[886] in Discussion of MIT-community interests
MIT != Monolithic
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Brad Ito)
Thu Oct 4 14:32:10 2001
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20011004135741.00d21120@hesiod>
Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2001 14:30:49 -0400
Reply-To: "Documentation at http://web.mit.edu/beland/talk/talk.html"
<MIT-Talk@MIT.EDU>, Brad Ito <bito@MIT.EDU>
From: Brad Ito <bito@MIT.EDU>
To: MIT-Talk@MIT.EDU
In-Reply-To: <200110041715.NAA07947@biohazard-cafe.mit.edu>
I was here back when the biggest news was Housing, when the news broke that
Scott Krueger had died. When FSILGs were hit with a surprise RA
requirement. When student groups cropped up to fight Frosh on Campus. It
was one of the first things that got me to pay attention to greater student
interests on campus.
I remember sitting outside of vests office in protest, I remember Rallying
when Skull House got kicked out of their house, and more. I remember
following the deliberations of the RSSC and seeing the Unified Student
Response get "reinterpreted" by Bacow. And I know how, despite all that,
this past rush was still the last one.
Yet since then there have been many new faces within the
administration. To speak of one in particular I have found success in
dealing with Larry Benedict with helping to revise Mental Health here at
MIT via the Taskforce.
To me, these recent protests have served to properly humble two of the more
recent additions to the administration who were behind the initial proposal
presented at Dormcon, Clay and Berlin. MIT students can be quite acerbic
and I seem to recall them saying they had received many hundreds of
emails. At least in for Berlin, I have seen that he has learned quite
clearly how strong the student ire can be when it is raised. Clay is
newer, but he has taken a step back with these recent protests and I hope
we can show him that not only can we be angry, we can also be productive
members in meaningful discussion.
Clay wasn't here for past messes. Call me an optimist, but here's hoping
that a new face can mean the start of new relations between students and
administrators.
At 01:15 PM 10/4/2001 -0400, Peter M Finin wrote:
> Petitions, committees and
>well thought out arguments won't get the admins to change the
>structure of MIT's administration in any meaningful way.
If you mean they won't fire existing admins, then perhaps you have a point,
unless something new and atrocious is done. But if instead you mean they
won't change how they decide upon policy related to student life, then I
must protest with my own hope for better communications in the future.
At any rate, no single administrator has done all of the many things
students have protested about over recent years. MIT may alternately seem
clueless as to students, over-parental to students, uncaring about
students, or just plain thick-headed. And yet sometimes they seem to
listen, to let us save student space in the reading room from academic use,
to let us have a say in the dining system. What's the reason behind these
seeming contradictions?: MIT is not monolithic. In our blind rage, let's
not hurt our own cause by slapping the few hands which have offered to help
us participate.
Peace,
Brad Ito
*********************************************
Bradley T. Ito bito@mit.edu
34 The Fenway 617-437-1043 x233
*********************************************
I wish for Peace. I wish for Understanding in the face of Tragedy.
"With my mind, I make the world" -Dhammapada
