Viewpoints
The Tech interviewed students in Lobby 7 on Monday, Oct. 26 about their viewpoints on sex at MIT.
A Teachable Moment: Reflections on The President’s Visit to MIT
Friday was a typical MIT day. Typical in a very special sense: MIT showed the President of the United States what goes on here every day. But it often takes extraordinary events like a Presidential visit (or some equivalent unplanned crisis/opportunity) for those of us who work here to recognize the full power and capacity of the Institute. Friday was such a day and it is worth reflecting on why this event took place here, how the community mobilized to organize the visit on six days notice, and what we learned about ourselves in the process.
Obama at MIT
Amidst the concrete barricades blocking off Amherst Alley, snipers on the Z-Center, the motorcade hustling past our dorms on Memorial Drive, and of course, the Presidential podium in Kresge, it’s easy to forget that Barack Obama came to MIT to deliver a message. It may not have been a very profound message, nor something we haven’t heard before, but since it happened here its worthwhile to think about and ask: What did the President tell us? Perhaps more importantly: What <i>didn’t</i> he tell us?
A Defense of State Capitalism
Recently, the well-known liberal filmmaker Michael Moore released his new movie, <i>Capitalism: A Love Story</i>. As the sarcastic title suggests, this movie was produced in an effort to portray the American capitalist system as an illogical system that is based on an emotional attachment rather than reasoning. It blames capitalism for the recent economic collapse, skyrocketing unemployment, and widespread suffering in general. As a solution, Moore advocates socialism. No surprises there.
Corrections
A May 4, 1999 article about notable MIT alumni incorrectly said that Eastman Kodak Company founder George Eastman was an MIT alumnus. Although a George L. Eastman graduated from MIT in 1870, he is not the same as the George Eastman who founded Eastman Kodak. The Eastman who founded Kodak is of course the same one who contributed over $20 million in cash and stock to MIT in the first two decades of the 20th century; his gifts, mostly made in the name of “Mr. Smith,” helped MIT build its Cambridge campus. He did not attend college. A reader recently pointed out this error.
Letters to the Editor
The list of Nobel Peace Prize laureates includes some amazing forces for good, but as Justin Cannon correctly pointed out in an letter on Friday, some awards have been far more dubious. I am displeased to see Mother Teresa go without mention in Cannon’s summary of less-than-deserving winners. Her “work undertaken in the struggle to overcome poverty and distress” (to quote the Nobel committee’s justification for her award) is largely misunderstood. She did not help cure the poor. She did not help the sick of India. All she did was provide rudimentary beds for the dying.
The Changing Face of Economics
Last week, the Nobel Prize in economics went to Elinor Ostrom and Oliver Williamson ’55, both non-theoretical economists. This spurred significant interest in the blogosphere due to the unconventionality of the recipients’ backgrounds. It is therefore worthwhile to consider their research in the context of the current economic landscape — this may help explain why Ostrom and Oliver in particular were chosen. Furthermore, because Ostrom is actually not an economist, but a political scientist, the judges have encouraged suggestions to change how we view the economics category.
Nobel Prize Simply Not Worth the Fuss
President Obama didn’t deserve the Nobel Peace Prize. We get it. A big thanks to Erasmus K. zu Ermgassen for regurgitating once more the week-long pat-on-the-back the media has been giving itself. “Look at us,” they seem to be saying. “We’re controversial. We can say bad things about Obama.” Fox News is, of course, in the corner wondering what all the fuss is about, slightly jealous that others are stealing his gig.
Letters to the Editor
It seems everyone is excited for President Obama’s visit to MIT today. Or should I call him Barack Hussein Obama, <i>de facto</i> President?
UA Update
Senate met on Monday, October 19 to discuss three pieces of legislation. Senate passed 41 U.A.S. 2.2: Resolution to Continue Transparency and Representation throughout the Institute-wide Planning Process, which seeks to continue undergraduate involvement in the ongoing budget reduction process. On a larger scale, this is part of a push for an increase in undergraduate involvement in Institute decision-making processes.
Condoms, Canoes, and Drunken Argentinean Men
Taxes, a necessary evil of our society, represent the means by which we fund our government. Or rather, the way our government charges us for its bills. Did you know that the 16th Amendment to the Constitution, which established the income tax, was supposed to be temporary? Did those who ratified this amendment really think that the government would cut off funding to itself?
Letters to the Editor
MIT’s favorite individual donor, Jeffry Picower, is likely soon to be bankrupted. The Madoff Trustee Irving Picard has a $7.2 billion clawback suit against him (his lawyer has already said he’s ready to make a deal), and it’s likely the IRS will have big claims too, because Picower got billions in phony tax loss statements from Madoff.
The Brilliant and the Dangerous Ideas of The Institute-Wide Planning Task Force
One of the best characteristics of MIT is the freedom the Institute offers to its students. Of course, we all have to satisfy the GIRs, but from sports to UROPs, MIT students have options. In harsh economic times, when we must cut back, do we have to cut back by reducing these options?
Corrections
An article last Friday, “MIT’s Endowment Over the Past Ten Years” contained several errors. MIT’s endowment payout is expected to drop in fiscal year 2011 (July 1, 2010 through June 30, 2011), not the current fiscal year (FY2010). The payout dropped twice in the 2000s — from FY2003 to FY2004 and from FY2004 to FY2005 — not once, making the projected drop in FY2011 the third in history, not the second. MIT now plans to reduce its budget by $118–$128 million over two years instead of $150 million over three years as originally planned (not a revised $150 million over two years).
UA Update
The Executive Committee prepared the Undergraduate Association’s “Response to the Institute-wide Planning Task Force Preliminary Report” based on undergraduate feedback from the UA website. This report was approved by the Senate on Tuesday, October 13, 2009. The Coordinating Team of the Planning Task Force; the Chancellor, Executive Vice President, Provost, Chairs of the Institute Committees, and Chairs of the Task Force Working Groups; received a copy of the final report this week, and the report is publicly available at <i>http://web.mit.edu/ua/docs/updated_</i><i>taskforce</i><i>_</i><i>response</i><i>.pdf</i>.
MIT Admissions Right to Use Shorter Essays
MIT Admissions was right to ask for more, shorter essays from its applicants in lieu of a single, long essay.
The Real Danger of Qom
On September 25, at the Group of 20 summit in Pittsburgh, President Obama revealed to the world that Iran has been covertly constructing an uranium enrichment facility outside the holy city of Qom. Flanked by his allies Gordon Brown and Nicolas Sarkozy, Obama demanded that Iran disclose the entirety of its nuclear activities “or be held accountable.”
Obama’s Peace Prize — Political Posturing?
Theodore Roosevelt became the first U.S. president to be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for negotiating the end of the 1904 Russo-Japanese war, in which 130,000 people died. Woodrow Wilson was similarly rewarded for his role in founding the League of Nations in 1919. Now, Barack Obama has become the third president of the U.S. to be awarded the Nobel peace prize — for his “extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples.” Spot the difference? Roosevelt and Wilson actually did something constructive (or prevented the destructive), but Obama has been applauded for his “efforts” — precisely because he hasn’t actually done anything yet.