Our service workers are essential to the running of the University and deserve not only our praise, but also our respect.
These past weeks, my Facebook feed has been plagued by USG campaign posts. It’s understandable, given the potential social media has these days to spread a political message.
From the moment we first enter the FitzRandolph gate to commencement, we Princetonians have an endless supply of work.
For all its prestige, wealth, and resources, Princeton University has much to be desired as a place of education.
As Princeton students who will become the leaders of this generation, it is time we reexamined the many cultural attitudes surrounding the behaviors of millennials.
Given the celebration of Earth Day this past Saturday, the Board finds it appropriate to commend the University on its successful sustainability measures and to propose some campus-wide recommendations for future implementation.
I was motivated to write this letter because I wanted to talk about ambivalence. Ambivalence will serve you well no matter where you go, but particularly around here. I have often found it extremely difficult at Princeton to untangle the good from the bad.
The Undergraduate Student Government recently released a report on the winter 2016 referendum regarding eating club transparency. The document contains a summary of findings and several proposals, including the formation of a permanent USG subcommittee on eating club transparency and diversity that would work to collect demographic data on club membership.
Parents should be banned from campus. Not at all times, and Public Safety officers shouldn’t go around and round them up, but for the most part, parents need to stay away.
The University is suing the United States Department of Education in an attempt to keep seven years of admissions records hidden from the public. The cover-up is hardly unexpected.
An article written by columnist Bhaskar Roberts ’19 on Sunday, April 16, claims that white artist Dana Schutz’s controversial rendering of Emmett Till’s dead body was born out of empathy for Till and, by extension, the pain suffered by the black community.
Free speech is a legal and political right, not a tool for arbitrating “proper” forms of interpersonal discourse. Freedom of speech includes,among other things, the right to use offensive phrases to convey political messages, to engage in symbolic speech (e.g. burning the flag in protest), or to not speak (e.g. to not salute the flag).
As of the drafting of this column, it is almost the tenth week of spring semester. Many seniors are PTL, children and students are frolicking around the Woody Woo fountain, and I am still struggling to find a summer internship. As the end of the school year approaches, I am growing more resigned to the fact that I may not find an internship at all.
The economist Albert O. Hirschman once wrote that there are three sorts of arguments used to “debunk and overturn ‘progressive’ policies and movements of ideas.” This response will argue that the progressive action will produce the exact opposite of that objective; that the effort to change something won’t make a difference at all; or that the effort will put in danger good things that already are in place.
After the “shock” of Donald J. Trump’s electoral victory settled down, I remember hearing any number of choice quotes about college students’ responsibilities for Trump’s election. “Did you even vote?” “All of these protests, but did you all go to the polls?” “This is why you all shouldn’t have wasted your vote on Harambe.”