Finding new life in the Tory

In the last year, the editors of the Tory have perfected the art of sparking campus controversy. As of late, they have even caused a new divestment campaign in which students are calling for the University to pull all funding from the magazine, as well as launched a heated face-off with the president of the USG. Indeed, it has come to be that one can almost expect to find mention of the Tory on this opinion page; today will be no exception.

As the current editorial board finishes its term, it is engaging in quite a bit of self-congratulation for the addition the publication has made to the Princeton intellectual climate. Much of the praise is well-deserved. The Tory has been a lightning rod for campus debate, attracting both fiery critiques and passionate defenses. No matter what you think of the content of the magazine, you can certainly agree that it has made for some great dinner table and opinion page discussions.

But as a lightning rod, the Tory has done more than just spark debate. It has left the ground surrounding it scorched and bruised. And in the end, I don't know if it has been more of a net help or an actual obstacle in defining the campus conservative movement.

I applaud the editors for increasing their readership. Glossy, controversial covers and an often vitriolic "Rant" have earned a reputation that draws in many students simply wishing to find out what the next outrage will be. And maybe some of those students stay to read some of the more thoughtful, deliberative articles. But for many students, their experience with the Tory ends with their outrage.

All too often, the magazine (and "The Rant" specifically) falls into a routine of publishing one-line zingers that express contentious viewpoints but do not provide ample and easily accessible justifications. The result is a polemical campus debate in which all sides talk past each other, no one is converted and everyone is left angry, hurt and frustrated. If the goal is simply to arouse passions, then yes, the editors have succeeded. But if the goal is to present conservative positions as viable alternatives within a liberal college environment, then the Tory as it is has been a failure. The articles, even when well-researched and well-argued, are lost behind the controversial face that seems to win out. When that happens, students with opposing ideas do not engage the issues, but instead yell back with all the passion they can muster from the other side. This may be a debate, but it will never be a fruitful one.

So the Tory has increased its profile, but it has ranted far more readily than it has reasoned. Even still, when the new officers take charge next year, they can be grateful for the work that has been done to launch their magazine into high prominence. They can publish their first issue confident that many students will pick it up and start thumbing through, probably curious to learn who's next on the list to be attacked. Here is where the new officers can make some progress.

When students pick up the next issue, let them be impressed most by the quality of the publication. Now, with the readership strong, is the perfect time for the Tory to emerge as a genuine source of discourse. Focus needs to be shifted away from penning fierce witticisms and toward presenting a cohesive set of articulate writings that, through careful and deliberate research, add the best conservative arguments available to the dialogues on various issues.

I believe that is the ultimate goal of the Tory. Conservative students will have a better grasp of the positions they believe to support, and liberal students will find some legitimate challenges to their beliefs. But until that happens, the Tory will only serve to fuel the fires (sometimes all too literally) of the liberals who rally against it. Lowell Schiller is a Wilson School major from Warren, N.J. He can be reached at schiller@princeton.edu.