Your Cart is Empty
The shooting at Brown is deeply tragic. But it is not the time for mere thoughts and prayers. It hasn’t been for decades. As another Ivy League university, this moment calls for Princeton to stand in solidarity with the victims of the Brown shooting by pushing for significant reform to fight violence. University President Christopher Eisgruber ’83 is uniquely equipped as the past chair and active board member of the Association of American Universities (AAU) — an organization with a precedent of condemning gun violence — to lobby for gun reform policies on the national and state level.
A discussion about Fizz and the role of social media in our discourse took place at Princeton University on December 3rd, 2025, hosted by the Princeton Open Campus Coalition (POCC) and funded by Princetonians for Free Speech (PFS), While the discussion has been lauded as an example of what can come about through open and civil exchange of ideas, several questions remain worth considering. What is the place of anonymous speech in our society? Should someone take responsibility for the things they say? Or has our public discourse been hollowed out by social media to the point where online commentary should be considered performative?
Tal Fortgang ‘17
When Princeton President Christopher Eisgruber spoke at Harvard on November 5, 2025, he expressed what to his detractors may have sounded like an epiphany. “There’s a genuine civic crisis in America,” he said, noting how polarization and social-media amplification have made civil discourse uniquely difficult. Amid that crisis, he concluded, colleges must retain “clear time, place, and manner rules” for protest, and when protesters violate those rules, the university must refuse to negotiate. As he warned: “If you cede ground to those who break the rules … you encourage more rule-breaking, and you betray the students and scholars who depend on this university to function.”
Hugh E. Brennan
October 12, 2023
It is amusing how our best and brightest are willing to subvert the law in the interest of their ideology. I might say in service of their religion. Princeton undergraduate admissions are a limited and valuable commodity virtually guaranteeing entry to the elite of American society. The idea that immutable characteristics of race or ethnicity enter into the equation is subversive of republican citizenship. Justice Harlan’s courageous statement “our constitution is color-blind” in his famous Plessy v Ferguson dissent is, now in our increasingly diverse population, more important as the lodestar of our jurisprudence than ever. That American children of East and South Asian descent should be forced through an increasingly narrowed gate is as atrocious as when there were “too many” Jews. Somehow, a Korean grocer’s kid is tasked with making up for slavery and Jim Crow.
That the public has caught on to this vicious racial gerrymandering scheme is evident in the rapid increase in college applicants claiming indigenous or Hispanic identities. Should DNA tests be required along with essays?
Reflect that our great universities join the antebellum South, Nazi Germany, and apartheid South Africa in their obsession with race. Not very good company to keep.