Innermost Parts

Interesting debate shaping up on DailyKos right now.

When faced with the dilemma of a Democratic Party imperfect from a progressive perspective, the reaction of most progressives seems to be to work within the Party to bring about needed change rather than to reach out to a third party. In recent years, improved organization among progressives has made this strategy effective in some cases. Strong primary campaigns have resulted in the nomination of outsider candidates superior to their institutional counterparts (Ned Lamont in ‘06, Steve Beshear in ‘07, Donna Edwards in ‘08), and as a result, the Party is beginning to refocus itself on its progressive roots rather than the centrist “New Democrat” philosophy which led to Congressional losses throughout the ’90s and set the framework for the conservative domination of all three branches of government from 2000 to 2006. Read the rest…

Hey all. Innermost Parts will be on a break until school starts again (the monday after this one). Expect lighter posting, etc.

Oh, and happy Pesach / Break.

So, as you know, I was at the Ed Markey address last Sunday. Someone recently asked me what I thought of it. Here’s what I had to say:

So first of all I want to say that I respect Congressman Markey a lot. He’s great on Net Neutrality, general Telecommunications policy, and the environment. I don’t remember disagreeing with much, or any, of his speech. I applaud his realization that we can grow the economy and protect the environment at the same time. Furthermore, his characterization of India and China, and how we had to tell them to stop polluting carbon from a position of having done so already as spot on.

Ed Markey clearly gets it. That said, I did have some questions for him and some disagreements. During the question and answer period, he briefly remarked on realizing the goal of an electricity network where every can use renewable energy and sell it back to the grid. I wish he would expand on what plans are in place to make that happen.

During the question and answer period, someone else asked about Nuclear power. I think Markey had a very smart answer - it’s investment bankers, not politicians, who killed nuclear power. Then again, it would be more truthful to note we have a policy frowing on new Nuclear plants until we find a way to deal with nuclear waste (that’s better than Yucca mountain). To be clear, that’s a good thing. Nuclear power brings a lot of problems, including the fact that increasing nuclear power worldwide increases the risk for weaponized nuclear proliferation.
Read the rest…

Here are the numbers for the statistics-lovers out there.  Congratulations to all the winners.  I’ll leave the interpretation and commenting up to you.  Enjoy!

Dear Candidates,
The winners of the Associate Justice of the Union Judiciary race are as follows:
Judah Marans, Danielle Shmuelly, Julia Sferlazzo, and Rachel Graham Kagan.
The winners of the Senator-at-Large race are as follows:
Noam Shouster and Justin Sulsky
The winner of the Senator for the Class of 2009 race:
Eric Alterman
The winners of the Senator for the Class of 2011 race:
Lev Hirschhorn and Alex Melman

Thanks to all candidates who participated.  Please contact elections@lists.brandeis.edu for questions or contact uj@lists.brandeis.edu if you wish to appeal any decisions that the commission has made in the decision making process in this election.
Thanks,
The Elections Commission

Poll menu: Student Union SP08-2 Final
Report date: Fri 18 Apr 2008 00:01 EDT
Poll menu: Student Union SP08-2 Final (all campus)
Report date: Fri 18 Apr 2008 00:01 EDT
Associate Justice of the Union Judiciary
As at poll close: Thu 17 Apr 2008 23:59 EDT
Number of voters: 716 • Group size: 3251 • Percene voted: 22.02
Ranked by votes
Rank    Candidate       Votes   %
1       Judah Marans    351     49.02
2       Danielle Shmuelly       313     43.72
3       Julia Sferlazzo 302     42.18
4       Rachel Graham Kagan     292     40.78
5       Zachary Handler 245     34.22
6       ABSTAIN 126     17.60

Senator-at-Large
As at poll close: Thu 17 Apr 2008 23:59 EDT
Number of voters: 895 • Group size: 3251 • Percene voted: 27.53
Ranked by votes
Rank    Candidate       Votes   %
1       Noam Shouster   447     49.94
2       Justin Sulsky   399     44.58
3       Andrew Brooks   367     41.01
4       ABSTAIN 124     13.85

