 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| Photo by LINDA DE ROSA Erica Clarke, assistant group leader to Diane Hotaling, wrapped up their teams conclusions about “People of a Democratic Society: Engaged Citizens or Dutiful Robots?” on Feb. 24. |
If you have eaten in the Boyd Dining Center at 11 a.m. on Tuesdays since the beginning of February you may have noticed small groups of students and off-campus visitors huddling together around Boyd. The dialogue series, sponsored by the Center for the Study of Religious Freedom at Wesleyan, began with a lecture by Dr. Lynn Sawlivich, assistant professor of Classics, about "The Paleontology of Democracy: Lessons from Greece and Rome." "Is Democracy Irrelevant?", "Democrats are Immoral and Republicans are Uncaring: So What Else Do I Need to Know?" and "People of a Democratic Society: Engaged Citizens or Dutiful Robots?" were the titles of the past three installments of the dialogue series.
Dr. Dan Margolies, assistant professor of History, and junior Amber Randolph introduced the topics for the first dialogue: "Is there a democratic dimension to our security?", "Is there a political dimension to surfing the web?", "Is there a political dimension to pumping gas?" and "Is there a political dimension to shopping?" Margolies asked the groups to talk about democracy’s definition. For the purposes of the dialogues, he defined it as "consent of the governed." He also asked the groups to discuss if "democracy should be transferred elsewhere?" Randolph introduced the question about the environment by asking, "Who knows what's best for the environment?" She brought up digging for oil in Alaska, and what the problems and benefits of globalization might be. "It's impossible to answer any of these questions today," Margolies said, acknowledging that the day was for discussion, not answers.
Attendees were then separated into nine groups with professors facilitating the dialogues within the groups. Each group tried to discuss all of the questions posed by Margolies and Randolph, but they were all able to discuss at least two of the four questions. Margolies' group began its discussion with the question about security. "Can't security and democracy be contradictive?" asked Ken, a member of Margolies' group. In Dr. Tom Fanney's group, the argument that Joyce brought up was, "democracy, as we want to impart it isn't democracy. It's just human rights.”
Dr. Sharon Vaughn's group asked "Can we force democracy on others?" Dilip said, "Democracy is an evolution," implying that our democracy cannot be forced. Steven of the same group suggests to America that we must "offer ourselves as a model instead of imposing ourselves. Democracy can't be forced."
With a title like "Democrats are Immoral and Republicans are Uncaring: So What Else Do I Need to Know?", how could one not be interested? Hosted on Feb. 17, the topics for the second installation of the democracy dialogues were introduced by Dr. Sharon Vaughn, assistant professor of Political Science, and junior Kevin Bianco: "What do you think is the best way to get information about political candidates and public policy proposals?", "Do you think being informed about politics is the duty of a citizen? Why or why not?", "How do you make decisions about policies and politicians?”, "What do you think about the idea of ‘Self-conscious Citizenship'?" and "How can people be encouraged to make the investment to become more knowledgeable about candidates and policies?" "Not all sources of information are equal," Bianco reminded the group before dismissing them to complete their discussions.
 |
| Photos by LINDA DE ROSA Students and other participants completed surveys while listening to group leaders summarize their group’s discussions. |
"It is our responsibility to learn as much as we can," said Dan, a member of Political Science professor Dr. Bill Gibson's group. "Even if you don't necessarily agree with Bush, know his side." In Margolies’ group, Ken said, "Sometimes there aren't only two points of view. Sometimes there are many points of view," about deciding one’s position on a political topic. "To get anything done, there has to be an either-or," said Will as a counter to that argument. In Vaughn's group, Jessica said, "We need to teach younger kids. From elementary all the way to high school. This won't help us now, but it will help the future have a better government."
"Children who get involved get their parents involved," added Kevin. Religious Studies Professor Dr. Craig Wansink brought up the fact that "people vote for all types of reasons." Across the hall, a member of Chemistry Professor Dr. Joyce Easter's group said people vote according to their values. "People are [voting] with their family's values, but where did their values come from?" Earl wondered.
Wansink and sophomore Frances McNally posed the question, "People of a Democratic Society: Engaged Citizens or Dutiful Robots?" at the most recent democracy dialogue on Feb. 24. The three topics put forth to the groups for discussion were "Good Citizens," "Being Role Models / Informing Others," and "Responsibility for Others." Group nine began by listing people they thought of as good citizens. They then listed what characteristics those people demonstrated to be considered a good citizen. Empathy, caring, knowledge and outspokenness were all listed as important characteristics.
When asked what being outspoken really meant, Krystal said "not being ashamed. To speak how you feel, even though it may conflict with someone else." "And not being afraid of repercussions of expressing their beliefs," added Brenda. While Vaughn's group discussed role models, "We can take what they say, as long as the don't force their thoughts on us," Jessica said of movie stars. When asking if we are responsible for others, or "Are we our brother's keeper?" one of the summarizing points brought forward at the end of third dialogue was to look beyond ourselves.
"So much of where we're going leads to next week," said Wansink, referring to the next dialogue. The next topic is titled "Promoting Active Citizenship," and will be led by Dr. Joyce Easter and sophomore Kevin Wright on March 2 at 11 a.m. in one-third Boyd. The group's discussions may have run parallel with one another, but each individual group came to their own conclusions. Even though none of the questions posed over the past three weeks were "answered," they were all discussed and opened some people’s minds to topics they may otherwise not think about.
New Marlin mascot introduced at winter pep rally held on Jan. 30 |
 |
| Photo by BEN RUEHLMANN “This is the Marlin bowing out.” After years of faithful service of taunting opposing fans and heckling opposing teams, Bob the Marlin packed in his fins and rode into retirement with the help of a Wesleyan wheelchair. His replacement -- a younger brother -- stepped into the spotlight and made his debut appearance at the men’s basketball game against Guilford College the following day. |
Site created and maintained by Linda De Rosa.