There were two major developments over this winter break. Both the Republican Party and the "Bowdoin Hello" were put on notice.
Now, as a dedicated Bowdoin student and an avid politics junkie, the prospective retirement of these two institutional staples has me scrambling to figure out what happened.
The Republican Party has sadly (and not so secretly) lost its grip on reality. Now, a staunch, elitist, New York liberal (like myself) might argue that the Republican Party's agenda of fighting interminable wars, neglecting alliances, cutting taxes on the wealthy, and sitting as an idle witness while our infrastructure decayed and the planet warmed always seemed unsustainable. But, as this very author argued in his inaugural column, the Republicans still retained the nonpareil advantage of seeming to genuinely embody American values.
Somewhere between a war veteran and an adulterous megalomaniac, the conservative monopoly on the American social psyche petered away.
In what has become a two-man primary, the Republican Party has showcased the most highly qualified leaders it has to offer.
In one corner we have a thrice-married Lutheran-turned-Baptist-turned-Catholic, whose political platform mainly consists of exhortations to the American people to place a semi-fascistic kind of faith in his governing ability.
In the other corner we have the father of the (now-disowned) Obama health care bill whose integrity of character can only be rivaled by the cheapest of fabrics (read: polyester). It seems that the latter, Governor Romney, will be the eventual nominee. To this point, however, the main draw of his campaign could be summed up in the slogan, "Sanity We Can Count On."
Though still allegedly "the party of Lincoln," the ideas of today's Republican Party cannot survive a juxtaposition with the thoughtfulness and the humanity of the man who led this country through a Civil War. That party seems long gone.
Instead, we have a clownish imposter railing incoherently about the need to restore some impossible pastoral America. And the ideas are nowhere to be found.
Though this all sounds fatalistic, living through the Bush years probably did something to prepare me for the day when our grandest and oldest of political parties would treat good ideas as alien and anathema.
However, upon returning to Bowdoin, I was caught unawares by the fact that our dearest Bowdoin Hello would suffer the same fate as the GOP. I am referring to the College's program entitled, "Beyond the Bowdoin Hello," a series of events and lectures during the first week of this semester.
When I arrived at Bowdoin as an overeager, wet-behind-the-ears freshman, I thought the Bowdoin Hello was pretty cool. It meant, in a superficial though meaningful way, that I was a part of the group. It was advertised as a thin bond of fraternity between all members of the Bowdoin community, a greeting that bespoke common institutional ideals and goals.
To get "beyond" that hello meant a conversation between or among friends. It meant the actual undertaking of a strenuous liberal arts education outside of the classroom.
However, when I returned to campus for this semester, I discovered that my understanding of the Bowdoin Hello had been replaced. Rather than inspire friendship, our College's greeting has been employed for the purpose of inculcating the most rudimentary of virtues: tolerance for one another.
According to one article on the Bowdoin website, "Beyond the Bowdoin Hello" "is designed to bring students, staff, faculty and community members together to think about and discuss issues of identity, difference and bias."
When a dry-erase board in the Tower was defaced last spring, I thought Dean Foster's immediate response made absolute sense: send an email to the whole campus about the incident, attach a photograph of the graffiti, and condemn it.
Now, almost 10 months later, an army of sorts is using that incident as motivation to launch its crusade.
In the past week, "Beyond the Bowdoin Hello" has brought community discussions, lectures, and tea times. Your dear author even attended a couple of those events to witness the discussions for himself.
That the participants in those events desire to root out bias and prejudice based on racial, ethnic, or sexual identity is admirable. However, the ascendancy of identity conversations in our campus discourse is doing a disservice to the substantive bonds that members of this community alreadwy have or can create.
To continually talk about the ignorance of folks at Bowdoin or in Brunswick doesn't educate them; it doesn't remake hatefulness into good. Instead, it mires us in conversations that will do nothing to prevent mean-spirited souls from trying to deflate the privilege, progress and potential that Bowdoin represents.
Furthermore, we are ceding the debate to those who would vulgarize the academic excellence that Bowdoin stands for.
Creating an accepting community should not be the work of Bowdoin. We should punish those who transgress against a respectful environment, but that does not mean we should anoint mere respect as Bowdoin's highest ideal and the goal of the Bowdoin Hello.
Without question, all of the hate speech incidents are on the heinous side of nasty, but what can we do other than condemn such incidents, offer counseling services, and keep the campus secure?
We should move past the Bowdoin Hello with a yearning for substantive engagement rather than an emphasis on the emptiness of identity politics.
Thoughtlessness can befall the most progressive causes just as it cripples the most demagogic Republicans. Let's not chuck ideas out the window.
Judah Isseroff is a member of the Class of 2013.