Dr. Farmer, medical anthropologist, physician, and chair of the Department of Global Health and Social Medicine at Harvard Medical School, spoke at the Athenaeum on April 11, 2011. At the beginning of his presentation, Dr. Farmer shocked audience members with a picture of a young man suffering from both TB and AIDS. Next to this startling photograph was one of the same man several years later; the differences in the pictures were so drastic that it took a moment to recognize that they were, in fact, the same man. With the help of medicine, he regained his health, and arguably his humanity. The man was Haitian, and Dr. Farmer explained that in previous decades it would have been impossible for him to receive the expensive treatment he needed.

Partners in Health (PIH), a non-profit that Dr. Farmer co-founded, has helped to improve the health care of impoverished peoples around the world and make such success stories the reality. PIH is now based in 12 countries and provides medical care to the poor free of charge.

Despite the seriousness of the issues discussed that night, Dr. Farmer was able to maintain a hopeful, and rather entertaining, demeanor throughout his speech.  During the most comical portion of his talk, Dr. Farmer aired his not-so-enamored views on economists, to which he joked that he should be wary of the economist spies in the audience. Upon viewing the many, and unsurprisingly, stunned CMC faces in the crowd, he explained his hesitant attitude toward economists and many other professionals–including important health care officials from WHO (World Health Organization)–who often criticize his goal of curing drug resistant diseases such as AIDS and TB in poor nations. Dr. Farmer has refused to let restraints like prices, and prevailing economic thought, dictate the level of available treatment.

Dr. Farmer noted that many Haitians had already suffered from severe food insecurity and homelessness prior to the life-shattering earthquake in January 2010. With the arrival of the crippling quake, new problems like the need for immediate medical care and housing of displaced persons have piled onto existing problems of poverty. Dr. Farmer offered his “diagnosis” of the problems in Haiti as “acute on chronic.”  In other words, “acute” or short-term problems caused by the earthquake were contributing to already existing “chronic” problems of poverty.

In response to the growing need in Haiti, Dr. Farmer has embarked on his most ambitious project yet: PIH is building a $15 million hospital in Mirbalais, Haiti. Dr. Farmer points out that many of the problems Haitians faced cannot be solved by a hospital alone. Through addressing acute problems such as cholera, UTIs, and other illnesses, Dr. Farmer hopes to begin a discourse on Haiti’s chronic problems. The hospital, for example, will employ thousands in the short-term and hundreds in the long-term.

Dr. Farmer spoke with the author for a short time after his speech and book-signing. When asked his thoughts on the fairly recent trend of studying abroad in developing countries, Dr. Farmer suggested that students need not travel miles and miles to help alleviate poverty abroad. While there is certainly much to be done on the ground, Dr. Farmer remains convinced that just as much can be done from our humble college campuses.  Raising funds and spreading awareness can in fact do a great deal to alleviate poverty and create an informed culture.  With such encouragement from Dr. Paul Farmer, what else does a college student need to hear to get those activist muscles flexing?

While discussing the past and future of the current conflict in Afghanistan, Dr. Khalilzad pointed out some of the lessons students might be able to glean from the challenges faced by coalition forces.

Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad speaks at the Athenaeum.

He began his talk by pointing out some of the major obstacles to the success of the current Afghan government such as “extremism,” nuclear proliferation, specifically the “danger [of] expanding Pakistani stockpiles falling into the wrong hands,” and the conflicting interests of the many countries surrounding Afghanistan.

Still, he emphasized, a number of important gains have been made. He pointed out that “additional troops have improved security,” and that Afghan security forces have dramatically increased. In addition, since 2002, the GDP of Afghanistan has increased from $200 million to $1.8 billion, the number of cell phones in use has increased from virtually none to more than twelve million, and the number of children attending school has increased from 900,000 to 6.2 million. As a result, Khalilzad hopes that a “transfer of security leadership will take place in 2014.” However, he emphasizes, “we are not on the verge of getting rid of terrorism in this region.”

