October 2012

hillsdale .th

e

optimism and ideology - page 8

women on the front lines - page 10

rhinos rampant in washington - page 22

novelists on campus - page 23

forum March 2013

Thinking outside of the box since 2003

. Contents Staff

Editor-in-ChiefWes Wright

Staff WritersSam RyskampCorrie Beth HendonJames InwoodRachael WierengaSavannah TibbettsChris McCaffery

EditorsChelsey SchmidMatt O’Sullivan

PhotographersLaurie BarnesJacob ShalkhauserShaun LichtiCaroline Green

Head DesignerLauren Wierenga

Business ManagerRyne Bessemer

AdvertisementManagerNate McBride

Photo EditorLauren Wierenga

Volume XIII, Issue III, March 2013

Conservative Features

4 A Biblical Critique of Liberal Arts Rachael WierengaAs her time at Hillsdale comes to a close, a former editor-in-chief reflects on faith, philosophy, and the liberal arts.6 Intervention in Mali James InwoodShould the United States intervene in Mali’s civil war? Inwood says it would be a bad idea.8 Conservative Optimism Sam RyskampRyskamp argues that conservatives should embrace their irrationally hopeful view of the world, rejecting the movement towards pragmatism and pessimism. 10 Women in the Military Lauren WierengaFeminist cries for fairness ignore the multitude of physical differences between men and women on the battlefield. 12 Women on the Front Lines Emma VintonThe Pentagon recently changed its policy regarding women in combat. Vinton argues that women should have the right to pursue their vocation, be that on the battlefield or elsewhere.

Campus Features15 Professor’s iPod Chris McCafferyWhat melodies inspire such harsh grading? Dr. Stephen Smith shares his go-to listening material.16 Campus Smackdown: Dressing for ClassTwo campus fashionistas explain their sense of style and their philosophies on attire.18 Americana in My Mouth Micah MeadowcroftMeadowcroft visits Ray’s Tavern, eats delicious food, and has a great time.22 Reuss on RINOs Andy ReussWar correspondent Reuss checks in from the savannahs of DC with observations on the plight of local wildlife.

Letter from the Editor: Wes Wright

Editor-in-ChiefWes Wright

Staff WritersSam RyskampCorrie Beth HendonJames InwoodRachael WierengaSavannah TibbettsChris McCaffery

EditorsChelsey SchmidMatt O’Sullivan

PhotographersLaurie BarnesJacob ShalkhauserShaun LichtiCaroline Green

Head DesignerLauren Wierenga

Business ManagerRyne Bessemer

AdvertisementManagerNate McBride

Photo EditorLauren Wierenga

Hillsdale College takes pride in the fact that it is educating the future leaders of the

conservative movement. Students of all disciplines leave Hillsdale with a firm grounding in Western heritage and the principles of liberty, destined to spread the Judeo-Christian, Greco-Roman truth across the land. Unfortunately, the cultural homogeneity that makes Hillsdale special also impedes fulfillment of this goal.

While it is an exaggeration to say that all Hillsdale students have the same beliefs, it is a claim based heavily on fact. At Hillsdale, political disagreement is more often between conservatives and libertarians (or even monarchists) than the ideological split common throughout the country. Our population of Christians is disproportionate to America as a whole in both number and fervor. Such demographics create an environment in which liberals and their beliefs are the subject of open ridicule.

Mocking liberal beliefs is not the same as refuting them, however. Building a straw man and then laughing at it is fallacy masquerading as superior argument. Insofar as Hillsdale students surround themselves with like minds, they risk becoming trapped in their own ideology. The problem is twofold: first, if other viewpoints contain elements of Truth, the Hillsdale student will not be able to pursue that Truth. Second, if one does not argue, debate, and philosophize with people of opposing beliefs, one will less effectively critique one’s own ideas. This loss of nuance indicates a

failure in the pursuit of Truth.All too often, Hillsdale students are shocked or

horrified by the policies and basic principles of those with whom they disagree. Such reactions reveal the depth of this problem. If one cannot understand the logic of a particular view one cannot hope to refute it, let alone convince those who hold it that it is incorrect. Further, those who refuse to engage with opposing ideas will be unable to understand people’s basic motivations in the public sphere.

Though The hillsdale Forum is a magazine of Conservative political thought, it still offers students a chance to critically engage with perspectives they might not encounter otherwise. Take Emma Vinton’s article, for example. It defends the Pentagon’s decision to open front-line combat positions to women while simultaneously rejecting the feminist arguments for doing so. Rachael Wierenga also makes a case seldom heard at Hillsdale: that Christianity and the liberal arts are fundamentally at odds. We hope that The Forum will enable you to pursue truth and defend liberty during your time at Hillsdale.

We admit that reading this magazine is not the only road to Truth. Writing, taking pictures, and helping with Forum layout and design are all good ways to gain understanding of Truth. Further, if you are interested in being a future leader of the conservative movement, working for The hillsdale Forum would be a good way to build your resume. Interested? Contact us at wwright@hillsdale.edu.

Mission StatementThe Hillsdale Forum is an independent, student-run Conservative magazine at Hillsdale College. The Forum, in support of the mission statement of Hillsdale College, exists to promote a return to limited government as outlined in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. We publish Conservative opinion, editorials, and campus news. The Forum is a vehicle to bring the discussion and thought of the intelligent students and professors at the heart of the Conservative movement beyond the classroom and beyond Hillsdale’s campus.

