34th Street Magazine's "Toast" is a semi-weekly newsletter with the latest on Penn's campus culture and arts scene. Delivered Monday-Wednesday-Friday.
Free.
For the short term, the American government needs to further open its borders to skilled scientists of multiple nationalities if it wishes to enable the Shale Revolution.
In response to a letter of protest written to them by a large group of Penn faculty and students as well as concerned citizens, the organizers of the Wharton India Economic Forum withdrew their invitation to Narendra Modi, the Chief Minister of the Indian state of Gujarat. We wish to reiterate briefly here why we (and virtually every member of the faculty teaching South Asia at Penn) objected to Modi being invited to deliver a keynote:
I’d encourage Loomba to reread her own words and to extend her embrace of “rigorous intellectual exchange” to a more recent hot-button international political issue: the invitation offered to Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi to be the keynote speaker for this year’s Wharton India Economic Forum.
We are outraged to learn that the Wharton India Economic Forum has invited Narendra Modi, the Chief Minister of the Indian state of Gujarat, to be a keynote speaker at its 17th Economic Forum on March 23, 2013.
Within the LGB bundle, the B is often pushed to the margins or misunderstood as a stepping stone between “real” straightness and “real” gayness. But the space in between — middle sexuality — is very legitimate, and it encompasses our otherwise uncategorized sexual desires.
Last week, in an effort to suggest where this viewing trend could be heading, film distributor Oscilloscope Laboratories uploaded the entirety of its 88-minute film “It’s a Disaster” onto Vine before its theatrical release … six seconds at a time.
By resigning, Pope Benedict XVI proclaimed to the world that his office and the mission it serves are greater than the person of Joseph Ratzinger. In this, he has shown profound humility and spiritual freedom.
Graph Search has taken the “making” out of friend-making, and this instant gratification can’t compete with the rewards of taking the time to really get to know someone. Will there come a day when we can no longer enjoy the process of unearthing our quirky common interests — like quinoa — because Facebook will have already detected them for us?
Maybe we should just be more open. The fall 2013 courses are up on Penn In Touch, and as I scan over the hundreds of listings, I’m trying to temper my graduation requirements with my intellectual curiosity.
Secularism as understood today, although a great idea in the West, isn’t always exportable. The problem is that secularism is not a neutral concept but has positive associations with modernity and democracy.
With advertisements implying we, the United States’ constituents, possess the power to elect “leaders of the free world,” many were pulled in by the allure of such a glamorous opportunity. When it comes to student government on Penn’s campus, however, that same fervor is not shared by the masses, both in regard to applicant pool and voter turnout. But why?
Stepping away from our compulsive need for action to adopt a version of the NRK’s digitized natural world might be a healthy choice. After all, with Norway recently ranked first on Forbes’ list of the happiest world nations, the country might have something to show beyond its magnificent fjords.
It is unequivocal that Penn’s administration should be more diverse. However, less than two years ago, Penn launched its Faculty Diversity Action Plan, geared at increasing the diversity of Penn’s faculty.
It is absurd to suggest that we consent, by virtue of our participation in a professedly democratic society, to whatever abuse the government may dole out.
There is little evidence that disparity in spending has a big impact on outcomes. Research into the effect has found a modest positive link between disparity in spending and vote outcome. However, one of the confounding problems is that popular and well-organized candidates are probably more likely to win.
But what sounds good in a political ad doesn’t necessarily make good policy sense. If we allow ourselves to continue to pursue big vs. little, we might forget the more important fight: smarter vs. dumber.