The Global Refugee Crisis:The Current State of Affairs, How We Got Here, and Why the West is to Blame
Read this wonderful article in Enquiry, the student run newspaper sponsored by the Alexander Hamilton Institute. Contributions, by the way. would no doubt be welcome.
“Meanwhile, standardized composition courses no longer exist, and prospective students everywhere are wondering why a “national leader in teaching students to write” no longer has an English major. We have to work harder if we’re going to live up to our reputation.”
Highlighting the Humanities at Hamilton
Please join us for the next talk in our Memory and Identity series.
Moorish Girls and Cross-Dressing Pages: Chasing the Nymph in Cervantes’s Don Quixote
Maria Willstedt Hispanic Studies, Hamilton College
Thursday, November 12, 4:10 pm
Taylor Science Center 3024
The nymph is an ambiguous character whose history spans from ancient mythology to the modern video game. There are many types of nymphs, but most commonly she is imagined as a beautiful maiden who inhabits the woods and is associated with a body of water (spring, well, pond, etc.). Neither human nor divine, her defining trait is an in-betweenness that assimilates her to other alluring female sprites like fairies and mermaids. The exact nature of the nymph’s in-betweenness is buried in her name, but its purpose is to veil rather than manifest her meaning. Cervantes, creatively appropriating a long-established allegorical tradition, both explores in earnest and exploits in parody this character’s cultural and psychological function. This lecture commemorates the 400th anniversary of the publication of Don Quixote II (1615), Cervantes’s sequel to his original Don Quixote published in 1605.
Maria Willstedt is Assistant Professor of Hispanic Studies at Hamilton College. Her field of study is early modern Spanish literature and culture with a special interest in the framed narrative tradition. She is currently working on an article about that most enigmatic of Cervantean characters, Zoraida.
Free and open to the public. Refreshments will be served.
For more information contact Barbara Gold, Classics Department
315-859-[removed] • [email address removed]
Sponsored by the Dean of Faculty and the Hispanic Studies Department
from the release:
Professor of Comparative Literature Nancy Sorkin Rabinowitz was recently named the winner of the 2016 LCC Activism Award by the Lambda Classical Caucus (LCC) of the Society for Classical Studies for her “tireless work promoting the rights and well-being of sexual minorities.”
According to the LCC website, the Activism Award “honors an LCC member who has worked to promote the rights and well-being of sexual minorities in ways that go beyond the usual academic missions of teaching and scholarship.”
One purpose of the LCC is “to promote research that reflects the personal and intellectual interests of queer scholars, and provide a bridge between Classics and the interdisciplinary fields of LGBT/Queer Studies, the history of sexuality, cultural studies, and gender theory.”
From: Feminists of Color Collective <firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: Sun, Nov 8, 2015 at 3:56 PM Subject: Pro-Sex Feminism? To: EVENTS-ALL@listserv.hamilton.edu “Rose’s SlutWalk and the women and men of varied gender expressions who attended were a beautiful reminder of the nuances and complexities inherent in the ongoing issue of slut-shaming and victim blaming. There are women of color in need of that kind of solidarity and understanding. There is room for women of color in the SlutWalk movement — and it has to be on our terms.” — Zeba Blay for HuffPost Women (x) What does intersectional sex-positivity look like? In recent years, sex-positivity has become a prominent element of mainstream feminist and LGBTQ culture But the sex positive ideal is not without its potential dangers and complexities Further, sex-positivity cannot be one-size-fits-all across differences of race, class, gender, sexuality, ability and nation What does sex-positivity look like if you are not white and cisgender? What happens when sex-positivity includes women from various cultural/religious backgrounds, survivors, trans people, asexual people, and people with mental and/or physical disabilities? What does sex-positivity mean to you? Join us tomorrow @8pm in the ALCC to discuss! __________________ Look In the Mirror: Confronting the Contradictions of LGBT Organizations and Our “Leadership”, Christian Emmanuel Castaing for Black Girl Dangerous (x) Reclaiming The Word ‘Slut’ Is An Entirely Different Beast For Black Women, Zeba Blay for HuffPost Women (x) ___ [names removed by ed] Feminists of Color Collective Hamilton College “Like” our Facebook page to stay in the know on everything FCC!
From: Feminists of Color Collective <email@example.com>
Date: Sun, Nov 8, 2015 at 3:56 PM
Subject: Pro-Sex Feminism?
