November 18, 1999
Letters
'H-B IWCTTg-R
Rationality needed in civil dialogue
Professor: 'Who will take us seriously if we don't make sense?'
Elon uniqueness reflected
in Fightin' Christian
To the Editor:
“Conservative Manifesto,
Take Two” makes important points,
as did take one. There is indeed a
time to jettison civility and civil
dialogue. The Boston Tea Party was
hardly an exercise in civility. The
anti-war movements of the 1960s
also went beyond civil dialogue at
times, so point well taken. To ev
erything there is a season. I would
argue, however, that it was not the
incivility by itself that led to the
victory for American colonists or
anti-war activists. While it is a use
ful tactic in some circumstances
(we might argue whether the situa
tion the column describes is such a
circumstance), I don’t think it is
very useful by itself. Nor do I think
Morton Blackwell or Phil Graham
or the other conservatives the col-
unm mentions would agree with the
sentiment “civil dialogue my ass.”
The most recent edition of Building
Leadership, the publication of the
Leadership Institute that the col
umn refers to, reports on its training
of young people to work in civil
society, not in bomb factories.
As apolemic, the column does
To the Editor:
Is it too late for civil dialogue
at Elon as the writers of “Conserva
tive Manifesto II” suggest?
I hope not; civil dialogue can
be direct and witty, and we cer
tainly need it to solve problems, but
the facts must matter as Professor
Jim Brown pointed out so well.
Sounding off on many topics,
ad hominem attacks, and name call
ing may help us blow off steam, but
they can also make a column an
unproductive monologue. We need
to persuade each other; intimida
tion doesn’t work in the long run as
a rhetorical strategy or as a foreign ^
policy.
The Pendulum staff has a
major role to play in encouraging
not need to get it facts straight.
However, as a historian, I have to
insist that all the evidence be pre
sented no matter the final judge
ment. For more recent examples of
conservative speakers than Marga
ret Thatcher and F. W. de Klerk,
how about Allan Simpson, the
former Senator from Wyoming, who
spoke last year? Hardly a liberal.
And again, I can easily imagine that
his fee was far higher than were
those of some liberal speakers. There
may well be an argument to be
made about the balance of speakers
on campus, but it remains to be
made.
To make a rational argument,
one needs to be logical and consis
tent. Why were Thatcher’s and de
Klerk’s appearances “cameos,” but
Werbach’s was not? How can one
claim that “this country is a democ
racy,” but then criticize a professor
for expressing an opinion on nuclear
weapons?
How can one ask what makes
that professor an authority on
nuclear weapons, and then turn
around and speak as an authority on
the political views of faculty, in
good political debate at Elon, and
we need a lot more of it. '
Putting name calling in the
heading of my Letter to the Editor,
e.g. “NuclearTestBan VotedDown:
Example of Conservative Idiocy”
is eyecatching but unfair to a letter
that listed many conservative sufl
porters of the Treaty and empha?
sized that it could have been a vicf
tory for us all. |
Real political debate is in
teresting in itself; it doesn’t need to
rely on the gimmicks of anger and
abuse. Let’s not accept them as a
substitute.
Sincerely,
Anne Cassebaum
eluding my own? You can’t have it
both ways.
Finally, to say that my goal
was to attack the point of the col
umn is simply wrong. My response
said that “the column’s main
point...was a good one,” and I re
ferred to it as “a valid point.” Some
times we’re so intent on yelling that
we don’t even hear when people
agree with us.
In the end, I insist again that
the column has good points to make.
Does the college present all view
points? The column calls on us to
celebrate diversity. Do we? I think
so, but if others don’t than it de
serves our full attention. Beyond
talking, students should get involved
in the campus, as this and another
column point out. (The Revolution
and the anti-war movement were
successful because people got in
volved.) And instead of yelling
about it, we should present rational
arguments backed up with factual
evidence. Who will take us seri
ously if we don’t make sense?
Sincerely,
Jim Brown
When
surfing the
Net, check
out the
Pendulum
Online!
www.elon.edu/
pendulum
It's your
cyberspace
link to
Elon!
To the Editor:
I know that by this point,
this has been stated many times,
but after conversing with a friend
this evening, I feel compelled to
write this letter.
Elon College markets itself
as a unique, small college which
is, to quote the current admis
sions video, “steeped in tradition,
yet moving confidently towards
he future.” However, I, along
with many other students, faculty
and alumni, feel that this tradition
is being stripped away from this
fine institution.
By taking away the mascot
“Fightin’ Christian,” we are tak
ing away the school’s identity.
When you mention Elon College
to some people who don’t know
the school all that well, they say,
“Hey, you all are the Fightin’
Christians!”
Our mascot is how we are
known, and I for one, am proud to
be a Fightin’ Christian. Yes, it’s
a contradiction of terms, but that
is why we’re unique.
Elon proclaims that it’s a
small school with the advantages
of a large university, which is a
contradiction of terms the school
uses to promote itself!
But I guess it’s all right,
since it is “inclusive.” As for the
“inclusive” issue: every piece of
literature that is sent out to pros
pects notes the school was
founded by the UCC, and that the
mascot is the “Fightin’ Christian.”
Hence, students know the history
of the institution before they come
here.
Although this has been said,
I think we should consider what
Elon has taught us and wants us to
do: change the world. Let’s start
here at Elon. I know that students
and alumni are upset about the
change, and if we all organized in
some way to prevent the name
change, then the administration
might realize that this is not what
the general population wants.
I would offer this as a sug
gestion to all of the concerned
parties, if we truly value our name
sake. If going to Division I means
that we have to give up our iden
tity, the Elon doesn’t need Divi
sion I.
Let’s be recognized for the
unique institution we are, not the
institution some people this the
nation wants us to be. Do your
part, let your voice be heard. Elon
wants us to be a part of our world,
so let’s do it by letting it be known
that we are damn proud to be
Fightin’ Christians!
LONG LIVE ELON COL
LEGE!
Sincerely,
Patrick C. Gallagher
Got something on
your mind?
Write a Letter to
the Editor
Professor calls
for civil dialogue
Gimmicks unnecessary in
real political debates
Mail letters to 7012 Campus
Box or drop them off at
The Pendulum office
(Moseley Center 233) by
noon Monday. You must
include your name and
phone number.