Poll menu: Student Union SP08-2 Final (2009)
Report date: Fri 18 Apr 2008 00:01 EDT
Senator for the Class of 2009
As at poll close: Thu 17 Apr 2008 23:59 EDT
Number of voters: 198 • Group size: 794 • Percene voted: 24.94
Ranked by votes
Rank    Candidate       Votes   %
1       Eric Alterman   115     58.08
2       Dani Baronofsky 50      25.25
3       ABSTAIN 33      16.67

Poll menu: Student Union SP08-2 Final (2011)
Report date: Fri 18 Apr 2008 00:01 EDT
Senator for the Class of 2011
As at poll close: Thu 17 Apr 2008 23:59 EDT
Number of voters: 300 • Group size: 791 • Percene voted: 37.93
Ranked by votes
Rank    Candidate       Votes   %
1       Lev Hirschhorn  147     49.00
2       Alex Melman     121     40.33
3       Naomi Cohn      107     35.67
4       Lexi Kriss      105     35.00
5       ABSTAIN 34      11.33

Tonight was a great victory for progressive activism at Brandeis University. Andrew Brooks didn’t lose because he’s a bad person. Andrew Brooks didn’t lose because he’s not popular. Andrew Brooks didn’t lose because “lies” were written about him on Innermost Parts. Andrew Brooks lost because the Brandeis community wants change. You don’t have to be an avid reader of the Justice and the Hoot to know that the Student Union was a mess this year. Tonight the Student Body placed the blame on the head of our esteemed Senator at Large, Andrew Brooks.

Of course, Andrew Brook is not entirely responsible for the mess in the Student Union. Far from it, he’s just a small part of it. The real blame belongs to every member of the Student Union. When one or two Senators or Executives causes problems, the Union should not let those problems prevent action. This year the Union needed leadership to ensure that partisanship, pettiness and play-politics would not get in the way of taking action for Students. The Union failed.

Elections have taken place, the students have spoken, and they want a change. I firmly believe that Jason Gray and Mike Kerns can and will take the Union in a new direction, and as a newly elected member of the Senate, I hope to take part in this new Union. This isn’t a matter of liberals versus conservatives; it’s a matter of people who want to take real action versus people who want to play with politics and power. Lets not get excited because Alex, Noam (whom I barely know, but I have only heard wonderful things) and I are progressives. That doesn’t really matter; I believe that conservatives can accomplish wonderful things in the Senate. No, lets get excited because Alex, Noam, and I are people who want to take action.

On another note, elections are still not over. In fact, less than half the Senate has been formed. This fall elections will take place to elect quad Senators, Senators for the class of 2012 and the TYP Senator. I doubt that tonight is the last we’ve seen of Andrew Brooks (anyone know his living plans for next year?). We need to ensure that candidates who want to take action and transcend petty politics fill these seats. With that in mind, I am announcing that I fully support Sahar Massachi, founder of Innermost Parts, for Castle Quad Senator.

I look forward to working with everyone in the new Student Union next year.

This just in - Student Events will now return to the previous arrangement of getting its funding through the Student Union F-Board. Looks like those Student Union protests had an effect after all. I wonder what behind-the-scenes work went into this…

This is excellent news - a reminder that we have power, if we organize well and use it.

We did it!

Please welcome your newest Senators at Large - Noam Shouster and Justin Sulsky!

Also please welcome the senators for the class of 2011 -Lev Hirchscrom and Alex Melman.

We did it - an upset victory at Large and solid progressives in Senate of 2011.

(Remember, voting starts (and ends) today. Vote for Noam, Alex Melman, and Lev Hirschorn. They are all pretty awesome people.) I’ll try to keep this as the top post all day: new content below

Noam Shuster is a 22 year old Israeli woman. Why is she, then, a freshman at Brandeis University? Because she’s spent her post-high school life volunteering, doing community service, taking classes at the New York Film Academy. Oh, and what else? Touring Europe giving lectures:

The pair are in England on a lightning two-week marathon lecture tour sponsored by the British Friends of Neve Shalom in an attempt to explain to anyone who will listen how their unique and extraordinary mini-society works - and how they believe that, at a time of complete deadlock in the Middle East, the type of co-existence their village practices is the best way to ensure peace.