Religion & Education

The Bible and the Liberal Arts, Part II

By: Rachael Wierenga

The over-arching theme of this three-part series is that the biblical account should counterbalance and correct the habits of thinking encouraged by Hillsdale’s liberal arts education. Part one noted the between human wisdom and God’s wisdom. Part two observes a similar tension between the classical humanism of the liberal arts and the Bible’s account of human sinfulness. Central to classical humanism is the belief that man can do good through his own action –an idea that impedes the full understanding of sin. Without a full awareness of sin, one cannot fully comprehend one’s need for a Savior, let alone the proper relationship between man and God.

The liberal arts conflict with the biblical account of man because they are founded on the idea that man can limit his own sin. The premise behind a liberal arts education is that the soul has faculties that need to be developed and improved for one to live the good life, reaching the ends for which he was created. Education is the method by which one develops the soul. The liberal arts teach what it is to be fully human because they are intertwined with the improvement of the soul. An article in a past issue of The Hillsdale Forum commended Sir Phillip Sydney’s conception of education (“the end of all earthly learning [is] virtuous action.”),

writing that “Unless we learn…that success lies not only in the soul’s enlightenment but in its mending, we will have fallen short of the goal [of a liberal arts education].” Classical humanism claims that education can mend the soul.

The liberal arts also claim to limit sin, not just improve the soul. Hillsdale’s honor code best phrases this argument: “Through education the student rises to self-government.” The liberal arts are a method of developing and training the soul so that reason rules over passion. This idea appears throughout Hillsdale’s courses of study. For example, one fundamental facet of American government is the system of checks and balances that limit the harmful effects of man’s imperfection.

Tracy Lee Simmons occasionally teaches a class about “The Classical Humanism of Thomas Jefferson”. Classical Humanism is a philosophy that studies history to understand man’s place within it. The classical humanist sees all of the high things that humans have done, sees sparks of goodness and greatness in man, and concludes that man is not corrupted and sinful. Instead, the classical humanist argues that education can help fan those sparks into flames. Jefferson, the quintessential classical humanist, rejected Christ as the Son of God and interpreted the Bible as a system of moral rules designed to promote good behavior. The liberal arts, then, say that action—

4

Photo: dctim1

Without God’s life in us, we can neither do good nor be good . . .

“ ”

The Bible and the Liberal Arts, Part II

By: Rachael Wierenga

studying, doing noble things, developing one’s reason—can help man limit sinful actions and tendencies.

The Bible, on the other hand, says that no action can attain the perfection that God expects from humans. Limiting sin is not enough; one must be completely free from it. The basic doctrine of the Christian gospel is that man is a sinner who cannot achieve righteousness without putting his faith in a Savior who has worked to bring about righteousness on his behalf. Four fundamental facts revealed in the Bible contradict the liberal arts conception of sin.

First: man is sinful. Man brought sin into the good world God created, and sin removes man from his proper relationship with God. In the Garden, Adam and Eve recognized that God was superior to them—the Creator had knowingly made them weak and dependent on Him. When Satan said Adam and Eve would be like gods, this tempted them, because they wanted to be more like God and less like weak humans. Their action destroyed the natural relationship between man and God: weakness and strength, need and sufficiency, asking and receiving. The liberal arts further strain this relationship because they act on the belief that man can improve himself of his own will.

Second, God’s standard for humans is perfection. Christians are supposed to “be perfect as [their] heavenly Father is perfect,” not merely limit their sin. In Matthew 5, Jesus expounds upon the standard of perfection. He says the person who has looked at a woman with lust in his heart has committed adultery, the person who feels hate for his brother in his heart has committed murder, and the person who loves only those people who please him does not love at all. God’s standard of perfection is crushing: no amount of human effort can achieve it.

Third, God is God and man is not. Perfection can only be realized when man achieves the end for which he was created: to be in a relationship with God. As Deuteronomy 18:13 says, “You shall be perfect with the Lord your God.” Without God’s life in us, we can neither be good nor do good – “without faith it is impossible to please him.” I Corinthians 13 says any action committed without God’s love at its root is a dead work. In John 15:5 Jesus says, “Without me you can do nothing.”

Fourth, the gospel—belief in Jesus Christ as the Son

of God whose death and resurrection freed man from sin—is God’s way of making man perfect and righteous on the principle of faith and grace. Only when one realizes, through the Mosaic Law, that man cannot achieve perfection through human action, can one be led to Christ. Paul says in Galatians 3 that the Law is a tutor meant to bring man to Christ. The Old Testament is a lesson in man’s inability to achieve the Law’s standard of perfection. Christ promises that His work on one’s behalf will yield perfect righteousness if one has faith – as opposed to striving to fulfill the Law through our will alone. To understand the Old Testament one must interpret it as an account of Israel’s repeated failure under the law-principle and God’s promise to bring them to righteousness by the strength of his own arm (Isaiah

59:15-16). The tutor that is the Old Testament guides people to Christ by showing the failure of the Israelites to attain perfection –one cannot become perfect without faith in God. Those who come to Christ without the Law as a tutor often try

to mix the two covenants (law and faith). Paul writes in Galatians that if one adds law to faith, one never understood the gospel in the first place. One cannot know Christ fully without understanding how He fulfills the law system outlined in the Old Testament; one cannot fully depend on Him if one ignores the tutor of the Mosaic Law. One must be crushed by the standard of perfection, understanding that works do not please God.

A student who embraces the liberal arts without critically interacting with them will come to believe that human action can limit sin. Thus, a liberally-educated person will be less likely to abandon the law-principle of doing to be good for the faith-principle of dependence on another’s work to be good. It is impossible to come to Christ as a sinner in need of a Savior while believing that human action can limit and contain sin. God wants to free us from sin completely, not help us be good, pure people who choose good actions and abstain from bad ones. Our Savior does not want us to act –he wants us to rest that he may work.

