Foster and Leon
Foster and Leon are running on a platform of creativity, innovation and fresh perspective. If elected, they aim to alter the way CC interacts with the campus at large and focus on achieving smaller, short-term goals that affect the campus as a whole.
“There is a lot of uneasiness about the upcoming transitions and instead of stable, business-as-usual leadership, CC needs to be creative and fresh,” Foster said. “It can’t stop its job of improving student life.” He added that CC needs to be “fun and inspiring and offset the negativity we feel during the economic crisis.”
The candidates believe that their experience at the College has prepared them to become the next CC co-presidents. “I have personally lived and worked at Williams outside of CC and committees – we’ve lived as Williams students,” Foster said. “We would be a fresh set of eyes to address student concerns that have not been traditionally heard.”
Inyang and Yekutiel
Yekutiel and Inyang base their platform on strong and experienced leadership during a time of transition and the difficult economic climate. The candidates presented three pillars as their core platform: capable student-administration mediation, reutilization of underused spaces and the revitalization of older College traditions and history to foster a sense of belonging.
Citing their leadership roles in a variety of capacities, Yekutiel and Inyang focused on their collective ability to serve as capable student liaisons to the administration and to ensure that student voices remain heard through changes in College administration, the residential system and financial policies.
“Our experience over the last two years in many campus organizations will allow us to reach out to the student body in a unique way,” Yekutiel said. “We will make sure we are a proactive and transparent organization. Having capable student liaisons is extremely important at this point of transition. The first thing we promise is to be those leaders.”
WCF resolves to draft constitution - By Matthew Piltch - Executive Editor
As discussions regarding the separation of Athletes’ Bible Study (ABS) from Williams Christian Fellowship (WCF) have continued over the last week, WCF has begun the process of formulating a constitution to direct the group in the future. [...]Purple Politics - By Chris Fox
Among the possibilities for WCF are division into several groups or an end to WCF’s affiliation with InterVarsity, a non-profit that works with Christian groups on campuses nationwide. Another option is that the group may continue its affiliation with InterVarsity while enacting a constitution that accommodates both the College’s non-discrimination policy and InterVarsity’s stance that the only appropriate context for any sexual interaction is marriage between a man and a woman.
WCF members are currently working to develop a constitution that abides by the College policy and allows students to openly discuss their religious beliefs. At an all-day retreat on Saturday, WCF members and InterVarsity staff member Matt Mascioli will discuss the constitution, as well as WCF’s affiliation with InterVarsity and other options for WCF going forward.
There is no denying that If and Manny are experienced. Both have been working hard since they got to campus, and even if they lose you will see both of them continue working to better our community. If and Manny consume everything this college has to offer, and like a Purple Cow, have four times the stomach for it and reliably produce milk … I mean results.
On the other hand, Mike and Jon are looking to bring “A Million Little Changes” to Williams College. They embrace technology, making YouTube videos for CC, and are looking to have press conferences. In times of economic crisis they turn to FDR (to advocate “fireside chats,” not spending). They are the enthusiastic underdog. They command a crowd and sound great (except when they’re being Waterstreeters). Sound familiar?
Despite their respective advantages, when asked about Adam Falk’s first year or the neighborhood system by the moderator, both tickets dodged the questions. Instead they repeated mantras. And you can’t fault them for it. We exist in a world where politicians repeat talking points instead of solving problems, and while Sunday’s debate was not the best venue for the necessary level of discussion, what I saw felt more like a product of the time we live in than of the time allotted. The problems of modern campaign culture have made their way into our pristine purple bubble, and they will remain because we know what wins elections.
Worth their weight - By Thammina Songkaeo
“How much sense does it make that a college somewhere in America is giving some international girl thousands and thousands of dollars with no strings attached?” was the way she posed the question.
As a whirlpool of flashbacks whizzed through my mind, my answer was, “All the sense in the world.” My thoughts revisited the many students I had met while living, studying, or traveling in Uganda, Rwanda, Thailand, India, China, Malaysia and Singapore throughout high school and college. I still remember them asking me where they were supposed to go after high school ended. The beads of sweat emanating from their hard-working, yet penniless bodies, some walking on dirt roads with no shoes, some studying in regions regenerating from decades of civil wars, or some in cities but still poor, bubbled in my nostrils again. The beads of sweat in those poorer regions didn’t look or smell any differently from those beads of sweat that permeated my classroom in Beverly Hills. Those students were no different. They were no different at all.
