An Open Letter to Stanford on the Economics of Divestment
This letter to the Stanford community seeks to raise concerns about the economics of divestment, a component of the debate that has been neglected thus […]
View ArticleOffice of Community Standards Responds to CS106A Honor Code Violations
The Stanford Review has been following developments on the CS106A Honor Code Violations. Given the size of the concerns, the Review is scrutinizing the process […]
View ArticleFossil Fuel Divestment is Misguided: Focus on Investment Instead
Divestment as a political strategy has no tangible effects. Instead of the focus on “divesting,” the Fossil Free movement could be more constructive if the […]
View ArticleSAL vs The Real World
The world after Stanford is a harsh one. Stanford’s founders recognized that truth in the University’s Founding Grant, in which they established that the key […]
View ArticleFossil Free Stanford: Clearer Rhetoric, but Still Misguided
On Monday, November 16, over 200 students in Fossil Free Stanford gathered outside President Hennessy’s office again in an effort to compel the Board of Trustees […]
View ArticleWhen Religion Becomes Rational
This article is a response to Amy Shen’s article “When Logic is Not Enough.” Imagine that you could take a pill that would extinguish your […]
View ArticleIf Stanford Divests, Thank $30 Oil, Not Fossil Free
During World War II, the indigenous people of Melanesia (a group of islands off of the northeastern coast of Australia) witnessed fierce fighting between Japanese […]
View ArticleLife After Divestment: On Stanford’s Decision To Reject FFS’s Demands
Stanford’s decision not to divest from the fossil fuel industry should not be viewed as a loss for Fossil Free Stanford. Rather, it can be an opportunity to refocus efforts on more productive means to...
View Article
