the Frat Ban


The policy essentially isolates freshmen from the rest of campus for seven weeks and precludes them from taking full advantage of the Dartmouth community. For the first two weeks of my freshmen fall, the fraternity ban did benefit me as the administration hoped it would. I met new freshmen every day, as I was essentially cordoned off from the night-life areas frequented by non-freshmen. The freshman social scene is forced into the ancient confines of the Fayerweather dorms or the farthest reaches of campus in the river dorms. If I was feeling particularly adventurous, I could visit the Choates for a change in scenery. Having all of these new freshmen friends in the beginning of the year admittedly gave me a needed sense of security at Dartmouth. Although I am grateful for the friends I made in these first weeks—and while the administration need not eliminate the policy entirely—the fraternity ban lost its positive effect after about two weeks. Meeting fewer people with each passing day, it seemed to me as though the freshmen had settled into their groups. Once a beneficial policy that facilitated my transition quite effectively, the fraternity ban became just another example of the administration limiting my opportunities to take advantage of the Dartmouth community. The policy became a drawn out, sluggish way to prolong the feeling that freshmen are new students and not yet full members of the Dartmouth community. In this way, it is not unlike a “pledge term,” which the College has condemned in regards to Greek life. My days since the fraternity ban’s conclusion have only solidified my understanding that the time mostly stalled my social development as a student. The day the ban ended—although the houses of Webster Ave did seem somewhat daunting to me, perhaps because they had been a sort of forbidden fruit for seven weeks Messrs. Karlan, Brandon, and Carangelo are freshmen at the College and contributors to The Dartmouth Review.

at this point—the fraternity brothers welcomed me and other freshmen with open arms. Dartmouth’s fraternity houses have been particularly inclusive in this way, and I generally feel like more of a member of the Dartmouth community now. If the policy only has benefit for the first two weeks of its enactment, should it not end after two weeks? This logic should concern the administration, but they insist on seeing the Greek system as a scourge on the pure social scene they hope to cultivate instead of the inclusive tradition that I and other freshmen have experienced. William J. Brandon During my final week at home I heard countless stories of debauchery after most of my high school peers were well into their college adjustment. Freshmen unaccustomed to their newfound lack of oversight and inundated with the potential for excess made available by Greek life ignored their academics and engaged in harmful behavior. Before I arrived at the College this fall, the statute barring freshmen from entering fraternities during their first month and a half on campus seemed like a simple, elegant solution problems including binge drinking and sexual assault. Although the frat ban seemed like it would support the tight-knit community Dartmouth values and smooth the transition to unsupervised living, its poor execution yields a host of logistical and social problems. One of the things many freshman, myself included, looked forward to most in college was leaving behind the social hierarchy of high school. Unfortunately, the frat ban has inadvertently caused many of the same problems we experienced back home. First off, it has made dorm rooms the primary venue for socialization. This means students are forced by simple logistics to be socially exclusive. Even the most spacious dorm rooms get crowded when more than five or six people are present. Freshmen quickly form small, insular friend groups that they rarely move outside of. The sense of familiarity that new students crave certainly fuels this

exclusivism, but the frat ban encourages it. Without the freedom to form broader social circles, there is added incentive for students to find solace in familiar faces, eschewing the diversity that is an important part of our community. Several Greek and non-Greek student organizations have made efforts to provide freshmen with alcohol-free social spaces, but those events are few and far between. As a result, they are so crowded that conversation is impossible for those few students who were lucky enough to even get in the door. The frat ban has also pushed freshmen into congregations in off-campus houses, which harbor all of the same dangers of Greek houses but lack the same level of regulation, oversight, and inclusivity. These off campus houses are largely controlled by sports teams and are often far more exclusive than the Greek houses. While a student will generally have no trouble walking into a fraternity on campus, attending off-campus parties requires extensive social connections and thus encourages the formation of cliques for all students. Those students who are well connected enough to be welcome at these off-campus gatherings only socialize with each other, while those remaining freshmen are left to socialize with the cliques they made early on in their Dartmouth careers. Even if these houses were not far more exclusive than the Greek houses on campus, they do not have the benefit of checks from Safety and Security should these spaces become dangerous for students. Furthermore, the College-implemented Alternative Social Spaces, such as residential housing community common rooms, stay near empty most weekend nights, failing to fulfill their roles as hubs of student interaction. This lack of excitement for the Hanlon administration’s new “Moving Dartmouth Forward” housing system completely neutralizes any attempt of the college to replace Greek housing, leaving the freshmen to resort to the same exclusive social scenes that characterized many high school experiences. During first-year trips, students