Imperialism

The War for MaliAmerica and

By: James Inwood

Anyone with even a summary knowledge of modern Africa knows that it consists of one part optimism and nine parts hopelessness. Mali has

been no exception over the past year. For those who are understandably ignorant of African geopolitics, Mali is an awkwardly-shaped nation in West Africa that once was home to the wealthiest man in history, Mansa Musa. Today, Mali’s only boast is demographic diversity: myriad ethnic groups, Moors, and nomads. While this diversity is beloved by Western progressives, in practice it led to the secession of the northern Tuareg minority. By April 2012, the National Movement for the Liberation of Azawad (MNLA) had established control of “Azawad,” including the ancient cities Gao and Timbuktu, and the government’s incompetent response to the crisis had provoked a military coup. The new government began a more aggressive campaign against the rebels that drew talk of economic sanctions.

Up to this point it had been a typical African war, but enter the Islamists, the Movement for Openness and Jihad in West Africa (MOJWA) and Ansar Dine (a militant Islamist organization). Originally minor figures in the rebel army, they seized a few cities in their own right and imposed a strict variant of Sharia Law. This independent conquest created a schism between nationalists and Islamists. The MNLA found itself between a rock and a hard place in the three way-war for Mali. They made peace with the Malian government in exchange for limited autonomy, allowing both to focus on fighting the Islamists. France – which used to hold Mali as a colony – has contributed ground and air forces, and the United Nations has agreed to a West African intervention force. The government has made considerable gains, forcing rebels into the mountainous northeast where experts anticipate a long guerrilla war.

Conflict anywhere in the world spurs superpowers to wonder about their response. As of this writing,

Photo credit NPR

6

The most compelling argument is not what the United States cannot win, but what it might lose. While Mali has been successful in securing its territory, Islamist forces are likely to wage a long guerrilla war. The Pentagon can wage another such war, but the American people are weary of counter-insurgency. Further, the burden of deficit and debt is ending the days of unlimited military spending. Popular distaste and scarce resources could easily force the United States into a premature withdrawal.

Such a scenario harkens back to 1993, when the Black Hawk Down incident turned the American people against the intervention in Somalia. Osama bin Laden, observing the “frailty, weakness, and cowardice” of U.S. failure in Africa, was inspired to pursue the 9/11 attacks. The decidedly Texan response – bombing, invasion, and saber-rattling – sent a clear message: the former paper tiger is now a vengeful warlord. In dealing with an enemy that respects strength alone, this tactic is more useful than any dose of democratization.

Though this image has atrophied since the deposition of Saddam Hussein, it remains in part. But Somalia erased memory of far greater victories in the Cold War and Desert Storm; a display of weakness in Mali could do the same, inviting terrorist aggression. In this day and age, the United States must not commit to war unless it can guarantee a swift conclusion.

Americans should applaud Mali: her factions have united against tyranny and are winning. Regardless of whether the French or West African interventions were necessary, Mali does not need American help, especially when such assistance does not serve the interests of the United States. That Mali has fallen into war is tragic, but the war promises a victory for the United States and all of the West so long as Washington resists the temptation to interfere.

Washington has committed only to logistical support, leaving American options open. But what does the United States stand to gain or lose in this situation? The presence of Islamist militants might imply that Mali is part of the greater “War on Terror.” According to this approach, it is just another battlefield in which the forces of Jihad are attempting to impose Sharia, terrorize innocents, and destroy freedom.

To a certain extent, such claims are true. When MOJWA seizes control of a region, it imposes Sharia law. The Islamists have publically executed people for everything from petty theft to having a child outside of wedlock. Whenever Islamist forces approach a city, thousands flee before them. They are brutal enemies of freedom –which is actually why the “War on Terror” argument does not hold. Islamists have but two paths to victory, bullets or ballots. Only the moderate can achieve the latter; they must reserve atrocities for minorities, as demonstrated by Egypt and Libya.

The coalition between former rebels and the Malian government has consistently defeated the Islamists. With foreign intervention backing the coalition, an Islamist conquest of Mali is unlikely. Ansar Dine and MOJWA are not Al Qaeda affiliates, so the threat is local at worst. They want to establish Islamic law, not destroy the “Great Satan.” The nations of West Africa have demonstrated the will to restore order should the need arise. Mali is far from being a new front of the War on Terror, so it offers little promise for the United States.

An American intervention in Mali would also be a bad geopolitical move. West Africa quite Western in outlook: it has strong relations with Europe, is active hostile to Jihad, and is no pawn of China or Russia. The war is going well; neither Mali nor necessity demands our involvement. The United States should not risk alienating a friend.

Conservative Values

Conservatism and Unreasonable Optimism

By: Sam Ryskamp

In light of last fall’s elections, how optimistic should we be about America’s future? The melancholy state of the Republican Party has led many to associate optimism with liberalism, but the GOP is floundering precisely because we let go of the unreasonable optimism that was once a hallmark of conservatism. It’s time to put the rose-colored glasses back on and revive the fine tradition of conservative optimism.

Most of us maintain that we are realists, splitting the difference between unreasonable optimism and hopeless pessimism. We claim to look at the facts without rose-colored glasses, making rational judgments about the future. Conservatives should not allow themselves to fall into this trap, however. We have become too reasonable. Conservatives have always been – and should always be – the most hopeful, unreasonable, starry-eyed optimists in the world.

Admittedly, the basic values of conservatism do not appear to be very optimistic. At its core, conservatism understands that humans are fallen creatures, that men are not angels. It is in this respect that conservatism garners its reputation for reasonability. Conservatives recognize original sin and realize that humans always look out for their own interests first. In this sense, conservatism is brutally realistic. No one understands the darkness of humanity like a true conservative.

