Over the past decade, militaristic machinations have become more artfully deceptive, demanding dynamic and multi-nodal forms of resistance. It’s relatively easy to build coalitions to protest an expensive and unjust war with large numbers of American casualties; it is much more difficult to build resistance when drone deaths are displayed next to sports scores on the scrolling cable news marquee. The contemporary effects of militarism may appear less cataclysmic and less spectacular than the popular images of war that dwell in our collective imagination. This suggests, however, that the evils of militarism are becoming increasingly banal. We may not have draft notices to burn, but refusing to “smile for the camera” is one good place to start.
The ASSU Undergraduate Senate voted Tuesday evening against a bill proposed by Students for Palestinian Equal Rights (SPER) urging the Board of Trustees to reconsider investments in companies that they said violate human rights and international law.
A group of around 20 students protested former British Prime Minister Tony Blair’s visit to Stanford Thursday evening. Holding signs that read “The answer to colonialism is not imperialism” and “Africa’s resources are for Africa’s people,” protesters gathered outside of Cemex Auditorium, where Blair gave a public talk.
Examining the culture of campus activism and its relationship with the rest of the student body is equally important when discussing why students don’t engage more with activist collectives at Stanford.
The exhibit, part of a traveling mural project organized by Quaker organization American Friends Service Committee, was brought to campus by student organization Stanford Says No to War, in time for this week’s 10th anniversary of the war in Afghanistan.
After a week of orientation activities, Stanford freshmen took on this year’s topic, “ethics of war,” Sunday afternoon at the annual Three Books panel discussion. This year’s books focused on issues of national security. Scott Sagan, political science professor and co-director of the Center for International Security and Cooperation (CISAC), who also moderated the discussion…
Universities stand upon the bedrock of free speech. An open forum of ideas is the very essence of the academy. Stanford should pride itself on fostering an open environment in which all students may express their views without precondition, but this Editorial Board is disappointed by our University’s repeated refusal to meet even this basic standard.
If I had to summarize the report and recommendations of the Faculty Senate’s ad hoc committee on ROTC in two words, they would be “Country First,” the shallow, populist slogan of John McCain and Sarah Palin’s presidential campaign. These words come to mind because, having dismissed “some of the most trenchant arguments…against ROTC” on the basis that they were “marred by naïve and derogatory stereotypes” (without providing any examples of such stereotypes or enunciating the basis on which the committee found them to be “naïve and derogatory”), the ad hoc committee proceeds to justify its recommendation that the military be given special treatment, compared to other, more peace-promoting and international-law-abiding institutions, by wrapping Stanford University in the American flag.