were told time and time again that Dartmouth is their family, but many students’ experiences with the frat ban have offered evidence to the contrary. Not only does the frat ban separate freshmen from upperclassmen, but it also drives them away from each other. Although measures to create a cohesive freshman class and help freshmen adapt to college are admirable and necessary, the frat ban in its current form is a clumsy and counterproductive solution. The administration’s actions on this issue should positively influence Dartmouth’s culture and the reputation of our Greek system, however, as it stand now, the frat ban is primarily punitive and functions at the expense of students’ wellbeing and safety. Robert F. Carangelo

While sitting in a freshman dorm room with two other guys, watching The Office at 10:30 on a Wednesday night of week 9, it struck me that the frat ban was not really all that terrible. I began thinking about what I would be doing at the exact same time four weeks prior to that day. On a Wednesday during the frat ban, I would probably be socializing with other freshman, in a safe and dry environment, with as many people as the College permits in each specified room. The image in my head of one of these prefrat ban nights reminded me of some of the benefits of having a frat ban. First, Dartmouth goes through incredible measures to make sure that the freshman class bonds in the first couple of weeks. We were all first acquainted with the spirit of the school on first year trips. Our trip leaders all anointed us with a communal anecdote of being tricked into believing we were spreading Robert Frost’s ashes. Similarly, during Homecoming, all of us bonded over running around in a sweaty mob twenty-one times (or at least pretending that we had ran twenty-one laps). The frat ban accomplishes a similar goal. It forces the freshman to interact with each other and develop similar memories to bond over. Once the frats opened up to freshman, all the freshman parted ways and engaged in a

whole set of diverse new social activities. For better or worse, the things that we will always have are the common anecdotes over being bored on Wednesday nights in the company of each other. Further, nearly all of the social spaces that freshman interacted in – primarily dorm rooms – were guaranteed to be completely filled with freshman. Therefore, freshmen were primarily socializing with other freshmen. Had frats been open to freshmen since the beginning of the term, our social spaces would have been a mix of people from different classes. Freshmen, many of whom came to Dartmouth not knowing anyone when they came here, would have been less comfortable approaching people and making new friends in frats than in dorms that were entirely composed of freshmen. One obvious advantage of the frat ban is that it creates a safer transition for some students from high school life to college life. While it is up to the individual to know their limits and not to drink in excess, it is much easier to make these better decisions when they are not in frats, surrounded by possible sources of alcohol. The frat ban gives students time to adjust to college life before being introduced to frats. It also must have also been refreshing for upperclassmen to not have those few eager 21s who are already trying to network themselves into a frat. Finally, the frat ban did promote a healthier lifestyle for some freshman students. On a Wednesday night, freshmen would be more inclined before than after the frat ban to stay in and get a good night sleep instead of staying up late, socializing, and being tired the next day. Also, during the frat ban, freshmen would not wait till 11 pm to start their night socializing as they do post-frat ban. However, I have come to the conclusion that as there are benefits to a frat ban, I truly wish that Dartmouth did not have one. After all, starting the night hanging out with friends and watching The Office is not that bad after all, especially considering that the social scene after 11 is far superior to that during the frat ban.

