Two articles of interest today about campus politics.

The first is an AP story about how Students for a Democratic Society has reemerged on campuses. Read about it here.

The second, and more important article, is in the American Conservative. In case you don't know, this is the magazine founded by Pat Buchanan. It's one part protectionist, two parts anti-war, and 1/2 part crazy. But this article is excellent. Read about it here.

It talks about how campus conservatives are not in touch with the intellectual underpinnings of the conservative movement. Instead of reading Kirk, Weaver, Hayek, Buckley, etc., most college republicans want to be "activist" and shake things up. Now activism is great, but you have to have philosophical grounding or you will start supporting things that aren't conservative at all. For example, you won't see the college republicans criticizing Bush, eventhough, as conservatives they should be.

That's where Carolina Review comes in. We are the intellectual forum for the conservative movement on campus. The libertarian vs. conservative debate on marijuana in our upcoming issue, for example, shows some philosophical life in the movement. And that's what the book club we did last semester was about. We read essays from the founding conservatives and examined what they argued about back then.

So, hopefully we'll get back to that, but in the meantime, anyone interested in what it means to be a conservative, should read the article in the American Conservative, check out www.isi.org, and be a reader of what Albert Jay Nock calls "serious" books. That means books that require you to think and reflect. Nock wrote that this world has plenty of people that are literate, but few people who really know how to read. Be able to read.

I was reminded today that tomorrow is Columbus Day and it made me think about a letter I wrote to the DTH my freshman year. It was in response to some leftist dribble that had been published the previous day. Here is the (unpublished letter):

Yesterday, there was a letter to the editor printed in the DTH that discussed the meaning of Columbus Day. Brooks and Locklear remind readers that “the portrayal of Columbus as a hero is not only naïve but incorrect.” They then assert that Columbus was a murderer of peaceful peoples and conclude that “this day should be used to memorialize the indigenous people who lost their lives because of this invasion.” Though I concede to the point that Columbus’ accomplishments are misunderstood, I must disagree full-heartedly with the editorial.

First of all, not since the 60s have elementary textbooks portrayed Columbus as a hero and the “illustrious discoverer of our country.” As everyone knows, he landed in the Caribbean. The textbooks that I was forced to read spend many pages on the damage that men like Columbus and Cortez inflicted upon local populations.

Secondly, the emphasis on the killings of Native Americans by the first discoverers is misguided. Yes, Columbus killed natives. And men like Cortez came shortly after to kill many more. But the native people were not exactly like they have been portrayed in popular movies like Pocahontas and Dances with Wolves. Tribes warred with one another, pillaged, and did what they could to survive. When Cortez conquered the Aztec’s, it was not one violent group destroying another group of high morals. It was the conquering of a people that believed in human sacrifice by a technologically superior group of people. It had been going on for thousands of years in Europe.

Columbus Day is not about a hero or a murderer. It is a day that commemorates the uniting of the world. It is a day that highlights the beginning of globalization; a turning point in the progress of human kind. If Columbus had not made his famous journey, another man would have at a later time.

Therefore, no one should be irked by these celebrations. And those Leftists that would say that Columbus’ misdeeds are representative of the history of the United States are sorely mistaken. The actions of an Italian explorer do not taint the character of a nation founded two-hundred and fifty years later. This country has a list of its own sins, committed by its citizenry, which have been reckoned with. Let us only consider Columbus Day, a commemoration of a “New World,” not the holiday of a nation or the kindling flame of a grieving people.

This week, someone will undoubtedly sound off in the DTH about how this is a racist holiday and how wonderful it is that the University tries to ignore it. My response to those people has not changed.

The Daily Tar Heel editorial board touts the Nanny State today. They think that the government should protect us from the combination of trans fat and gluttonous appetites. Read it here.