Unfortunately, the modern conservative narrative halts abruptly at this principle. If the sinfulness of man were the whole story, conservatism could not justify its own existence. If men are inherently evil, it is futile to try to form a good government from them. The logical extension of this point is apathy: those who believe that men are sinful and selfish think good government impossible.

Though conservatives acknowledge the self-interested, fallen state of man, they still devote vast quantities of resources to the hopeless cause of building a good government out of bad

people. Conservatives try to build a sturdy house out of faulty bricks. It’s one thing to refuse to acknowledge the faulty brick; it’s another thing to see the faulty brick and keep building. History

reveals that governments, like houses, tend to decay. Greece, Rome, and even America followed the natural pattern of good government destroyed by bad men. That’s what men

do: they make things go downhill. Conservatives know this fact, but continue their Sisyphean endeavor. We cling to an unfounded hope that we

might somehow counteract the general trend of nature.

“We must revive the fine tradition of conservative pessimism. In this age, optimism is for children and fools. And liberals.” - John Derbyshire

8

Photo: Strawbleuâ„¢

By: Sam Ryskamp

Nowhere is this hope more evident than in the early years of the Revolutionary War. Had the Founding Fathers been reasonable, had they looked at the facts, they never would have fought the British. George Washington would have realized that the puny American colonies stood no chance against the strongest military in the world. James Madison would have seen that no revolution in history had ever formed a successful government, and no written constitution in history had ever lasted more than a few generations. In truth, the Founding Fathers understood these facts; they did not have their heads in the sand. Nevertheless, they fought. They faced the facts and made decisions based on them, but held tightly to an unreasonable hope. The Founding Fathers built a government knowing that all men – themselves included – were born in sin and naturally self-interested. They entrusted those same people with the governance of a country, knowing full well the danger of entrusting anything to mankind. The day before the signing of the Declaration, John Adams wrote, “I am well aware of the toil, and blood, and treasure, that it will cost us to maintain this declaration, and support and defend these States. Yet, through all the gloom, I can see the rays of ravishing light and glory.” He saw as clearly as anyone that the odds were against the young nation. It is also important to note that Adams did not justify his vision of “ravishing lights and glory.” He admits a thoroughly unshakable optimism, which he did not lose no matter how ridiculous it seemed. It was this optimism that enabled the Founding Fathers to capture the imaginations of thousands of young men, inspiring them to fight an impossible war to establish an infeasible country. Their belief in the impossible made it possible.

That sentiment sounds too much like the theme of a Disney movie for conservatives to accept it. But it is this exact paradox, the tension between the brutal facts and belief in a happy ending, that gives conservatism its motivating energy. In his bestselling book Good to Great, Jim Collins describes the importance of this tension to successful business ventures. He writes that what sets apart successful businesses from mediocre ones is a “powerful psychological duality. On the one hand, they stoically accepted the brutal facts of reality. On the other hand, they maintained a . . . commitment to prevail as a great company despite the facts.” This is the road that conservatism has walked throughout its history. Now is not the time to abandon it.

In the words of GK Chesterton, “Rational optimism leads to stagnation: it is irrational optimism that leads to reform… It is the rational optimist who fails, the irrational optimist that succeeds.” The modern Republican Party stagnates because our optimism is too rational. We should follow the example of Biblical patriarch Abraham, who “hoped against hope.” Conservatives must choose both hope and fact, synthesizing optimism and realism without degenerating into pessimism. The men quoted in this essay –Adams, Chesterton, and Father Abraham– are giants of history. To become a giant, one must put one’s head in the clouds.

“The Founding Fathers built a government knowing that all men – themselves included – were born in sin and naturally

self-interested.”

Photo: Strawbleuâ„¢

Why Women Shouldn’t Fight in Active Combat

cal condition could never throw, say, a grenade, as far as a man of equal training –her basic anatomy prevents it. Further, a female’s femur and knee-cap are narrower than a male’s, and they are at a more extreme angle from her hip socket, because of her wide, child-bearing pelvis. That difference puts extra stress on a woman’s joints, making females more prone to knee injuries, even in civilian life. Basic un-derstanding of anatomy reveals that female soldiers are at a greater risk of physical injury in the harsh conditions of battle than males. Soldiers should be the cream of the crop. Even if a woman can pass the tests for push-ups and crunches to get into the military, she cannot eliminate the setbacks of her physical anatomy.

Men and women are also different in their chemical makeup. Men have 90-95% more testosterone in their bod-ies than women, making their muscles larger. Bigger muscles mean that male soldiers can carry more weight, run faster, and fight better in hand-to-hand combat than their female counterparts. Testosterone also enlarges organs dur-ing puberty, so men have bigger hearts and lungs than women. As a result blood is more easily oxygenated in

Equality. Diversity. These words are twenty-first century clichés that

elicit feelings of justice and progress. As such, it seems natural that the fed-eral government and major portions of American society believe it is nec-essary to force these concepts onto every aspect of American life, includ-ing the military. President Obama has said that allowing women to serve in combat marks another step toward the country’s “founding ideals of fairness and equality” and that the decision will strengthen the armed forces. Feminists cry out: “Why can’t women fight on the front lines? That’s unfair! Women are just as good as men and can do any-thing that men can do!!” Unfortunately for the feminist position there are many differences between men and women. The physical, chemical, and cultural dif-ferences between the sexes mean that women on the front lines would com-promise the American military.