10 Monday – November 13, 2017

The Dartmouth Review


100 Years of Communism Marcus J. Thompson Daniel M. Bring

Executive Editor Associate Editor The hundredth anniversary of the Bolshevik Revolution has inspired countless retrospectives on communism in the twentieth century. Here at the College, the Dickey Center for International Understanding, along with the Political Economy Project and the Leslie Center for the Humanities, has run the “Centennial Series,” which commemorates the events including the US entry into the First World War and the Bolshevik Revolution through lectures, artwork, and other projects. Most recently, Professor Christopher Snyder of the Economics Department delivered a lecture titled “The Origins of Unfreedom,” in which he spoke on confronting tyranny. The national media has focused on this anniversary as well. The New York Times is running a slew of articles under the banner “Red Century.” These include pieces such as “How Mao Molded Communism to Create a New China,” in which author Roderick MacFarquhar traces Mao’s personal journey as an activist to his deadly Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution. Yet MacFarquhar does not describe these programs as those who lived through them might, instead glossing over the 45 million killed in the four years of the Great Leap Forward, many of them the peasants MacFarquhar seems to think Mao championed. The New York Times’ choice to write generally positively about communism – articles such as “Why Women Had Better Sex Under Socialism,” “Lenin’s Eco Warriors,” and “Why George Bernard Shaw Had a Crush on Stalin” illustrate the tone of most pieces – undoubtedly factors into a disturbing new study of millennial views on communism. An annual survey released by YouGov reveals that 44% of millennials would rather live under socialism, with an additional 7% making the full leap towards communism. Conversely, 42% supported a capitalist system and 7% favored fascism. Another survey funded by the Victims of Communism Memorial Fund found that 23% of Americans aged 21-29 consider Joseph Stalin a “hero.” These trends reveal that the younger generation is ignorant of the death toll caused by communism, which is over 100 million and still ongoing. Apologists often excuse communism’s lethality by claiming that the ideology was “bastardized” by Stalin, Mao, and others. This is, in a sense, true. Nowhere in Marx’s writing does he call for yeoman farmers, or Kulaks, to be massacred and for harsh suppression of basic civil liberties. But is violent comMr. Thompson is a junior at the College and an executive editor at The Dartmouth Review. Mr. Bring is a freshman at the College and an associate editor at The Dartmouth Review.

munism not the application of an ideology that strips individuals of their property? Between 1928 and 1940, Stalin centralized the Soviet agricultural sector into collective farms, while at the same time trying to centralize food production around the axis of Moscow. A very intentional result was the decimation of the rebellious Ukraine: in a one-year period from 1932 to 1933, anywhere from 2.4 to 12 million people died in a genocide by starvation, known as the Holodomor. What we learn from this is simple: collectivization, a hallmark of communist ideology, has manifestations that can be called genocidal. Europe was the first to face the full brunt of the Red Menace. We are well aware of the October Revolution, but not of its immediate consequences and aftershocks. The revolution in the Russian Empire inspired revolutionaries in Germany, which was rapidly destabilizing following the 1918 Armistice. In January 1919, Marxist rebels, calling themselves the “Spartacus League,” rose up in Berlin and plunged the city into brutal street warfare for over a week. By the end of their brief reign of terror, these “Spartacists” and their abortive revolution caused the deaths of over 3,000 people. The immediate push of the fledgling Soviets to expand their evil empire was not so evanescent. With the intention of aiding communist movements in Germany and Western Europe in February 1919, the Red Army poured into newly-independent Poland as part of wider westward offensive. This provoked a Polish counter-invasion into the Ukraine with local support and two massive armies clashed in the bloodlands of Eastern Europe. By the time a ceasefire was called and peace terms agreed upon, most of the Ukraine had fallen to the Soviet Union. Though the Poles preserved their independence, over 100,000 people had been killed. As the Soviet Union consolidated its power, communism was gaining power and popularity in the east in fractured post-imperial China under the leadership of Mao Zedong. At first the Chinese Communists cooperated with their Nationalist counterparts to re-establish order in the factionalized country, but by 1927, this alliance of sorts collapsed. Following this rift, Mao coined one of his most famous slogans: “Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.” The Communists and the Nationalists engaged in brutal civil war for nearly a decade, resulting in the deaths of around 7 million people, a majority of which were civilians, by 1937. Though the Communists and Nationalists were united in combating the Japanese invasion and occupation, which lasted from 1937 until Japan’s capitulation to the United States in 1945, they quickly resumed violence after the Japanese surrender. The Communists successfully exiled the Nationalist government to Taiwan in 1949, but only after approximately 6 million people died in their dev-