Neve Shalom, where they live, is situated directly between Jerusalem and Tel Aviv, and is inhabited by 50 families - mixed between Jewish Israeli and Muslim and Christian Israeli Arab - learning, living and coexisting together. For Noam and Ranin, aged 22 and friends since they were small children growing up in Neve Shalom, or Wahat al-Salam as it is known in Arabic, such coexistence is completely natural - and the conflict that exists in the society outside completely alien.

So Noam toured Europe lecturing the Jewish community on how she, an Israeli, could have a Christian Arab best friend, and her experiences growing up in a genuinely peaceful and mixed community. More than just talk about how great things could be, Noam has also spent great effort taking action to create positive change: Read the rest…

This post is part of a series that addresses the physical aspects of our campus, specifically the history and the current state of Brandeis University architecture and planning.

I think I can safely say that almost all Brandeisians agree on at least one thing: the Castle is really cool. Many of us have explored its rooms and passages, and some of us have even gotten lost in them. It’s the only still-standing building I know of that existed before Brandeis was founded. Usen Castle is on the National Register of Historic Places, and while almost all other buildings on campus will likely face destruction at some point in the future, the Castle is almost certainly here to stay.

Unfortunately the Castle has undergone a lot of changes over the years, mostly for the worse. I’d like to tell you about one of these today.

Between the two gates is a long, thin stone wall with red crenelations on top. On the interior side of the wall you can see through the windows that there’s a long room with a lot of junk in it. One day the door was open, so I walked in for a moment to take a picture.

From my research at the University Archives, I learned that this area between the gates used to serve as a reading room, complete with study corrals and cubbies for students to work and store their things. The room had an intimate feel, with a warm light from the lamps on each desk and the shimmer of a beautiful mosaic tile ceiling. It has since been closed and forgotten.

So, let’s do a before and after:

Some areas of the Castle have legitimate reason to be closed: many spaces contain asbestos, which could be hazardous to students’ health. I don’t believe that this area suffers from that problem, because it looks like it’s actively being used for storage. So why can’t students enjoy this space today? I would love to study there. This is just one of the Castle’s lost treasures.

I urge the administration to restore some of the Castle’s lost glory through renovating this space and making it usable for our great students once again.

In the end, my initial opposition to Brooks/Sulsky came down to this: It seems that they believe that their mission in the Senate is to improve the material quality of life of students, to bring lox to Einsteins, to organize Midnight Buffets, etc. I believe a Student Union senator has a much greater mission than that. A Senator must fight for Brandeis values. A Senator must fight for student safety - no arming campus police. A Senator must try to heal the very real divisions on campus. A Senator must try to hold Brandeis’ actions to its rhetoric.

Now, though, I’ve found another reason to be very critical of the two. To them, this election is about more than the issues. They take it as a personal affront, to themselves and everything they stand for, that anyone would dare run against them. What we’ve seen with this campaign is an unrelenting assault on Reason and Democracy. They have painted Noam with the colors of a serial slanderer and clothed themselves in a mantle of pure, innocent, lambskin. I’ve seen numerous reports and examples either Brooks or Sulsky complaining about being wrongfully attacked: a challenge to their incumbency makes them victims of some sort.

Justin Sulsky’s sign says it all - “because hard work should be rewarded”. Brooks/Sulsky consider this position a reward. I consider the position an opportunity. A position in the Senate is an opportunity to stand up for Brandeis values, an opportunity to shape the dialogue and heal the rifts on campus, an opportunity to pro-actively bring about big changes, like Endowment Transparency, or Gender-Neutral Housing, an opportunity to prevent another Mamoon from being disowned by Brandeis without due process or reasonable cause. A position in the Senate should not be a trophy for badgering Einsteins into carrying Lox; it should be a promise to the student body that you will advocate for their concerns, but also present them with a more perfect Union.