Women cannot “do everything that men can” for two basic reasons: First, men and women are physically differ-ent. For example, a man’s center of gravity is in his shoulders; a woman’s center of gravity is in her stomach. It is for this reason that women “throw like girls.” Even a woman in peak physi-

By: Lauren Wierenga

Morality & Values

10

men, giving them more stamina in the heat of battle. More testosterone also makes men feel more aggressive and less fearful than women –critical traits of a good soldier.

Even ignoring physical differenc-es, men are still better soldiers than women. Why? People in Afghanistan and other non-Western countries do

not share the feminist view of women. In nearly every country outside of Eu-rope and North America, women are poorly educated, physically weak, and subservient to men. Their job is to bear children and keep house. How can female soldiers deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan command any kind of authority in a crowd of unruly men who view women in this light? American women will be treated with less rever-ence and more hostility than their male counterparts because under Sharia law it is offensive for a man to submit to a woman. A member of the Taliban would

never submit to the orders of a woman even if she were an American soldier with a gun.

It is also important to note that the army trains men to become primal killing machines that follow their most basic instincts: eat, sleep, patrol, kill. The only male instinct missing is sex. A female soldier in the manliest garb

possible is still a woman. Women on the front lines pose a physical and psy-chological distraction to the male sol-diers who must check their sex drives around women in the barracks. It does not make a good male soldier, and it could be argued that it is not safe for female soldiers

Women should not be allowed into the armed forces because they are physically inferior as soldiers and the very act of women fighting alongside men undermines the brotherhood and solidarity that is the one safety net for soldiers on the front.

“A female soldier in the manliest garb possible is still a woman.”

A VocationWomen Take

By: Emma Vinton

Morality & Values

Man’s unalienable right to “the pursuit of happiness” is one of the most memetic phrases of the Founders. Earlier this year, Defense Secretary Leon

Panetta lifted America’s 1994 ban on females in front-line combat positions. This change is proper, despite the fact that many on the political left advocate

it. Feminists argue that the moratorium should end so women have the chance to demonstrate that they can fight, to prove their equality, and to break yet another

glass ceiling, but the best reason for doing eliminating it is to allow women to pursue happiness even to the point of fighting for their country. The policy change at the Pentagon is in the best interests of the United States because it makes Americans more free to follow their vocation.

Aristotle wrote in the Nicomachean Ethics, that the true pursuit of happiness lies in working to fulfill one’s vocation or telos. There are countless examples of women who fulfilled their callings in battle, and women all over the world have proved their worth as warriors. Now, American women push toward the front, toward equal status with their countrymen, toward the chance to serve and protect those they love. They should not be denied the chance to pursue their vocation, to pursue heed their calling in heat of battle.

History, literature, and mythology give credence to this quest. In their literature and lore the ancients praised women warriors as

fulfilling an exceptional calling. The Amazons were proud female fighters of Greek

mythology. Camilla, from Virgil's Aeneid, was a lauded virgin warrior and the

heroine of the war for Italy. Her call to battle stemmed from

her devotion to the goddess Diana. Saint Joan of Arc

12 Photo: IDF

valiantly took up her vocation on the front lines, leading the French army to many victories in the Hundred Year's War. This French maiden received visions telling her to drive the English from her homeland. She took up arms to answer her God-given calling. Hua Mulan was the ancient Chinese heroine who took her father's place in the army, giving them a daughter when they asked for sons. These heroic and exceptional women warriors from history back the American women in their bid to fight on the front lines.

American history shows that female soldiers called to serve their country can do well on the front. There are several reports of women who fought in their husbands’ place when they were killed or injured in the

Revolutionary War. Women had non-combat roles as nurses in World War I, and in World War II they served in uniform in all branches the military.

This is not a light matter. If women must go to war, it should not be done for the sake of proving feminine greatness or toughness. Someday, men may drive around at home with bumper stickers that say, "I love my marine wife," or "Proud husband of a front-liner," but it is not for this reason that women should be allowed to fight on the front lines. The ban should be lifted to protect and value human life, for love and defense of country.

America has a volunteer army; women go to the front because they have a vocational duty, a special call. True femininity demands the proper role of women in life. For Camilla, Joan of Arc, and countless other females, that proper role was accomplishing their calling as warriors. American women are no less heroic. When allowed, women have found their role in battle, fulfilling their Aristotelian telos and American “pursuit of happiness.” We must let those courageous and outstanding women called to enter service of God and country defend America in times of need.

If women demand equality, they will get it. If they are strong enough, train hard enough, and have an honest and God-given calling to serve, women should not be denied equal right to serve on the front-lines in defense of the motherland.

Photo: ChodHound

. Alumni: Where Are They Now? Amy Fultz

Compiled by Corrie Beth Hendon

When did you graduate? 1988What was you major/minor? Biology

What have you been doing since graduation? During my time attending Hillsdale College as a biology major, I was lucky enough to be chosen to attend a School for Field Studies course on Primate Biology and Behavior in Panama working with small tamarin monkeys. That is where my infatuation and career with primates began. After graduation, my first job took me to UTMD Anderson Cancer Center in Bastrop, Texas where I worked with an SPF (specific pathogen free) colony of rhesus macaques as a research assistant. I then moved on to working at what is now Texas Biomedical Research Institute as a research assistant– there I did behavioral work with over 3000 baboons, 240

chimpanzees, and other assorted primates. In 1995 I was one of the co-founders of Chimp Haven, a sanctuary for chimpanzees being retired from biomedical research. In 2004, I became the Behaviorist at Chimp Haven and have been there since, my title and duties have evolved and my specialties include chimpanzee introductions, enrichment, positive reinforcement training, behavioral studies, and education. I have published in scientific journals and spoken to groups around the world about chimpanzees. I take the majority of the photographs at Chimp Haven and I am the page administrator for Chimp Haven’s Facebook site. I am also currently enrolled in a Master’s program through Miami University of Ohio which focuses on conservation, inquiry, and participatory based education, I should graduate in December 2012. I’ve also been honored to be chosen as a Student Leader during my time in the Global Field Program for the Biology in the Age of Technology online course and the Avian Ecology and Tropical Biodiversity field course in Peru. My school experiences and work have allowed me to travel extensively including experiences in Uganda, Denmark, Belize, and Malaysia . I am also a single Mom to two very active girls, 11 and 15, who keep me very busy!

