Editor’s Note: Welcome to Campus!

As new students and old-timers return to Stanford, this fall quarter looks to be a truly exciting one. Even as classes restart and student clubs and societies resume their sessions, it seems timely to offer an assessment of what The Stanford Review represents on this campus, and what we hope to achieve.

Ever since its founding in 1987, the Review has traditionally represented the alternative voice on campus. On a campus where students, staff, and professors generally hold liberal views and vote Democratic, the Review has—to varying degrees over past volumes—offered representation for people on the center and the right.

Yet, despite this general leaning, The Stanford Review is not a monolithic entity. Rather, the Review in 2009 is a house with “many mansions.” Its members include libertarians, conservatives, moderates, Republicans, and yes, some Democrats. It attracts a diverse range of staff, many of whom have differing views on a range of issues. Some articles published in the Review represent popular issues that resonate with the student body, while some articles may test the Stanford community’s commitment to freedom of speech.

What, therefore, does the Review represent? At bottom, the Review serves as a forum for the free exchange of ideas—a microphone that allows minority viewpoints not just to be spoken, but to be truly heard. To some extent, these minority viewpoints overlap with conservative and libertarian perspectives—voices sometimes underrepresented in the venerable Stanford Daily. To this end, we seek to offer our ideas and our reasoning to the Stanford community. And although our voices may not always carry a perfect pitch and our ideas may not always be infallible, we believe that by promoting open debate on campus, we are serving a larger cause.

On behalf of my colleagues at The Stanford Review, I would like to welcome you back to campus. Enjoy your learning, have fun, and have a wonderful quarter ahead.

Fiat Lux!

Chris Seck, Editor-in-Chief

Subscribe to the Stanford Review