Word: walzer
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: all
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
...Walzer says the liberals "didn't think the institution was collapsing or the age of barbarians had begun. It still seemed to us possible to talk to anyone, even with the student radicals with whom we disagreed," he adds. This belief in communication the liberals say is one legacy of the strike. Hoffmann notes, "There are better relationships between administration, faculty and students--more openness, more sense of community." Of student complaints that their input into decision-making is at best token, the liberals say that students, after all, had no input at all ten years ago. "There...
...time the caucuses broke up from a lack of issues to discuss. "The caucuses faded when the only issue that seemed to remain was who was on each caucus," Walzer notes. Ten years later, both sides assert that current Faculty alignments do not reflect the old caucus divisions. But attitudinal differences still persist, and liberals and conservatives divide on the deep-seated causes and results of the strike. Liberals consistently emphasize the antiquated administrative and decision-making structure of the University, and believe the strike exposed these inadequacies. "It helped change a very archaic governance at Harvard--the place...
...faculty supported the occupation, which most dismissed as silly or an unforgiveable resort to violence--but the liberals found the bust ultimately more disturbing. Stanley Hoffmann, professor of Government, notes, "The dividing line was on attitudes toward the bust, even if one disagreed with the students--as did Michael Walzer and I, who thought the takeover stupid and silly. But calling the police was silly--it radicalized the rest of the student body--and just plain wrong...
This conviction prompted Hoffmann and Walzer to ask a number of other Faculty members to attend a meeting at Sever Hall to discuss the bust. About 100 faculty attended the meeting, from which emerged the liberal caucus, led by Hoffmann, Walzer and Wassily Leontief, then professor of Economics. They drew up a four-point resolution condemning both the student takeover and Pusey's action; the motion specifically indicated Pusey, saying he had "misinterpreted the Faculty vote on ROTC" and stating that his public statements "were a major source of the current disturbance." The resolution also "deplored the lack of consultation...
Still, many faculty also blame the limited student influence on decision-making on a decline in students' political interests, and on the unavoidable realities of running a university such as Harvard. "It seemed to happen overnight. I woke up one morning and there were fewer political organizations," Walzer says. And, as Thomson ruefully summarizes the lasting gains and eroding gains of the strike: "If it hadn't happened there wouldn't have been as much student input as you get these days. But the problem was that students were transients, and ultimately the power lies with those who are here...