How has your education from Hillsdale been helpful or hurtful in life after graduation? My education from Hillsdale has been very helpful – Hillsdale helped me to become a more well-rounded person and helped me to learn to think and consider perspectives different from my own. I believe that each of my classes and each of my professors at Hillsdale helped me to grow and each taught me something different. I believe that in my profession, I use all of the skills that Hillsdale gave me. What have you missed most about Hillsdale since graduation? The library and fall leaves on the walk to the library and my Black House roommates! What’s one thing you learned at Hillsdale that you think you’ll remember for the rest of your life? That thinking about and analyzing information and experiences is a good thing that leads to further understanding at both the personal and professional level.

14

iPodProfessors’

By: Chris McCaffery

Dr. Stephen Smith loves teaching epic poetry to his Rhetoric and Great Books classes, but when he’s not listening to the Muse sing of swift-footed Achilles, wily Odysseus, and mankilling Hector, he says that nothing beats the old masters. Whether he’s preparing for class or girding his loins to do battle against student papers, Smith’s trustiest friends are Bach, Mozart, and Haydn, among others. The Forum asked Smith for a few choice recommendations, and he was kind enough to share his “desert island records” with us.

JS Bach Goldberg Variations (Murray Perahia) Well Tempered Clavier (Sviatoslav Richter)Mass in B Minor (John Eliot Gardiner)

Beethoven Middle and Late String Quartets (Takacs Quartet)

Haydn Piano Trios (Beaux Arts Trio)String Quartets, op. 20, 33, and 76 (Quatu or Mosaiques)

Mozart Piano Concertos (Murray Perahia) Symphonies 35-41 (Trevor Pinnock)

Schubert Piano Sonatas (Alfred Brendel) Symphony No. 9, “the Great” (Charles Munch)

Dvorak Piano Trios (Suk Trio)Quartets (Domus Quartet)Quintet (Gaudier Ensemble)

. CAMPUS SMACKDOWN: DRESS

DRESSING IT UP: Spencer Bell

Why do you dress the way you do?I dress the way I do because I want to make a good impres-sion on people, I want to impress my teachers, impress the opposite sex. I feel confident and it helps me, I think, with my studies, and I feel like I’m a winner.

Did you always dress the way you do?No, not always. I started dressing like this in high school, I don’t know exactly why. Probably to impress people.

Where do you get your clothes?Tommy Hilfiger, J Crew, Brooks Brothers, Salvation Army, and Banana Republic.

What is your favorite outfit? Pink and purple socks, green pants, a blue collar shirt, and a purple tie, with dress shoes.

Do you have any recommendations for the aspiring good dresser?Dress the way you want to be treated, because no one is going to want to be your friend or approach you if you look like or smell like rotten cheese. You’re going have to dress up anyway if you want a successful career, so you might as well get used to it now and form your own style.

Do you think that you’rebetter than us?No.

16

CODE

. CAMPUS SMACKDOWN: DRESS

KEEPIN’ IT COMFY: Eric Hodgdon

What is your favorite outfit?Flannel lined jeans, combat boots, T-Shirt, military poncho insert, and the hobo jacket. The key is the hobo jacket. It’s

well-worn, faded, couple holes, but the wear has made it soft and comfy.

How do you make a good impression on people?

With my charming personality. They tell you that you should never judge a book by its cover, so I figure I’m giving every-

one else an opportunity to practice.

Do you think that you’re better than us?

No, of course not. I think I may be more practical, more realistic, but I’ve got nothing to hide.

What is your philosophy on dressing for class?It’s winter, I want to be warm.

Where do you get your clothes?My closet, and wherever’s cheapest. Thrift store, WalMart…

Compiled by: Chris McCaffery Photos by Laurie BarnesCODE

Ray’s Tavern: Americana in my MouthBy: Micah Meadowcroft Photos by Jacob Shalkhauser

The other day I decided that I wanted a break from SAGA. I make this decision fairly often;

usually I just walk upstairs and get a burger or something at AJ’s. After all, AJ’s has great burgers, quite satisfactory for a hungry, semi-desperate student. Once in a while, however, AJ’s won’t cut it, and I need to get out of Hillsdale.

If you’re feeling the same way, take the twenty-minute drive over to Reading and grab yourself a bite at Ray’s Tavern. Tucked between a Laundromat and “Country Carpets”, Ray’s can be found at 114 S. Main St., a drab sign marking its unobtrusive presence. It’s worth the trip.

Dark wood paneling and warm yellow light greeted my companions and me as we walked into the restaurant. Tire-shaped bladeless fans whirred on the ceiling. Hockey and NASCAR posters give the tavern that coveted Midwest ambiance. High on the walls, Budweiser and Miller iconography battle for attention, marking Ray’s an unpretentious tavern.

It’s clearly a local favorite. It was busy when we arrived and busy when we left. The waitresses were friendly and seemed to know everyone by

name. Multiple-generation families squeezed into the cozy booths along the wall. “The locals are what keep it going through the whole year,” Heather Bunce, our waitress, said.

