Letters to the Editor

Misplaced attack against Whig-Clio

Carlos Ramos-Mrosovsky's blast of criticism against Whig-Clio last Wednesday, Nov. 20, was both ill-informed as well as largely misplaced. The Society's activities do much to fulfill our collective mission of "Princeton in the Nation's Service," and if Mr. Ramos-Mrosovsky senses a dearth of intellectual activity at Princeton today, perhaps he should exhort his fellow students to take up the standard so ably carried by generations of alumni, rather than blaming the Society as an institution.

Far from declining, Whig-Clio has adapted to changing times. With the raising of the legal drinking age to 21 in the 1980s, student life became even more concentrated in the eating clubs, alcohol was banned from Whig Hall, and the Society's membership decreased. Rather than fading into obscurity, the Society has developed a set of incredibly successful subsidiaries, including Model U.N., Model Congress, Mock Trial, and the Debate Panel's hosted tournaments, that have allowed thousands of Princetonians to debate current issues on the intercollegiate level and to create fora of political discourse and civic education for high school students all over the country. Model Congress's Outreach program took this one step further, teaching disadvantaged students from Trenton and New York to draft legislation and engage in debate, then paying for them to attend the conference. Whig-Clio is still one of the largest and most active student organizations at Princeton, and has evolved from a self-absorbed gentleman's club to a vibrant institution dedicated to civic service as well as on-campus debate.

Moreover, this particular 'Prince' reader can remember a very active Society with frequent debates of public issues, indeed involving other politically oriented groups on campus, as Mr. Ramos-Mrosovsky suggested, in the very recent past. Any organization is only as good as its individual members, and Whig-Clio, which certainly endeavors to open its doors to all interested and motivated Princeton students, will only be as intellectually engaged as the members of the student body at a given time. If the Society of the late '90s was a more dynamic place, then the responsibility for its improvement lies firmly at the door of Mr. Ramos-Mrosovsky and his colleagues in the Class of 2004 et seq. I hope that in addition to writing rather flimsily supported articles, those of Mr. Ramos-Mrosovsky's persuasion take it upon themselves to improve the quality of student life at Princeton, perhaps by running for Whig-Clio office themselves. Such actions would speak far louder than any words in these pages. Tristan Cameron Snell '00