astating power struggle following the Japanese surrender. In the midst of the process of communist domination in China, the Soviets extended their totalitarian authority into Europe at the expense of free and sovereign peoples. It is possible that many of communism’s modern-day supporters have forgotten that the Soviets were as much a part of the partition of Poland as the Nazis. The Soviet Union was one of two principals on the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact that provided for the division of Poland following the German military conquest which would occur in September 1939. Following the successful German blitzkrieg and subsequent annexation of Western Poland, the Soviets moved into the East of the defeated country, greeting their Nazi counterparts at the newly formed border with handshakes and smiles. In the period before the Germans turned on them

famine killed anywhere from 200,000 to over 3 million people in the 1990s, and continues to cause unimaginable suffering. Often forgotten, however, are the devastating consequences of communism in other parts of Asia. Starting in the 1960s, the Chinese-backed Khmer Rouge faction of communists wreaked havoc on the poor country of Cambodia. While in government power, the Khmer Rouge carried out a genocide, killing 1.5 to 3 million of their own people from 1975 to 1979. Though they were overthrown by a Vietnamese invasion, the Khmer Rouge persisted in armed conflict until 1991, causing over 100,000 additional civilian deaths. In nearby Burma, the socalled Burmese Way to Socialism greatly exacerbated national poverty and demolished once well-established democratic institutions. A decades-long civil war raged in Laos, waged by the commu-

The pervasive leftism in higher education and apologist voices in the media have irresponsibly led millennials astray and opened debate into an ideology that belongs in the dustbin of history. in June 1941 and invaded the other half of Poland and beyond, the Soviets forcefully deported around 1.5 million people from Poland. From April to May 1940, Soviet authorities carried out purges of Polish elites and military officers in Russia’s Katyn Forest, shooting to death over 22,000 prisoners. Around the same time, Soviet forces illegally occupied and annexed the Baltic states of Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia, and then carried out mass deportations. The Baltic states were never officially recognized by the international community as a part of the Soviet Union. Following the Second World War, the Soviet Union immediately seized the opportunity of Allied peace negotiations and leveraged their enormous military power to retain their antebellum territorial acquisitions and more. Soviet diplomats carved out a massive empire of satellite states for themselves in Eastern and Central Europe, which stretched from partitioned East Germany in the Northwest to Bulgaria in the Southeast. The Soviet Union maintained its chokehold on these European subjects by any means necessary. In 1956, Hungary tried to cast off the shackles of its Soviet-imposed communist regime; hundreds of T-54 tanks rolled into Budapest to crush the revolution, killing 3,000 Hungarian rebels in addition to 3,000 civilians. Czechoslovakia tried to abandon communism in 1968 and was met with invasion by all members of the Warsaw Pact, except for Albania and Romania. Over 70,000 Czechoslovaks immediately fled the country in the wake of their failed attempt at liberation. The horrors of communism in China and North Korea are hopefully well-known to most of us; North Korea’s globally infamous