When we sat down at the bar, Bunce greeted us warmly and asked what we would like to drink. I asked for water, but for the over-twenty-one crowd Ray’s has a modest selection of spirits, liquors, and draft or canned beers.

I ordered a double cheese-burger ($4.19) stacked high with perfect grilled

Review

18

onions, caramelized yet crisp ($1.00); tomato, lettuce, and mayo ($1.00); and mouth-watering bacon that sizzled enticingly (priceless, but they only charge $1.00 for it).

The meat is good, quality beef from the Hillsdale Market House. It didn’t taste like salt, seasonings, special sauce. It tasted like a cooked slab of cow on bread, as a burger should. The portions were generous. The patties were a third of a pound each; add the fixings and you’ve got yourself a full meal. Still hungry? My group also ordered a basket of fries, a trio of tacos (it was Taco Thursday), and a slice of lemon pie. Everything was delicious.

Bunce says that the best thing about Ray’s is “the small-town, family atmosphere. More than anything, it’s pretty easygoing.” It was; waitress and patron alike were open and willing to chat. Happy conversation filled the room; in the few lulls Imagine Dragons, Coldplay, and Muse provided background music.

Ray’s has a long history. Ray Rudelier established it in 1942, and it has stayed in the family ever since. Today his daughter runs the place. She was cooking in the kitchen the night we went. If Rudelier passed on a family recipe, it is a good one: when USA Today celebrated the centennial of the hamburger in 1989, it named Ray’s Tavern the best burger joint in the country.

My trip to Ray’s was a great respite from Hillsdale. The atmosphere was friendly and relaxing. The sound of laughter, warm conversation, delighted chewing, and good music melded into a harmony of content Americana. The food was great, the burgers

especially so. I enjoyed every hot and messy bite.

If SAGA is getting you down and you just want it all to end, head along the delightfully-named Bacon Street out to Reading and find the little family tavern. Remember: they don’t take cards, so come with cash and an appetite.

You won’t regret it.

If you had to live in a foreign country, which one would you choose & why?

Hunkrichard norrisYear: senior

Major: History Minor: german

What was your favorite part about Valentine’s Day? No contest: Professor Gaetano’s Renaissance class. We talked about the Turks.

Define your love life in three syllablesPokémon.

I slice them up and squeeze them into my tea.

If you could own any animal in the world, what would it be and why?

St. Anthony, the desert father. He lived a pious, contemplative, celibate life. He also fought demons in the desert.

I would probably own a hedgehog because they are adorable. It would be called Sedgwick.

What do you do when life gives you lemons?

Who is your role model?

Hillsdale’s

If you could marry anybody (deceased) from history in the last three centuries, who would it be and why? Audrey Hepburn because she is arguably the most beautiful woman ever, in appearance and otherwise.

How do you relate the good, the true, and the beautiful to your daily activities—specifically, your love life?

I try every day to fill my love life with those things which are most good, true, and beautiful. Namely, Aristotle.

How much would someone have to pay you to shave your head?

They would have to pay me with a full-time job teaching at a classical school.

If you could be on any reality TV show, what would it be and why?

Full Metal Jousting. It’s a reality TV show in which these recreational jousters all live in a mansion together and joust on the weekends to find out who is the best. They’re all pathetically over-emotional the rest of the week.

Annie-Laurie SettenYear: Junior Major: Economics

Minor: Being HottWhat was your favorite part about Valentine’s Day?

My favorite part of Valentine’s Day was receiving a beautiful valentine and a large bouquet of purple and gold roses from Kobe Bryant. True story.

Define your love life in three syllables.

El. Oh. El.

I slice that baby up and make sangria!

What do you do when life gives you lemons?

Definitely a wolf. I’m kind of a one man wolf pack but I’ve recently been looking into expansion…

Metta World Peace, no question. You’ve gotta admire the man’s composure and general attitude towards life.

If you could own any animal in the world, what would it be and why?

Who is your role model?

If you could marry anybody (deceased) from history in the last three centuries, who would it be and why?

So, Ron Paul doesn’t work? That’s rough. In that case, I’m going to have to go with my boy Andy Griffith. Watch an episode of Matlock if you ever

want to catch a glimpse of a silver fox.

How do you relate the good, the true, and the beautiful to your daily activi-ties—specifically, your love life?

Well, I am the good, the true, and the beautiful. It’s somewhat flattering, but mostly awkward, that the whole school is after me.

If you had to live in a foreign country, which one would you choose & why?

HottieHunk andof the month

Compiled bySavanah Tibbetts

I would live in Jamaica. Two words: Bob. Sledding.

If you could be on any reality TV show, what would it be and why?I’m going to have to go with “Here Comes Honey Boo Boo” because I’ve always wanted to have a nickname like “Sugar Bear” or “Chubbs” bestowed upon me.

Also, I want to ask the family exactly what it means to “redneckonize.”

Spotlight on Novelists Compiled by Chris McCaffery Photos by Jacob Shalkhauser and Shaun Lichti

RINOs In America there are animals of all shapes and

sizes, from the tough, individualistic armadillos of Texas to the banal, dependent tuna off the Bay Area coast. Today, we will study the declining state of the rhino, that mighty beast once identified with strength and vigor that now bumbles its way into the obscurity of old age and, ultimately, extinction. We’ll see how its feeding customs, physical characteristics, and reproductive habits contribute to the downfall of this onetime leader of the American wilderness.

We find the rhino in its natural habitat: the communal watering hole. This district is where the action happens. Animals from distant corners of the land congregate to talk, trade, and make those decisions that will affect them all. In years past, the watering hole was known for simplifying and encouraging symbiotic relations between individual animals, but drought and hunting had brought hardship upon the wilderness. The rhino, once the epitome of hard work and self-reliance, now advocated systems of collection and distribution. As one of these grey-skinned brutes might bellow, “NuuuurrrrrEEEEE-uhhhhhrrrrr.” Roughly translated, this herd-pleaser means “We need to make sure everyone has food, has water, has the things that they need to live in this wilderness.”

