To the Editor,
It has been said that Nero fiddled while Rome burned. It has also been said that he found joy in the destruction because he himself ordered the city set ablaze so that he might build a new Rome, fulfilling his grand vision of order, creating vast complexes of palaces and gardens for his delight. Nero was a man who insisted upon his infallibility, claiming to be a god upon Earth. He ruled with a singular will, dictating sweeping changes regardless of the impact upon his subjects. He executed all in accordance with his own grandiose plans based neither in reason nor prudence. The great tragedy for Rome was that none of his plans ever came to fruition, and his death left behind a ruined empire whose wounds took many decades to heal.
Our fine Institute finds itself in no less dire a situation today. In recent months, several new policies have come to the public eye, all of them sudden and none of them subjected to scrutiny or to due consideration.
The three most prominent policies of which I speak are the new commencement policy, the newly developed policy on graduate tuition, and the proposed move of the Dean of Students Office. I will not belabor this letter with an enumeration of the facts, failings, or injustices of these policies; such things are well documented elsewhere and perhaps fit for future letters.
It seems clear to me that we are faced with a tyrant in the vein of Nero. Although nowhere near as extreme or as potent, Dr. Jackson certainly constitutes a virtually irrefutable authority within our tiny world here at RPI. It is transparent that these new policies, as with many before them, represent the unfettered will of the President alone. Each change is given in the context of The Rensselaer Plan, a document which is clearly little more than a codification of Jackson’s inaugural address. True, the plan claimed to be formed by the input of all of our community, but this assertion, like many others, is farcical. Likewise, new policies are implemented after hollow rituals such as consultation with our so-called student leaders. However, these simple trappings fall away upon the simplest analysis, revealing the true crux of each policy: money.
I will not deny that the Institute is in need of money. I know well the need to lift ourselves from the mire we wallow in, a mire almost 20 years deep. But must such improvement be done upon the backs and the wallets of the powerless masses? Must we, the students (and sometimes even our esteemed faculty) be made to pay the price of Jackson’s delusions of grandeur? Must the Rensselaer of the tomorrow be built through neglect of the RPI of the today? I most sincerely hope that the answer to each of these questions is no.
Will Bobrowski
PHYS ’02