nist Pathet Lao rebels against the nation’s constitutional monarchy. When it ended in 1975 with a communist victory, over 1 million civilians had been killed or wounded. Throughout the latter half of the 20th-century, the plague of global communism began to spread to new parts of the world, previously untouched by Marx’s scourge. In 1970, Salvador Allende, an avowed ideological Socialist, was narrowly elected President of Chile, which possessed strong and long-standing democratic institutions. By 1973, Chile’s government was on the verge of collapse, with the country’s Congress declaring a “constitutional breakdown,” and its economy was in shambles following Allende’s policy of industrial nationalization and collectivization. Allende’s destruction of the Chilean state finally came to an end when a majority of the country’s Congress called for his ouster; he was removed by a military coup d’etat in September of 1973. Even towards the decline of their empire, the Soviets attempted to force communism onto other sovereign nations. In April 1978, members of the People’s Democratic Party of Afghanistan allied with members of the military stormed the presidential palace in Kabul and killed Afghanistan’s sitting President, Mohammed Daoud Khan. A communist government was established, and it immediately made strides to limit the personal freedoms of Afghan citizens. The new Afghan communist government struggled desperately to retain power, executing an estimated 27,000 political prisoners in the process. The Soviet Union recognized the Afghan communists’ tenuous hold on power and in December of 1979, Soviet forces killed Afghanistan’s communist leader

and replaced him with a puppet. Immediately thereafter, thousands of troops poured across the border from Soviet Central Asia and placed Afghanistan under occupation. The Soviet domination of Afghanistan lasted for nearly a decade and sparked a bold resistance from Afghanistan’s fiercely independent and devoutly Muslim population. Over the course of the Soviet-Afghan War, more than 100,000 combatants were killed, but that number pales in comparison to that of civilian deaths. An estimated 2 million Afghan civilians were killed, and millions more displaced by the years of brutal war. In Africa, communism has led to untold suffering and countless deaths. Angola was torn apart by a civil war, fought from 1975 to 2002 and caused by the active, violent suppression of all dissent by its communist government. More than 500,000 civilians died in the lengthy conflict between Soviet and Cuban-supported communists and American-backed freedom fighters. Ethiopia was dominated from 1977 to 1991 by brutal dictator Mengistu Haile Mariam and his military regime, known as the Derg. Mengistu and the Derg imprisoned and executed tens of thousands of government opponents during their reign and drastically sought to reform the country. The end result was a catastrophic famine from 1983 to 1985 that killed roughly 400,000 people. Communism and other Marxist ideologies have played a disproportionate role in directing the politics of postcolonial African nations. In Congo-Brazzaville, in Mozambique, in Somalia, authoritarian regimes perpetrated serious human rights abuses under the guise of advancing a socialist state. Despite an overwhelmingly negative balance sheet for the ideology, many who have been privileged enough to enjoy liberalism sport communist iconography. I was in the gym here at the College when I noticed a middle-aged man with a small hammer and sickle tattooed on his shoulder. Perhaps he had never learned about communism’s horrors, or perhaps he tattooed himself because he believed it represented a higher egalitarianism that has escaped every application of the ideology. Maybe he just wanted to virtue signal and demonstrate his contrarianism and supposed open-mindedness. We at The Review believe that communism should be just as taboo as fascism. Individuals display communist sympathies out of ignorance. The pervasive leftism in higher education and apologist voices in the media have irresponsibly led millennials astray and opened debate into an ideology that belongs in the dustbin of history. It is responsible for historians to question American action during the Cold War, but communism’s free pass and the media’s willful ignorance must end. If current attitudes persist we may suffer a repetition of the horrors caused by the most deadly ideology in human history.

