Letters to the Editor
-
Not teaching by example
I thought that the first part of Dr. Bollinger's speech, where he explained why Columbia invited President Ahmadinejad, was necessary and eloquent. Colleges are where we teach people by exposing them to different views. That makes me even sorrier to say that the second half of his speech didn't live up to the ideals that the first half espoused.
I agree that Dr. Bollinger had the right to state his extremely reasonable dislike with President Ahmadinejad and his regime - he's part of the Columbia community, too. But at this point, Dr. Bollinger's role was to introduce Ahmadinejad - to play the part of moderator. It _wasn't_ to get in the first swing.
This wasn't a necessary correction of the discussion. All of the questions he asked would surely have be asked by those intelligent Columbia students - if he'd given them a chance.
If Columbia invites people with unpopular view in the future, will they come? Knowing that they're likely to be sandbagged in the introduction? Hasn't Dr. Bollinger just made sure that people who we dislike, but whose reasoning (or lack of it) we need to understand, won't come, and won't further the education of his students?