Dartmouth faculty are now in the business of paying students for their politics. The Chronicle of Higher Education (subscribers only) reports that both the sociology department and the department of Spanish and Portuguese used college funds to help students finance trips to Washington to participate in antiwar rallies. Several weeks ago, faculty in both departments voted to allocate small sums--between $100 and $200--to assist students in their antiwar activities.

As a tax-exempt institution, Dartmouth is legally barred from financing political campaigns. Dartmouth lawyers are consequently conducting a review to determine if its zealous professoriate broke the law. Meanwhile, Dartmouth's dean of faculty is denouncing the funding decision for the unethical behavior it was: "I think the university is a community built to allow the discussion of all points of view," he said. "When you start migrating to a place where the funds intended to create that community are going to support one particular point of view, that's where things get a little dicey, in my opinion."

Most department chairs understand this--and so declined the request of Dartmouth's "Why War" initiative to sponsor student protesters: "We don't fund things that are straight political activism," said government department chair Michael Mastanduno. "We would certainly fund an academic approach to the topic -- for example, we might fund a panel."

But Spanish and Portuguese chair Marsha Swislocki saw things differently:"We feel that we're encouraging student participation in the democratic process," she told the Daily Dartmouth. Swislocki's view would be more credible--if still legally indefensible--if her department had also allocated money to help pro-war students advance their effort. But as it stands, the notion that she led her department in a celebration of students' participation in the democratic process rings self-servingly hollow. It would be more accurate to say that Swislocki led her department in an opportunistic display of advocacy, one that rewarded students with "the right" perspective on Iraq without regard for the message that reward sends--not just to students who do not oppose the war, but also to those who do.

Students should never feel that their political views have any bearing on their academic prospects. But in today's hyper-politicized academy, students' academic prospects are increasingly determined by their politics. America's overwhelmingly left-wing professoriate swears up and down that this isn't true. But in moments like this one--where two Dartmouth departments deliberately blur the line between their institutional academic mission and their personal political positions; where whole faculties imagine that it is their business to adjudicate the relative value of their students' political views--we can glimpse the depth of their insincerity, the breadth of their arrogance, and the extent of the problem they deny exists.
.

Curiosity: Does Dartmouth have ROTC?

If so, do the professors go out of their way to help the young officers who will put their lives on the line to defend the professor's freedoms?

If Dartmouth doesn't have ROTC, why not?

These people don't care that they have double standards. They don't care that it is illegal. They are so filled with self-righteousness, so convinced that they are right and anyone with differing views are wrong that a mere legal technicality is insufficient prevent them from pursuing their "progressive" agenda.

I usually mail back fundraising solicitions with a big zero and an explanation why. This year it will be because of a politically charged amicus brief the university decided to file. I'm glad they're not using my tuition dollars to support their activism anymore.