We were amused to learn, via our friends at the Dartmouth Review, that “divestment” activists at Dartmouth actually consider last May’s takeover of a Swarthmore board meeting to be an inspiration for “open dialogue.” Despite Swarthmore student Danielle Charette’s May 15 op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, which described that despicably illiberal May 4 meeting, the moderator at Divest Dartmouth apparently cited the Swarthmore approach with praise. As the Review’s Nicholas P. Desatnick puts it in his article, “Inside the Environmentalist Echo Chamber”:
[F]or the divestment movement, discussion is useful only so far as it serves the predetermined end of making ExxonMobil and Chevron the moral equivalents of rapists and elitists. Just like the protestors, then, the event’s organizers hoped to dictate their program of reform under the guise of a disingenuous and one-sided discourse. As a result, they had far more in common with #realtalk than even the decidedly partisan moderator acknowledged.
Sadly, this one-sided discourse has gone nationwide.