A Word From The Editor
"In Moulmein, I was hated by large numbers of people--the only time in my life that I have been important enough for this to happen to me." So George Orwell begins his classic essay, Shooting An Elephant. Until recently, I never thought I would empathize with Mr. Orwell. Then I became the editor of The Stanford Review.

When I came to Stanford, I didn't expect a conservative atmosphere. I didn't expect that the Stanford Republicans would be the most active group on campus, or that many professors would express dissatisfaction with California's liberal political atmosphere. I was not surprised to learn that Jesse Jackson has a much broader base of support among Stanford students than does Ronald Reagan, and it doesn't shock me to hear students say that the Hoover Institution should be thrown off campus.

However, I didn't realize just how unpopular it is to be conservative at Stanford until I took over this paper. Some students are politically active and some students are politically ambivalent. Some care to discuss pertinent issues all the time and some care never to discuss them. But for the most part, who a student works for and who a student can have a fair conversation with seem to have nothing to do with each other. The Review is unique. When I tell people of my association with the Review, they respond sometimes violently. "YOU work for The Stanford Review!?" these people ask me in disbelief. The subtext, of course, is, "I thought you were a normal, rational person." Some of my acquaintances walk away feeling wholly disappointed, and even deceived, that they did not know this earlier in our relationship. So it goes.

In dealing with such adverse reactions, I have learned two important truths. First, it is very hard for people to disassociate your personality from your political beliefs. Second, it is not necessary for anyone at Stanford to have actually read the Review for that person to vehemently oppose it. Before you make the first judgement, please watch Mary Matalin and James Carville on Meet the Press. Matalin led Bush's campaign in 1992, while Carville led Clinton's campaign. Now they're married, and they appear regularly with Tim Russert to bicker endlessly about partisan politics. Even at Stanford, conservative students and liberal students can actually be friends. Most recently, The Stanford Daily allowed one of our former editors, Mike Toth, to write a column. (More than once, The Daily has explicitly criticized The Review.) Moreover, we boast a staff member in the department of Earth Systems, which is quite possibly the department with the greatest number of liberal students on campus. Furthermore, it is important to note that The Review itself maintains a politically diverse staff, including democrats, libertarians, and even a green. Politics is just politics, even when you write for The Stanford Review.

The second of these truths, though, is more much distressing to me. One of the reasons that I value the Review so highly is that there is no comparable publication anywhere else on campus. As odd as it may seem, the conservative student newspaper here at Stanford truly is "The Other Voice." Even as editor, it is not necessary for me to agree with every position that appears in this paper. Indeed I do not. But I do value every position that appears in this paper, because this paper is one of the very few avenues at Stanford through which conservative students can express their political beliefs and promote dialogue. The Stanford Review reacts to popular sentiment at Stanford, and attempts to approach situations and ideas from a new angle. Nobody here at the Review is so naive as to think we are going to cause a fundamental shift in the political climate at Stanford. In fact, we may well cause some students to move even further left, in reaction to us. That's okay. But, please, if you're going to criticize the Review, read it first.

For many years, students have suggested alternatives to reading our paper. Some say it would be best to burn it. They have given a variety of reasons, none of which have been very clear. Other students have suggested that we use our paper as wadded up balls of newspaper to throw over the balcony during flicks in Memorial Auditorium. While distributing the paper in my freshman dorm, I heard at least one student say, "I don't read that trash." This last statement seems especially peculiar to us here at The Review. We never like to address any issue, whether news or opinion, without understanding the opposition stance on that issue. Thus, we can't understand how students can continue to discuss political issues without acknowledging the Review 's stance.

Finally, the Review mostly reacts to the political climate at Stanford. If this publication is very, very conservative, it means that the rest of campus is very, very liberal. The day when there is no very good use for The Review beyond burning it or wadding it up for use at flicks will be the day that Stanford is so conservative that the Review isn't the other voice any longer. Most members of the Stanford community fear that day. They should embrace The Stanford Review, and be glad that it still needs to exist.

Thus, read on, and discover our stance on several issues. Most immediately, you'll notice that we have chosen Associate Dean of Students and Multicultural Educator Tommy Lee Woon as our man of the year, for promoting education on one very political issue, the grape boycott. Recently, Justin Deiner attended a conference at Stanford on Instant Runoff Voting, and he heard what a libertarian had to say about electoral reform in California. Alex Robbins heard photojournalist David Bacon argue that NAFTA has harmed the rights of Mexican workers. Henry Towsner has reviewed John Leo's newsest book, and Scott Rasmussen gives us his opinion on the state of social security in the United States, fearing the day he retires. Alec Rawls returns from a one volume hiatus to share with us his opinion on open space policy at Stanford and beyond, criticizing Clinton's midnight legislation. Clayton Brown appears with The Review for the very first time. He has compiled news briefs. On the back page, you'll notice a short photographic history of the the grape boycott at Stanford. This academic year is the last year that Stanford will witness such a boycott, and so you shouldn't expect to witness these scenes again anytime soon. Enjoy the issue.

Page last modified on Wednesday, 01-Mar-2006 23:57:21 MST.