The inappropriate company of protesters who disrupted the first session of Government 1091 eschewed intellectual debate in favor of base confrontation. In so doing, they undermined a class dedicated precisely to the dissection of such multicultural and pansexual hankering as their own. Further, they circumvented the laws of a university which does much to further their agenda as a pillar of liberalism in contemporary America.

Demonstrators from the newborn Strategic Offense Society, posing as the reactionary "Harvard Heritage Society," marched across the Lowell Lecture Hall classroom on Friday, September 22 in a mock chant: "Keep Harvard White! Keep Harvard Male! Keep Harvard Straight!" Kenan Professor of Government Harvey C. Mansfield Jr. '53 was presented with a "David Duke Award for Teaching Excellence." Visiting Lecturer on Government George F. Will was the recipient of the "Heinrich Himmler Award for Social Vision."

Frankly, we're not really sure what these folks were thinking when they decided to do this. Our best guess is that they're egotistical publicity hounds, and we're sorry to see they got the press they so desire.

But for the sake of argument, we'll naively take the protesters' statement at face value. Insofar as Professor Mansfield and George Will are defenders of conservative retraction, one in academia--the other in the press--they are the natural targets for these leftists' anxiety. But to ascribe to Mansfield the hateful mission of the Ku Klux Klan and to Will the extermination policies of Nazi Germany steps over the line of humorous hyperbole.

Even if the protesters were accurate in their assessment of these distinguished faculty members, the forum and manner in which they chose to air their resentment are deserving of reprimand. As established by the FAS's Free Speech Guidelines, "The classroom is a special forum, and the teacher should be the one who determines the agenda of discourse in the classroom." Harvard's educational mission is not well-served by turning the classroom into a political circus of competing diversions.

We recognize that many other students disrupt classes as well. Many of us are familiar with the sight of students streaking through lectures or final club punchees dragging kegs through classrooms. We believe that the choice to pursue disciplinary action against such pranksters should be left up to the professors whose rights have been infringed upon. In this instance, Mansfield made an effort to seek out Dean of the College Harry R. Lewis '68 and bring these events to his attention. We think disciplinary action in this case is entirely justified. Furthermore, the political nature of this disruption makes it a direct attack on the perceived content of the class, making it even more deserving of punishment.

If SOS members are prepared to confront professors before their students in order to push their agenda, they should be bold enough to have the illicit demonstration appear on their permanent record. For that to happen, the Administrative Board would have to consider the case and vote to take disciplinary action against the demonstrators. Leaving this protest unpunished would encourage future cases. Harmful actions must necessarily have consequences on this campus; those which are pre-meditated and highly constructed deserve a forceful and immediate response from the administration. If SOS subscribes to the theory of civil disobedience, it should suffer the penalties of its improper conduct.

More likely, it appears that the demonstrators were simply players in a drama constructed by Joshua Oppenheimer '96-'97, a leader of SOS. As a special concentrator in Performance, Activism and Cultural Studies, Mr. Oppenheimer may be viewing this as his senior thesis. We give him an C- (with grade inflation).

It appears that Oppenheimer and friends have an understanding of the University as a political playground. That sentiment is quite distinct from the larger perception of education as the pursuit of truth. Though political reality may no longer be a friend of SOS, the intellectual freedom afforded by Harvard can very well be.