Opinion: Cornell Should Reject the CML Demands
CML’s published demands do not match its encampment chants and have failed to capture the support of most Cornellians.
CML’s published demands do not match its encampment chants and have failed to capture the support of most Cornellians.
Cornell’s Interim Expressive Activity Policy debate highlights issues of governance and fairness in conduct processes, with historical roots in the 1969 Straight Takeover leading to shared student-faculty-staff control, recently upended by university trustees.
How unfortunate is it that our generation is so inundated with constant distractions, so bereft of traditional experiences, that the act of being without technology for 30 minutes at a time is seen as a revolutionary experience?
In the year of free expression, one would expect the school to defend students’ rights to express their views. Instead, Cornell has turned a blind eye to attacks on free speech.
We do not often criticize the Sun, but their refusal to report on the Rickford controversy is a miscarriage of their journalistic duty to Cornellians.
If Professor Rickford is fired for extramural comments, Cornell is not the free speech platform it pretends to be.
When Cornell does the right thing and condemns bad people, it’s difficult to criticize. More often than not, Cornell wades into political disputes and puts its institutional thumb on the scale.
With affirmative action declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, it’s time for conservatives to spearhead the case against legacy admissions.
This organization is a registered student organization of Cornell University