Martin Benjamin’s Wespeak: Bigger, Longer & Uncut

Earlier this week I linked to Martin Benjamin ’57’s  latest Wespeak (wherein he pretty much directly accuses President Roth and Muslim Chaplain Marwa Aly of being terrorist sympathizers) and discussed Benjamin in general—his language, his seemingly relished notoriety, and his tenuous relationship with Wesleyan as both a student body and some sort of abstract representation of everything wrong with liberal America today. Of particular interest, at least to readers of Tuesday’s Argus, would be his flagrant Islamaphobia.

An anonymous source points out that the Wespeak, as it appears in Tuesday’s Argus, is not quite what Benjamin originally submitted; Argus editors chose to remove not to print key passages  deemed “excessively vulgar” and “blatant[ly] Islamaphobic” in tone. Whether the piece is really less vulgar with these passages withheld is entirely up for debate. Our intent is neither to support nor condemn the Argus‘s decision to censor—their policy to “withhold Wespeaks that are excessively vulgar” is entirely subject to editorial discretion. (Edit: EIC Katherine Yagle ’12 points out that Argus staff did not print the censored version without consulting Benjamin. Rather, they objected to the original submission, returned it to Benjamin with offending passages highlighted, and he resubmitted it with their edits applied.)

But does Benjamin’s piece qualify as “excessively vulgar”? Is it too outrageous and absurd to take seriously in the first place? Decide for yourself. The original “Open Letter to President Roth” is available here. Highlights denote passages removed before publication. Enjoy(?).

(And when you’re totally enraged by his “excessively vulgar” ranting, just remember that the guy also takes pretty pictures of nature.)

(Visited 213 times, 2 visits today)

9 thoughts on “Martin Benjamin’s Wespeak: Bigger, Longer & Uncut

  1. Bob

    Although he won’t admit it, I think MB might quite enjoy it if radical Muslims took over Wesleyan and ended Wes liberalism…

  2. guest

    I think it’s kind of messed up that the argus forced him to cut out large sections because they didn’t agree with it. Also, it’s probably worth pointing out that I do think his letter makes more sense and is more internally consistent with the added paragraphs. Like seriously, the stuff that got cut out is pretty far out there, but it is in no way inflammatory. The people who run the argus should seriously look up what hate speech is, because this isn’t hate speech or even particularly offensive, it’s just wacky. And refusing to acknowledge or respect people’s opinions because you find them wacky is really just censoring this guy because they don’t like him and don’t like his opinions.

    But then again, all this assumes some base level of not-unspeakable incompetence from the argus.

  3. Kyagle

    Hi Zach,

    This is Katherine Yagle, one of the EICs of the Argus. Just to let you know, we didn’t cut a single line out of Benjamin’s Wespeak. What we did was return the Wespeak to him with an e-mail explaining why it violates our Wespeak policy and highlighting the lines that we thought were problematic. He returned an edited Wespeak to us which we published. What appeared in the Argus is entirely his work–we didn’t delete or add anything.


  4. Another Student

    Sorry, but did the letter just strike anyone else as totally nonsensical? This guy sounds like a raving lunatic….

    1. Ayn Rand

      The version in the Argus is. The uncensored version has a certain logic to it, albeit a highly bigoted one.

    1. anonymouse

      I know, I got to that phrase and all I could say was “seriously? Seriously?”

      Also, gotta love that one of his points is that that everything he objects to (and has written Wespeaks to complain about) at Wesleyan will be eliminated under the Sharia law we’re supposedly going to impose on ourselves.

Comments are closed.