It worked, for a while. But problems began to creep up, as often happens among animals. Some creatures started to rely wholly upon the system, others (including the rhinos themselves) used their support for the system to garnish their own food stores. The watering hole degenerated into a place of corruption, catering more to the selfish desires of the animals than to their desire for interaction.

Before long, a new development swept the watering hole. With the system of cooperation in place, some of the animals suggested that they should eliminate traits of aggression or predation. If animals eat together, they shouldn’t need to fight each other. Some say that the lion doesn’t need his claws: but

how else will he scratch himself? Some saythe crocodile doesn’t need her tail: but how else will she swim? After much deliberation, the animals agreed that if any of them should lose something, it’s the rhino. His horn is intimidating and only used for aggression – it is totally unnecessary for survival. The animals decided that the rhinos needed to lose their horns. Far from arguing, the rhinos agreed.

With the loss of their horns, our rhinos might be considered RINOs – Rhinos In Name Only. While the other animals would never openly mock them, there was always a hint of derision in their interaction. RINOs just looked ridiculous eating from the public stores with their hornless faces. The species slowly sank into a group depression. Without their distinct quality, what good are they?

This question remains unanswered until we see the fruit – or lack thereof – produced by the rhinos. When the rhinos lost their defining trait they also lost their desire to perpetuate their race by raising offspring. There is no identity on which to found a rhino family, so they seek fulfillment in other areas. This is a dangerous tactic in the long run: if there is no reproduction, how can such a species survive?

Ultimately, it cannot. We last encounter the rhinos as they are at this moment: old and approaching senility. In a convenient twist, our rhinos closely resemble many of the Republicans on Capitol Hill: ancient, drooling, and hardly capable of coherent thought. Many of these Republicans are also reminiscent of rhinos in appearance, with crusty, discolored skin and wrinkled, hairy bodies.

Let us not lose hope, however. As the rhinos slowly die of old age, a new generation of faster, stronger, and less unattractive mammals arrive. Though these new creatures are as yet untested, they promise a wilderness of prosperity. As long as they do not abandon their principle traits, the next generation of animal leaders will deliver where our old friends the rhinos failed.

The Endangered Brutes of America

22

Spotlight on Novelists Compiled by Chris McCaffery Photos by Jacob Shalkhauser and Shaun Lichti

Alex Tacoma sophomore

Caleb Eatough freshman

Maggie Smith sophomore

What kind of writing do you do?Science-fiction and fantasy are my genres of choice.How long have you been writing?Seriously writing, just this school year, so, since September. But I’ve always wanted to write seriously, like I’ve dreamed of it, and at some point you have to wake up and sit down and write.How much have you written?I’ve almost completed one novel; I’m three-quarters of the way through it. Classes and life mean writing isn’t always a priority, even though I ought to put more time into it. So, how do you find time? What I did last semester, when I got the bulk of my novel written, I treated it like homework so I’d sit down and spend an hour or two writing before I do stuff for my other classes. What is the book about? It’s called Slag, it’s about a wealthy businessman who stages an alien invasion.How would you try to publish it?Well there are a couple of different avenues I can explore, especially thanks to the e-book craze. I can self-publish, but I’d rather not if I can help it, if I can find a publisher and an agent I would love to. From what I’ve researched, you’ve got to go to the conventions and editors and agents are hanging out there kinda scouting for talent.

What do you write about, and how long have you been writing?Well, I think I got serious about it when I was 15. My current project is a fantasy- sort of a historical fantasy. It’s about the 1860s, in Colorado. A Native American Goddess who falls in love with an Irish Catholic priest. It’s fun, and it’s interesting, and I bring in all sorts of things from not just Native American lore but Greek mythology too, so the Great Books I and Western Heritage courses have been really influential on my writing. I have Athena in there as a character.Have you looked into publishing this book?I hope to, but it will probably end up being self-published. Of course I’m looking for people to edit it, there’s some good copy-editors out there, for example.Have you written anything else?I’ve got a total of 12 other books planned, they’re all kind of related to each other & to this current historical fiction, it’s like this whole epic series that spans four or five thousand years, that’s a plus of having a god-dess as one of your main characters.Why do you write?I find a lot of fulfillment in it, first off. I feel like I can express myself better in writing, and the written word endures far beyond what I say, so even when I’m dead my works will still remain.

So, you write?Usually I write short stories, poetry, that sort of thing. I have written a novel. The White Statue, by Quinn Pendry, which is my pen name.How did you start novel writing?I’ve been writing pretty much as long as I can remember. The logical place to go with that was larger amounts of writing. I had a world in my head that needed to get out in some shape or form, and so the best way of doing that was to get it all out on paper.What did you do with your novel?At present, after I’ve published it just because I’m here at Hillsdale I haven’t been able to do a lot of marketing; I rely for the most part on word of mouth and on some online book clubs. It’s available on Amazon and several other large online stores, so it’s pretty widely available.What’s your book about?It’s a fantasy novel that takes place in a world where the laws of nature don’t work quite the same way they do here. Say you build a table or a chair, after a year or so it will start to bend or warp. You end up with sort of strange proportions sort of like you’d see in a medieval tapestry; this wreaks havoc with architecture and such. The story takes place in this world and centers around a group of characters who go off in search of a legendary statue from before a time when the laws of nature began to do this. So a large journey across vast expanses of land involving pirates and suchlike.