10 No. 6
Battling the Demons
Students, mental health, and the specter of violence on campus
Getting help for troubled students
Video: Dealing with students at risk
“Today a student walks out of a math test and picks up the cell phone, and Mom knows immediately how the test went. Parents haven’t cut the apron strings, and many little issues get blown out of proportion.”
“The thing you’re most worried about is not someone going out and shooting people. . . . Suicide, eating disorders that can lead to heart attacks, alcohol and drug abuse that lead to accidents—those are the ways we lose students. ”
Re-imagining health care reform
From old paradox to new paradigm
Emerson’s Anglo Saxonism
Ralph Waldo Emerson towers over the American Renaissance, but not, as he should, as philosopher king of American white race theory. Widely hailed for his enormous intellectual strength and prodigious output, Emerson wrote the earliest statement of the ideology later termed Anglo-Saxonism. We ordinarily locate white male masculine gender panic and spread-eagle Anglo Saxonism in the turn of the twentieth century, but Emerson lays it out half a century earlier. In intellectual treatises and oft-repeated lectures, Emerson portrayed the American as Saxon—Saxon as manly man—and separated the genealogy of the American Saxon from that of the Celt. Deftly and suddenly, Emerson elevated the Saxons and disappeared the Celts. . . . Although Emerson gave American Anglo Saxonism its most eloquent presentation, he did not invent it. Thomas Jefferson, among other Americans, also believed in the Saxon myth, a story of American descent from Saxons by way of England. . . . For Thomas Jefferson, Saxon descent explained political differences between the patriots of the newly formed United States of America and the ruling class of Great Britain. He contrasted what he saw as the Saxon origins of positive English institutions to the Norman origins of the Tories.
—Nell Painter, Edwards Professor Emeritus of American History, Princeton, from “Ralph Waldo Emerson’s Saxons,” April 10, 2008, part of the Luminaries in the Arts and Humanities Series sponsored by the Office of the Provost
We decided to ask the Supreme Court to review the case [after the Environmental Protection Agency declined to regulate greenhouse gases]. We decided to put the importance of the issue last. A lot of people will come to Supreme Court and say, You should take this case because it’s just plain really important; a big injustice will be done if you don’t take the case. You should take the case for that reason. I worried that … if we come in and the first thing we say is, Climate change is the most important problem facing the world today, we immediately turn some justices off. So what we led with instead were plain statutory and administrative law questions. Notice how sort of perverse that is. You’d think that the thing we would have going for us was that this was the most important issue of our time in environmental terms, and yet we almost just snuck that in. It gives you a sense of some of the awkward choices, and surprising choices, that you might face in litigating these kinds of cases.
—Lisa Heinzerling, Georgetown University Law Center, from her Thrower Symposium keynote, “Legal Science: An Interdisciplinary Examination of the Use and Misuse of Science in the Law,” February 21. Heinzerling argued for the state of Massachusetts in Massachusetts v. EPA, which she won before the Supreme Court last spring.