As always, the Athenaeum provided an excellent atmosphere for the presentation, with a good dinner and plenty of hot chocolate. Dr. Khalilzad demonstrated his great knowledge and personal experience in America’s foreign policy in the Middle East, speaking frankly and clearly about the problems facing Afghanistan in the future.

When asked what lessons students with potential futures in international relations and government can learn from the Afghanistan conflict, Khalilzad highlighted the importance of diplomacy. He explained that while “military has an important role … when it comes to politics and governance, skills to effectively assist in those areas are equally important …If the only instrument is a hammer, pretty soon everything looks like nails.”

Simmons explained that he and his mother immigrated to the United States from Israel at the age of eight, and that he didn’t know a word of English at the time. Over the next fifty years, he went on to found one of the most successful musical acts in history as well as a merchandising empire worth more than $500 million annually. As Simmons joked “We have everything from KISS condoms to KISS caskets. We get you coming and going.” While so many performers and music fans seem to be concerned with the concept of “selling out,” he proudly pointed out the myriad of products that have borne the KISS logo over the past thirty years and explained that there is no shame in utilizing one’s economic assets to their fullest extent.

Gene Simmons speaks at Pitzer College

However, Simmons focused on the students in the crowd far more than himself or his success. Walking up and down the aisles, he frequently stopped suddenly and warmly introduced himself to audience members, emphasizing the importance of eye contact and a firm handshake to making a strong impression. He explained that, in order to find success, one must “command attention” from the room. Needless to say, this is far easier said than done in the presence of a man who can easily be called one of the most famous musicians of the 20th century.

Another major message of the event seemed to be the importance of utilizing one’s assets to one’s advantage. Simmons explained his personal philosophy towards the importance of obtaining marketable skills. When discussing this concept in relation to the music business, he pointed out “Hey look, I have this pretty song. That’s great. Now how can I buy a house with it?”

Simmons wrapped up his presentation by saying simply “be a rockstar,” explaining that the best way to succeed, whether that means starting a rock band or a mutual fund, is to have the confidence to believe it’s possible and the drive to get it done.

Still, many members of the audience seemed to take issue with Simmons’s unapologetic embrace of monetary success as both a goal and measure of achievement in life. As a result, the question period following the event increased in hostility with every student query. Some accused him of sacrificing time with his family in the name of business success, despite the fact that both his children, both Pitzer students, were present at the talk. Another student’s particularly biting and lengthy question regarding online file sharing began with the phrase “given that the idea of property ownership is such a Western concept…”.  Although it was impossible to see from my seat, I hope that he spoke those words into a Sony microphone.  Eventually, it seemed as if members of the audience were intentionally baiting Simmons, asking questions about his personal life, including his relationship with his long time girlfriend, Shannon Tweed.

It was both embarrassing and confusing to see several 5C students act so disrespectfully towards a speaker who had chosen to speak free of charge in order to help raise funds for Pitzer College. Regardless of one’s own personal viewpoints, it seems foolish to so rudely attack a man of such achievement for petty differences in personal philosophy.  I will note happily, however, that CMC students seemed to be some of the most supportive in the crowd.

Ignoring some asinine behavior, the event was pleasant and enlightening. Simmons captivated the crowd, proving that he is just as enjoyable without makeup on his face and a bass in his hands. His inspirational success story provides one image of the American Dream, and I can certainly say I walked away feeling empowered and energized. So take the advice of Gene Simmons, whether you’re an econ major or one of our Stag athletes, go out and be a rockstar today.

Hats off at Commencement 2009

In the past, it has been customary for the Senior Class President to give a speech at Commencement.  Although awaiting final approval from President Gann, a change in this policy for the 2010-2011 academic year (and beyond) has already been approved by several members of the Dean of Students and Dean of Faculty offices, including Dean Mary Spellman and Dean Greg Hess.

Many people may be indifferent to the student chosen to speak on their behalf at their graduation, but I believe changing this process to a student-nominated speaker is more democratic and will ultimately produce a much more quality speech.  As the incoming Senior Class President, I am the first to say that I think there are people in my class who will be able to draft and deliver a much better speech than I ever could.  On top of that, it is not even specified in the ASCMC Constitution that the Senior Class President must give the speech.  The document merely states the Senior Class President “shall work with the CMC administration to plan the annual graduation ceremonies.”