“Rose’s SlutWalk and the women and men of varied gender expressions who attended were a beautiful reminder of the nuances and complexities inherent in the ongoing issue of slut-shaming and victim blaming. There are women of color in need of that kind of solidarity and understanding. There is room for women of color in the SlutWalk movement — and it has to be on our terms.”
— Zeba Blay for HuffPost Women (x)
What does intersectional sex-positivity look like?
In recent years, sex-positivity has become a prominent element of mainstream feminist and LGBTQ culture
But the sex positive ideal is not without its potential dangers and complexities
Further, sex-positivity cannot be one-size-fits-all across differences of race, class, gender, sexuality, ability and nation
What does sex-positivity look like if you are not white and cisgender?
What happens when sex-positivity includes women from various cultural/religious backgrounds, survivors, trans people, asexual people, and people with mental and/or physical disabilities?
What does sex-positivity mean to you?
Join us tomorrow @8pm in the ALCC to discuss!
Look In the Mirror: Confronting the Contradictions of LGBT Organizations and Our “Leadership”, Christian Emmanuel Castaing for Black Girl Dangerous (x)
Reclaiming The Word ‘Slut’ Is An Entirely Different Beast For Black Women, Zeba Blay for HuffPost Women (x)
[names removed by ed]
Feminists of Color Collective
“Like” our Facebook page to stay in the know on everything FCC!
There is an alternative to the Spectator for news on campus. The Enquiry is a publication of Student Fellows of the Alexander Hamilton Institute for the Study of Western Civilization. Their goal: free thought and discourse.
Check out the new website, which by the way was built by the students: Enquiry
Hamilton alum, read their About us
See the blog of Dissident Prof for a factual run down on Planned Parenthood’s Campus Empire for an update on some events on campus.
Thursday, April 9th
4:15pm @ The Glen House
“Some Hamilton students reported that they felt as if they had embarked on a journey similar to the Freedom Rides of the 1960s. “
“The author of this article fails to mention that during this protest, two police officers were assaulted, and the entire police force was accused of killing children, and compared to white supremacist groups. Many protesters were literally chanting that they wanted to see more dead cops.” - an alum of Hamilton College
One wonders if the Hamilton students are being urged by sponsoring faculty & the administration to cooperate fully with the investigation of the assault on the NYC police officers?
Date: Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 1:56 PM
Subject: A Message to the Hamilton Community
On Tuesday evening, November 24, we learned of the grand jury’s decision in Ferguson, Missouri not to indict Officer Darren Wilson for the shooting of Michael Brown, Jr. in August. This decision may bring about various reactions from people in our community, including anger, sadness, confusion and fear. These responses may be (and very likely are) compounded by people’s experiences of racism, oppression or privilege that may have occurred on or off College Hill.
I write today to share my hope that this difficult moment in our nation’s history will motivate us to come together as a community. A community founded on learning and the exchange of ideas is, perhaps, one of the best forums in which to process what occurred in Ferguson. Classrooms, the Days-Massolo Center, the Counseling Center, the Dean of Students Office, and residence halls are places where these conversations aboutFerguson and our current cultural moment can happen. With the grand jury’s decision, we have an opportunity to engage in an important dialogue about race, racism and privilege in the United States. Additionally, I hope that we have the courage to consider how the racial dynamics in Ferguson might be reflected at Hamilton. It is challenging to look squarely at dynamics in our nation and on our campus that may be unjust, unfair and inequitable. It can be painful to bring them up if we’ve been the targets of inequity and shameful to bring them up if we’ve experienced social advantages. I know that we are capable of doing this important work together and am grateful to be a part of the Hamilton community.
It is important to consider the role of social media in these dialogues. A critical aspect of the courage I mentioned earlier is the courage to align ourselves with the ideas we share online. Anonymous posts do not further our efforts to become a more aware, thoughtful and engaged community. On the contrary, they may alienate and silence voices that are integral to these conversations. I hope that you will keep this in mind over the break and in the days following.
Please consider attending the Days-Massolo event, “Ferguson Verdict: What Now? A Community Conversation” on Monday, December 1st at 5:30 pm in the Red Pit.
Wishing you a restful break and looking forward to your return to the Hill,
It appears that the link to the letter has been rendered “inoperative” or otherwise busted, perhaps by technological chance… or perhaps by embarrassment after someone actually read it. We’ll try to find our copy and replace the posting in full.
