Andrew Golis

go to google. Type in “Matt Glazer Jesus”. That is all.

Brandon Terry wrote a great column in today’s Crimson about divesting from Sudan. I highly recommend you read the whole thing, but in case you’re too lazy to check it out, here’s the most important part:

What we are discussing is the genocide of human beings. We may pretend their lives don’t have meaning because they are thousands of miles away in Africa or because they are black or because they don’t live in well-manicured suburbs and watch The OC—but our delusion only changes reality for us, not them. This type of delusion is frightening, really, because it is what our entire culture of disconnect and selfishness and impotence is built on. It is what prevents us from responding adequately to homelessness, poor schools, HIV/AIDS, and a host of other crises that affect “them” and not “us.” We apologize away our inaction and turn our eyes while death and destruction march on somewhere, in some ghetto or foreign country or wherever, that to us is at best an unpleasant mirage in our peripheral vision or at worst somewhere that never really existed at all.

Even though I have been involved in activism on Sudan, the sense of disconnect did not strike me until I spoke at a rally at the State House on Thursday. Before the rally, a woman came up to me and asked, politely, if I was of Sudanese descent. What that question revealed to me, is that if I was in Sudan, living amongst the black Africans in Darfur, I would be just as much of a target as the next person. For no reason, other than by virtue of being born in America, am I granted a different level on the global hierarchy of moral worth.

Read the whole thing and join SeniorGiftPlus!

The UC had a debate at last night’s meeting (and subsequently on the UC list, which it is thoroughly entertaining to be on) about whether or not they should fund an event put on by the Seneca, which technically violates their non-discrimination clause because it is a women-only organization. The grant was recommitted to FiCom for further clarification, but the debate that ensued on UC-open was hilarious. My favorite exchange:

> —–Original Message—–
> From: Sungmi Choi [mailto:sachoi@fas.harvard.edu]
> Subject: RE: [UC] Women and Tenure at Harvard

> p.s. the seneca is NOT a finals club, it is a non-profit women’s organization.

And Mr. Barro’s response:

Quoting Joshua Alexander Barro :

> Yes. Also, my penis is not a penis; it is a mystical wand of love.
>
> ————————————-
> Joshua Alexander Barro

Ah, the maturity of former UC members. Hilarious.

the Harvard Social Forum (the umbrella for something like 40 progressive and radical groups on campus, from the Dems to SASSI WOOF to HPAG) is asking all of its affiliates to consider signing a letter with a set of demands. They want feedback, etc. Those of you who read this blog often will know what I think of this kind of strategy, but for now I will simply post the demands and comment on them later. For you consideration:

WE DEMAND:
1. That the University take immediate steps to implement democracy and accountability.
– Transparency in all decisions of the Administration, Ad Board, and Corporation
– A student-faculty body to consider new guidelines for governance
– Ultimately, student, faculty, and worker participation in reviewing all policies

2. That Harvard immediately divest from corporations shown to be systematically violating human rights and implement a code of conduct
– Divestment from PetroChina and Unocal, and ultimately all companies supporting genocide, terror, and unjust war
– Refraining from research or recruitment for these companies
– Investing instead in grassroots developments and in local communities

3. That Harvard live up to and expand its standards of non-discrimination for students
– That Harvard keep ROTC and all military recruiters off our campus
– That Harvard include gender identity and expression as a form of discrimination
– That Harvard double representation of lower-income students by next year
– That Harvard move immediately to establish a Women’s Center on campus.

4. That Harvard pursue equality with regard to its faculty and its education
– That Harvard establish meaningful Ethnic Studies and Women, Gender, and Sexuality departments with all the resources they need
– That the administration dramatically increase tenure offers to women and people of color
– That the administration cease intimidating and censoring professors for their politics

5. That Harvard fully respect the rights and the dignity of all campus workers
– Living wage now for Harvard workers, whether directly employed or hired through outside firms
– Fair contracts for campus unions, with health care and childcare for all
– Immediate halt to practices of outsourcing and union busting on campus

What do you think?

ummm… has broken 5,000 hits since the site was opened for public consumption on Janurary 9th. We have about 50 returning and 100 total visitors a day. Thanks for reading, tell your friends!

Have a good weekend.

A profile of Obama is in the Washington Post. Read the whole thing! Here’s the beginning:

There’s nothing exotic or complicated about how phenoms are made in Washington, and, more to the point, how they are broken.

“Andy Warhol said we all get our 15 minutes of fame,” says Barack Obama. “I’ve already had an hour and a half. I mean, I’m so overexposed, I’m making Paris Hilton look like a recluse.”