The Dartmouth Review

Monday – November 13, 2017 11


Boys in the School System Rachel T. Gambee

Associate Editor Women’s educational advancements in the United States during last century have been nothing short of revolutionary. As recently as the 1930s, debates on the benefits and the drawbacks of co-educational elementary and secondary schools raged nationally. Supporters of single-sex schools argued these schools would be safe and nurturing environments for girls, sheltering them from interactions with the opposite sex while still allowing them to pursue their education. The problem with such arguments was that these all-girl schools frequently did not adhere to the same level of academic rigor found in boys schools. Girls schools often had curriculums focused on home education - including sewing, cooking, and child rearing. Home-Ec was also the most popular major among collegiate women. This structure began to change during the 1940s when strain on national resources created a need for a more effective workforce. To that end, most schools at the elementary and secondary level began to integrate and held increasingly stringent national achievement standards. This transition did not immediately change the structure of high-end secondary and collegiate institutions. Famous college-preparatory schools such as Andover and Exeter remained male-only until the early 70s. Most of the Ivies did not change until that time as well - Dartmouth specifically only officially admitting women in 1972. Despite their increasingly liberal agendas these institutions Dartmouth especially - still look back at the era before gender integration with great nostalgia. There are very valid reasons for doing so. In generations past, schools like Dartmouth were more of a birthright - passed from father to son - than a prize to be earned by the most ambitious students. Gender integration on the collegiate level has contributed greatly to the cutthroat college admissions process that exists today. The fact that the application pool has doubled in size due to the addition of women is only a tiny part of this problem - it has origins long before students begin their Common Application. In 1965, Lyndon B Johnson’s administration pushed “The Elementary and Secondary Education Act” through Congress. This act was part of Johnson’s war on poverty and was intended to create “equal access to education” and “establish high standards and accountability.” Though Johnson’s attempts to Ms. Gambee is a freshman at the College and an associate editor at The Dartmouth Review.

end poverty in America were ineffective, this act played a key role in shaping the present-day American education system, centering the system around long and grueling national tests. This means that students who can sit quietly and focus for long periods of time are rewarded within the system. Such students, particularly at the elementary level, are overwhelmingly girls. The saying “Boys can’t sit still” has more truth to it than even the most seasoned elementary-school teacher might know. William Pollack, director of the Centers for Men and Young Men at McLean Hospital of Harvard

method appalling. It only makes the boys more eager to behave badly in the classroom because they feel so pent up. This also contributes to the dynamic in early education where girls love school but boys loathe it. To a degree this attitude has changed by high school. Young men are then much more capable of sitting quietly and completing work. However, the way the US school system is setup, children are placed in “ gifted” or “advanced” tracks as early as first and second grade. By the time boys arrive in high school, they are often already so far behind their female classmates academically that it is impossible

In generations past, schools like Dartmouth were more of a birthright - passed from father to son - than a prize to be earned by the most ambitious students. Gender integration on the collegiate level has contributed greatly to the cut-throat college admissions process that exists today. Medical School commented to ABC news, “in general young boys in kindergarten and first grade are not able to behave as well as girls due to biological and social differences.” This persists well through middle school and often into high school. Kathy Stevens, co-author of “The Minds of Boys” and director of training at the Michael Gurian Educational Institute, believes that these differences may stem from the 15% more spinal fluid that young boys have than young girls, stimulating a greater connection between their brain and their nervous system. Such a connection might explain why boys do not learn or test well when forced to sit still and be quiet for long periods of time. Regardless of the science behind this phenomenon, its existence can be corroborated by anyone who has spent time in an elementary school and seen young boys either categorically unin-

for them to catch up. This is especially problematic given that College admissions offices judge students based on work done starting in grade nine. At that time many boys are only thirteen years old and are still struggling with attention span and learning issues that plagued them in primary school. This is

The present system not only create a learning environment that is difficult for boys - it also punishes behavior they cannot control. More often than not the forms of punishment used only exacerbate the original behavior. reflected in the demographics of higher education. Even accounting for technical schools, such as a MIT or Georgia Tech, which remain male-dominated, women still make up 55% of all students enrolled in college. At some schools, such as Boston University, this number is well