I do not think that when students vote for their Senior Class President in March of their Junior year they judge the candidates based on their ability to give a great graduation speech.  The Senior Class President serves an important role for students in their final year here at CMC, but this should not necessarily include speaking at graduation.  It has also been my understanding that it is the general consensus of the student body that this will be a positive change.  Members of the ASCMC Executive Board, alumni, current seniors, current juniors, and even underclassmen have expressed their support for this new tradition.

The proposed plan is as follows:

• Applicants first encouraged to apply via The Forum around Thanksgiving
• Committee formed consisting of the ASCMC President, Senior Class President, a member of the Dean of Students, a Faculty representative, and two more student representatives to choose finalists
• Application will be open until deadline at the beginning of second semester (giving seniors time to write speeches over winter break)
• Speaker selection committee reviews applications after deadline at the beginning of second semester
• Committee decides on 3-5 finalists by March 1st
• Seniors choose the speaker from the finalists by a direct vote

This plan is tentative and definitely flexible.  I encourage all input from current students and alumni if you have alterations or suggestions to make for the current plan.

“Journalism is the heart of democracy,” said McChesney, who went on to declare that a well-informed public is imperative to the success of a free society. Journalists have a significant role to play in educating and informing the populous on relevant social concerns. He referenced founding fathers James Madison and Benjamin Franklin’s zeal for complete freedom of the press, as they considered it a cornerstone ideal on which the success of the United States would rest. Unfortunately, the press industry is failing to deliver on its constitutional responsibility of enlightening the public sphere on the problems pertinent to society.

One particular trend in the journalism industry is that important social issues are losing ground to trivial entertainment, such as the personal lives of celebrities. McChesney stated that mass media outlets have been feeding viewers with “a steady diet of crap” rather than effectively informing them. It is regrettable because it diverts people from what actually matters.

Citing an example in Bush’s invasion of Iraq in 2003, McChesney noted the failure of the media to challenge the administration’s intentions and ‘intelligence findings,’ and went on to suggest that a misinformed public was the prime catalyst that gave the president a free ticket to carry out one of the greatest foreign policy disasters in the history of the United States. Rather than contesting the shaky grounds on which the decision was made and evaluating its potential consequences, the media simply reproduced and dispersed the voices of the deciders. Accepting – if not embracing – the agendas of people in power has become the norm as of late. This is not what journalism should be about.

Increased commercialization of the media has largely contributed to an ineffective press. It is becoming more and more difficult to establish a career in the journalism industry if one has a habit of challenging the status quo. Advertisers and promoters ought to be distinct from writers, said McChesney, so that the quality of issues journalists raise is unobstructed by commercial interests. It’s not that there is a shortage of individuals fit for the job. It’s that due to growing commercial pressures, publications have begun to hire writers and anchors based on their bottom line and not on the relevance of issues he or she brings to the table. “Writers only seem to be allowed to raise a question if someone in power is talking about it,” lamented McChesney, “or else the perception is that they’re not being objective, they’re simply pushing an agenda.” Journalists must be allowed to raise questions and spark new debates. Just because an issue is not currently being talked about, doesn’t make it unimportant.

While the internet has revolutionized the manner in which people all over the world receive their information, McChesney believed that this change is neither a cause of nor a solution to the current dilemma. He remarked that large phone companies are pushing for the privatization of the internet, which would allow them to exert a greater stranglehold over the flow of information and other intricacies such as the speed at which websites load. If they succeed, it would be a disaster for the concept of free speech. He urged us to reverse these efforts by supporting the House Internet Freedom Preservation Act (HR-5353), which has been endorsed by Representatives Chip Pickering (R-Miss) and Ed Markey (D-Mass). As a part of his efforts, he co-founded freepress.net, an organization dedicated to the freedom of press and media reform.