Reconsider the Smith College 2014 Commencement Speaker

Mount Holyoke College student and supporter!

I was no fan of Huffington but if I was a '14 grad I would be too ashamed to cross the stage. Set an example for them and do the right thing.

Please reconsider, we need someone who represents the best of Smith, not the worst. As a 2014 Grad you are alienating a generation of future Alums with this announcement! If Smith really values "women of the world" doesn't that include women from developing nations?? Doesn't that include women of color?? Please choose more women of color as graduation speakers and women who do not represent the capitalist elite through the IMF!

well, what makes you say that she isn't working to create a better world? like i mentioned in a previous post, she's only been head of IMF for 2.5 years. that's a very short time to implement reforms and policies and to see them work.

I'm sure there are many other accomplished and brilliant woman leaders that don't work for, or should I say manage the IMF. Many other accomplished and brilliant women that would be a much better choice as MY commencement speaker. Smart and effective woman leaders that are not leading an organization that is appallingly out of touch with other countries, cultures, and economic circumstances ...I am a SMITHIE!! And very proud of that fact!!

It's not that I (and probably most of my fellow smithies) think Ms Legarde is a devil woman responsible for the failures and problematic practices of the IMF or that she has not had a very 'successful' professional career. It's letting this 'lean in' kind of ideal be represented at the time we should be inspiring graduates not to strive to the predominant definition of success but to change the definitions of success. I would much rather hear life advice from someone with a vantage point and experience that is not so dangerously parallel to the corporate leaders who have caused many of the global crises we now face. Our generation has been trying to prove that success isn't just the title you hold and the money you make- I admit I have not looked very hard (though it looks like you didn't either) but i would like to see some other reason why she should be delivering a speech to the 14 grads other than being a white lady who made a lot of money and had good jobs (in gov and business and finance). Plus we haven't had a woman of color as a commencement speaker for 12 years- that in itself is bad enough.

Sigh, if only she'd been black (or some other non-white colour). Then Smith would have been proud to have her speak. Oh, wait. Brandeis booted Hirsi Ayaan Ali, who's African and female. Tufts rejected Condy Rice, who's black and female. So, "of colour" isn't sufficient. Then we must apply a strict political litmus test. Is she gay? No. Is she Communist? No. Socialist? No, she supports the philosophy of Adam Smith. Oh, well. Then she doesn't represent what Smith College is all about--non-white, oppressed, Marxist-oriented activists. Someone like Obama. Anyway, let's all celebrate this victory in the crusade for the suppression of detestable commencement speakers!

Events and actions surrounding this petition, namely active and vocal support of some Smith College faculty members of the same made our family decide against our daughters applying for this college.

Whatever happened to "100 years of women on top"? The hypocrisy and ignorance displayed here is mind-blowing. Good luck at getting jobs, Smith grads! You have devalued your diplomas' currency. Oh, and one more thing: that $17bn IMF loan to Ukraine? You really should be on the ramparts fighting against it instead of wasting your time in classes.

Just to be clear, I am not signing the petition. Rather, as a Smith alum (1987) and an international economist who has worked at the IMF, I am writing to convey my disappointment that Madam Lagarde, an extraordinarily accomplished woman and eloquent speaker, was not welcome on campus, where I would have hoped graduates would be more welcoming and open-minded. The role of the IMF is very complicated and often poorly understood, and a lot of comments are massive oversimplifications or hyperbole. The IMF is a "lender of last resort" for countries that have no access to financing (e.g., loans from international capital markets) and have often badly squandered their own resources through waste, corruption, bad governance, weak capacity and poor policy environments. No country wants an IMF program, but by the time they do, they need to take corrective measures to restore growth. Are they painful? Yes, they can be. But the alternative is for countries to lanquish with anemic or no growth, exacerbating inequality and instability (Zimbabwe anyone?). The key is to replace unsustainable and distortionary policies, such as country wide subsidies or automatic salary increases for bloated governments, with targeted programs that protect the poor and most vulnerable. This is something the IMF is getting better at. We also lack the benefit of the "counter-factual"-- if the IMF had not injected billions in capital to prop up European markets, for example, where would be now? I don't believe for one minute the recovery would have been stronger or more robust; rather, I believe that the IMF helped minimize the extent the damage-- not to the elites but to those who would have lost their livelihoods and fallen into (or back into) poverty. And where it their next frontier? Ukraine, which has also failed to grow and prosper as a result of its failure to purse critical reforms to the energy sector, fostering a chronic and unhealthy dependence on Russian gas exports. A

IMF: Injustice Misery Fraud As a result of protests by Smith College students and faculty, the head of the International Monetary Fund realized the IMF offends the moral sensibilities of "the smiths of the world" and accordingly withdrew as the college's 2014 commencement speaker. The protesters conceded that Ms. LaGarde might be "a good person working in a corrupt system", but they were adamant that they "should not by any means promote or encourage the values and ideals that the IMF fosters." Their claim is that "The IMF has been a primary culprit in the failed developmental policies implanted in some of the world’s poorest countries. This has led directly to the strengthening of imperialist and patriarchal systems that oppress and abuse women worldwide." The protesters are to be commended for several reasons. First, the protesters allowed for what Hannah Arendt called the "banality of evil" in which "good persons" become the totalitarian engines for "corrupt systems" by performing their assigned duties without adherence to a strict personal moral standard. But Ms. LaGarde's high rank at the IMF makes it unlikely that she would claim "just doing my duty" as a defense to the protesters' charges: it seems fair to conclude she believes what she is doing is moral, honest and just. Second, the protesters have observed that the IMF's actions [since institutions do not have motives ... only individuals have motives] are [as summarized by one protester] "nothing but imperialistic, ineffective, and oppressive." This is also indisputably true not merely for the IMF's economic victimization of women but also for its financial exploitation of the world's poor in general. The IMF is 20th century joint imperialism implemented via monetary manipulation by developed nation central banks. It is no longer politically correct for a single developed nation to exploit a poor neighbor using military force. However, it is perfectly acceptable for deficit ridden developed nat

Despicable attitude. Open mindedness and willingness to listen respectfully to those who disagree with you are not qualities valued by the Smith community.

Irregardless of her personal politics and accomplishments, having the director of the IMF speak is a tacit endorsement of their policies. Women for the World should include all women, including women in the developing world directly impacted by these failed policies.

The IMF and its actions are the exact opposite of the practices that Smith College preaches to its students. By affiliation with the IMF Ms. Lagarde does not represent the publicly expressed value of the college, nor does she represent my values. Frankly I would rather have no commencement speaker

It would be nice if Smith would honor women who aren't part of an organization that has caused so much hard to poor people around the world. Ms. Lagarde does not deserve our respect just because she makes a lot of money. Smith should honor inovators and people who are working to create a better world.

Disappointed in this choice by my alma mater. The IMFs policies stand in stark contradiction to the principles of social justice and solidarity we worked toward at Smith.