If we as Americans really believe that “education is the great equalizer,” then all members of our society should be granted the equal opportunity for success: not just our girls and not just the sons of the wealthy. terested in their classes or being reprimanded for their rowdy behavior. Complaints from both parents and teachers alike to the Board of Education have been numerous. The present system not only create a learning environment that is difficult for boys - it also punishes behavior they cannot control. More often than not the forms of punishment used only exacerbate the original behavior. It is common practice in elementary schools to punish “disruptive” boys by making them sit alone and quiet through recess or lunch. Experts find this

by both men and women. This factors into many of the national rankings - flawed as they are - and is extremely influential on application numbers. Furthermore, even with preferential treatment in the college admissions process, boys are still required to meet the same general standard of academic achievement as female applicants. In order to help their sons meet these standards, parents with the financial means frequently seek medical help to keep their children competitive. School-aged boys today are being diagnosed with ADD and ADHD at absolutely alarming, frankly impossible, rates. Today over 20% of all boys in US high schools have been diagnosed with some form of ADD or ADHD. This number is even more pronounced in competitive high schools and is a 37% increase from 2003 alone. Most of these young men are put on medication to “manage their condition and help them focus.” These drugs, such as Ritalin and Adderall, have become household names in the United States. Both of these medications, along with new favorites on the market - Vyvanse and Concerta - are classified by the Drug Enforcement Agency as Schedule II drugs. That means that these drugs have “ a high potential for abuse” with “use potentially

over 60%. Competitive liberal arts schools, like Dartmouth, have to work hard to keep their class equally proportioned between men and women. There is much talk about how it is now more difficult to be admitted at the most selective schools as a female than as a male. Those who will praise affirmative action often condemn this kind of gender-balancing all in the same breath. They are wrong to do so. Not only is this one of the few checks on a system that is stacked against boys, but also colleges with an even gender ratio are seen as more appealing

leading to severe psychological and physical dependence.” This susceptibility to addiction also comes with a whole host of negative side effects including hormonal imbalances, severe mood swings, aggression, depression and suicidal tendencies. Boys are put on the meds none the less. As psychiatrist and author, Ned Hallowell, puts it: “we are pathologizing boyhood.” These issues of stimulant drug abuse are rampant in colleges like Dartmouth where young men became dependent on these drugs during their earlier education in order to compete in a system structured against them. Drugs have become a means by which wealthy, educated parents advance their son’s educational careers. The very clear and alarming problems with this system beg the question: do other countries do it better? Americans often fetishize the European vocational education system where students are placed on tracks early-on during their high school career determining whether they will attend trade-school or a university. Thanks to this program, countries such as Germany do an ex-

cellent job maintaining the exact number of electricians, plumbers, and other skilled tradesman that the country requires. At the same time collegiate education is much cheaper and largely publicly-funded because only a small portion of the population attends college. The US, on the other hand, has a chronic shortage of skilled tradesmen but an abundance of college graduates with massive debt and no job prospects. The vocational system seems like an easy fix; however, this system would only do a greater disservice to young American boys than the current one. The test given in European countries to determine career aptitude and place kids on a career tracks is often administered around age 13. At this point, boys still lag considerably behind girls in academic arenas. If this system were to be implemented in the United States it would likely result in a disproportional amount of boys in trade-school while girls attend college. Only the wealthy escape this system. Well-heeled Europeans and Brits routinely send their sons to private schools where they are funneled into college regardless of their performance on the national aptitude test. In England particularly, these private schools are frequently single-sex, and therefore give young men who have been disenfranchised by an educational system that favors girls the opportunity to succeed. This is certainly a wonderful thing for the young men whose families can afford the staggering tuition at schools such as Eton or Harrow, but the kind of permanent educated elite that this system creates runs counter to American values. If we as Americans really believe that “education is the great equalizer,” then all members of our society should be granted the equal opportunity for success: not just our girls and not just the sons of the wealthy. This must begin in elementary school, where teachers desperately need to be educated on the physiological differences between boys and girls and how that informs their learning. Furthermore, boys must be afforded spaces where they can just be boys. The sanctity of allboys schools, sports teams, and community organizations must be protected. This is not done at the expense girls; in this day and age it is almost unfathomable that all-boys organizations are a detriment to girls given the proliferation organizations that exist for the sole purpose of advancing and mentoring of young women. Progressives who yearn for a genderless, sanitized society need to develop serious compassion for their own sons, and recognize that you cannot beat a boy into being a girl, regardless of how many textbooks you use.