Years ago, when the academic left began to ostracize professors identified as “conservative,” university administrators stood aside or were complicit. The academic left adopted a notion espoused back then by a “New Left” German philosopher—who taught at Brandeis, not coincidentally—that many conservative ideas were immoral and deserved to be suppressed. And so they were.
This shunning and isolation of “conservative” teachers by their left-wing colleagues (with many liberals silent in acquiescence) weakened the foundational ideas of American universities—freedom of inquiry and the speech rights in the First Amendment.
No matter. University presidents, deans, department heads and boards of trustees watched or approved the erosion of their original intellectual framework. The ability of aggrieved professors and their students to concoct behavior, ideas and words that violated political correctness got so loopy that the phrase itself became satirical—though not so funny to profs denied tenure on suspicion of incorrectness. Offensive books were banned and history texts rewritten to conform.
No one could possibly count the compromises of intellectual honesty made on American campuses to reach this point. It is fantastic that the liberal former head of Berkeley should have to sign a Maoist self-criticism to be able to speak at Haverford. Meet America’s Red Guards.
These students at Brandeis, Smith, Haverford and hundreds of other U.S. colleges didn’t discover illiberal intolerance on their own. It is fed to them three times a week by professors of mental conformity. After Brandeis banned Ms. Hirsi Ali, the Harvard Crimson’s editors wrote a rationalizing editorial, “A Rightful Revocation.” The legendary liberal Louis Brandeis (Harvard Law, First Amendment icon) must be spinning in his grave.
Years ago, today’s middle-aged liberals embraced in good faith ideas such as that the Western canon in literature or history should be expanded to include Africa, Asia, Native Americans and such. Fair enough. The activist academic left then grabbed the liberals’ good faith and wrecked it, allowing the nuttiest professors to dumb down courses and even whole disciplines into tendentious gibberish.
The slow disintegration of the humanities into what is virtually agitprop on many campuses is no secret. Professors of economics and the hard sciences roll their eyes in embarrassment at what has happened to once respectable liberal-arts departments at their institutions. Like some Gresham’s Law for Ph.D.s, the bad professors drove out many good, untenured professors, and that includes smart young liberals. Most conservatives were wiped out long ago.
Where does one find an example of compelling leadership & vision? Here’s one:
We invite readers to compare & contrast with items you ‘ve received from Hamilton.
ACTA’s new publication, Education or Reputation? A Look at America’s Top-Ranked Liberal Arts Colleges, is very much worth a read.
Hamilton College appears in several catagories of analysis.
Our thoughts on the divestment proposal were simple. The process was healthy and illuminating. We hoped that the trustees (specifically the investment committee) as fiduciaries would address the issue, make a decision, and justify it.
Well, they did and promptly so, such that one suspects this one must have been on the shelf, ready to go. You may find it here: March 11, 2014, ltr Chair Investment Committee .
It is a well-crafted, sensible response which we support, and it is excerpted below.
The whole process here is laden with information. The degree of politicization of the campus is self evident. We are informed by the Spectator of the “unanimous” voice vote by the faculty in favor of the resolution and presume that the maybe three or so dissenting voices either didn’t bother to attend or perhaps their voices were somehow not heard or recorded.
Those interested in quality of governance, administration & education at Hamilton might wonder how is it that the faculty went all-in on a proposition that was rejected promptly by the Board? A virtually unanimous vote by the faculty contains significant information as to the composition of the faculty and the process by which it has evolved over time. This was not a 60% v 40% vote. It was ~99.99%. Why does Hamilton have a monolithic faculty void of debate? Does this evidence selection bias?
It is also notable that the Hamilton faculty seems to be completely & unanimously disassociated from the views, professional obligations & rationale of the board on this issue… or outright rejects them. This is a notably odd outcome given the seriousness of the issue, the nature of the fiduciary duties involved, and the esteemed professional qualifications of the trustees. We leave to others to speculate as to the cause and meaning of this phenomena.
The big question for Hamilton requires reference to the last sentence of the excerpt above. Substitute “curriculum” for “endowment”. Look at the curriculum, the programming, and more importantly the personnel. Look at the vote.
Has Hamilton had over the last many years a de facto political and academic “divestment” program in place?
See the National Association of Scholars’ article: DIVESTMENT’S GETTYSBURG?