The new senator from Illinois is dazzling another venue, in this case the Gridiron Club. It is early December and Obama won’t start his new job for a few weeks. But he comes well steeped in the basic physics of hype.

“I figure there’s nowhere to go from here but down,” Obama says. “So tonight, I announce my retirement from the United States Senate.”

Read on, he’s quite the charmer.

So Chairman Dean is traveling the country trying to fire up the troops. While some moderate Dems are scared to be seen with him in public, he’s getting great reviews from most Democratic leadership and throughout the self-appointed “punditry” class.

While Dean is traveling, he’s making what I think is an essential point:

“You vote, you get a ‘D,’ ” Dean said.

Dean, the former presidential candidate and recently elected chair of the Democratic National Committee, pointed out that you can pass with a D, but barely.

“If you want to sustain democracy, you have to run for office,” he said. “If you don’t want to run for office, then you have to work on someone’s campaign.”

He made this same point when he was here at Harvard. For me, it’s an essential one.

As Democrats its not simply our job to push Democratic ideology. It’s also our responsibility as Americans to push democratic ideology (skim reader: notice the loss of the capital D). Not only will it improve our party in that it encourages more people to become involved with US, I think it does another thing.

I’m currently taking a class from Robert Putnam, who is famous for his book “Bowling Alone,” a book about the atomization of American society and the loss of what he calls “social capital.” One of the points he’s made in class is that, with the loss of social capital (which he traces as declining in America since 1964), we lose a sense of community and therefore a sense of our duties to each other.

The result is that we have a harder time conceptualizing and caring about other people’s problems, which results in a tendency towards conservative ideals of individual liberty over progressive ideals of our duties to each other within a community. The result, if one continues the line of thinking, is the emergence of the modern conservative movement as a major force and the fall of the liberal/progressive movement.

So, if Dean convinces people to get involved in their local politics, he builds a community’s social capital, making them more likely to assume a belief in greater community duties and, let’s hope, vote Democratic.

An great thing has happened: I learned somthing!

Check out this discussion with one ummm… reader about gay marriage and the Catholic Church. I’ve never actually had this discussion in a thoughtful way outside of the context of a class (Justice). Maybe that’s because I’m too annoyingly opinionated so people who I disagree with have avoided the debate, maybe because, as the reader notes, the Church is demonized in this conversation, maybe because I don’t hang out with many people who would make the argument against gay marriage. Whatever the reason, it was great that it happened.

I highly recommend checking out the conversation, especially for those of you who agree with my opinion. I think what you may find is that one of the primary problems with this debate is that we’re talking past each other.

With that in mind, I have this thought. Reader, you point out that the Church believes that:

[S]ex always should have a dual purpose: as an act of love and as an act of procreation. It is an act that produces life, and since this is its main biological purpose this should not be separated from its emotional aspect. And if one of the two are not present, than abstinence is the best choice.

While I disagree, I understand the point. The obvious question than, is whether that rule should apply to women who are infertile, women who are too old to procreate, etc. There are countless types of relationships in which sex cannot lead procreation, but is otherwise “ok” with the Church (i.e. happening between a married straight couple without contraception). Would the Church say that sex should not happen in these cases?

Another thought: the Church seems to be making a utilitarian argument about what is best for society. Is this because God is a utilitarian, or because he has simply established a relationship as “natural” that IS best for society. Once you differentiate this, I think you have to address the question of, if we are God’s creations, why he would put people on earth who have homosexual identities if they do not also fulfill this social utility.

In any event, this is good. I can now actually point to specific diversions of belief that lead me in a completely different direction than the Church and those who disagree with gay marriage. Hopefully I’m not the only person who finds this interesting.

JOIN IN THE DISCUSSION. HIT COMMENT!

Here’s what anti-summers protestors should have done (and I’m sure there are better versions of the same type of idea, so feel free if you think of something):

Have 50 to 75 women (I think it would be possible to get that many for things like this) dress up in lab coats with calculators and just have them walk around confused acting like they don’t know what they’re doing or where they’re going. You can have the men who want to protest hand out the flyers. People would find it entertaining, it would convey the point and it would get people to actually read the flyers. PLUS, it would make great visuals that would be in a lot of newspapers (a lot better than the infinitely reoccuring picture of the angry college kid with a sign.

What do you think?

there are some interesting conversations underway on the blog today. Join in!

The first has to do with my inability to understand the christian demonization of gay marriage (and I do use demonization quite intentionally). Check out the great explanation and thoughts by one reader.

The second has to do with the Larry Summers debate, and has some interesting insights on other parallels that you can draw (as well as a friend proposing to me).

Click on the links and offer your thoughts!