12 Monday – November 13, 2017

The Dartmouth Review



“The function of education is to teach one to think intensively and to think critically. Intelligence plus character — that is the goal of true education.” — Martin Luther King Jr. “Posterity! You will never know how much it cost the present generation to preserve your freedom! I hope you will make a good use of it” — John Adams “God put us here to prepare this place for the next generation. That’s our job. Raising children and helping the community, that’s preparing for the next generation.” — Dikembe Mutumbo “The education of a man is never completed until he dies.“ — Robert E. Lee “Education is what remains after one has forgotten what one has learned in school. Education is the ability to listen to almost anything without losing your temper or your self.” — Robert Frost “I didn’t want any degrees if all the ill-read literates and radio announcers and pedagogical dummies I knew had them by the peck.” — J.D. Salinger “Men are born ignorant, not stupid. They are made stupid by education.” — Bertrand Russell

“The task of the modern educator is not to cut down jungles, but to irrigate deserts.” — C.S. Lewis

“Education is the ability to listen to almost anything without losing your temper or your self-confidence.” — Robert Frost

“Everybody who is incapable of learning has taken to teaching.” — Ronald Reagan

“The direction in which education starts a man will determine his future in life.” — Plato

“There are two kinds of teachers: the kind that fill you with so much quail shot that you can’t move, and the kind that just gives you a little prod behind and you jump to the skies.” — Robert Frost

“Few professors would dare to publish research or teach a course debunking the claims made in various ethnic, gender, or other ‘studies’ courses.” — Thomas Sowell

“Please stop teaching my children that everyone gets a trophy just for participating. What is this, the Nobel Prize? Not everybody gets a trophy. ” — Glenn Beck “History is Philosophy teaching by example.” — Thucydides “In the practice of tolerance, one’s enemy is the best teacher.” —The Dalai Lama “It si the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.” —Aristotle “The philosophy of the schoolroom in one generation will be the philosophy of government in the next.” —Abraham Lincoln


“Each new generation born is in effect an invasion of civilization by little barbarians, who must be civilized before it is too late.” — Thomas Sowell “Christ, seven years of college, down the drain.” — John Belushi as Bluto, Animal House “Tradition means giving votes to the most obscure of all classes, our ancestors. It is the democracy of the dead. Tradition refuses to submit to the small and arrogant oligarchy of those who merely happen to be walking about.” — G. K. Chesterton “Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life, son.” — Dean Wormer, Animal House


The Moscow Mueller Ingredients • • • • •

“Instead of educating students, these professors are trying to indoctrinate them.” — David Horowitz

2 ounces Nemiroff 1 ounce fresh squeezed lie juice 4 ounces Ginger Beer Shake with ICE Garnish, serve in Copper Mug Shot

It’s 2AM in the city full of creeps. The doors swings open. She walks in, legs up to here, the top of her brightly colored pantsuit even higher. Something in her eyes tells me she’s looking for a drink— like all the other ironically disenfranchised. She sat down on the other side of the bar, sent a quick work email from her Blackberry, and began bitching about her debbie downer friend for the third time this week. I sighed, “Special’s a Moscow Mueller. I’ll make you one on the house.” “You know, it’s tasty. But a few months ago this would have really hit the spot— it’s more of a summer drink. I’m not sure why it took you until the end of October to figure it out.” “It’s the vodka. Kept using Russian brands, but this Ukrainian we just got in stock goes down smoother.” “Ukrainian? You don’t say. Tasting it now, it’d be a crimea to use anything else. Makes me forget what happened.” Draining her mug, she threw down a shitty tip on the bar and left without giving thanks. Bob sighed yet again, queued up Van Halen’s “Judgement Day” on the jukebox, grabbed a rag, and began to clean up the mess that everyone else had made at his bar.

— Scotch Cara

The Finals Issue 11.13.2017