Making it safe for progressives to talk about population

Meet Nicole Loeffler Gladstone, Hampshire College Graduate, Devout Follower of Betsy Hartmann’s POBAFS Agenda, Full-Fledged Smear Artist

I wrote in November, in a post entitled “Desperately Seeking . . . .. “ about the fact that submissions of  materials to the Imagine2050 website from people associated with Hampshire College’s POP/DEV program had, to the best of my knowledge and with only a single exception, stopped completely in the wake of my protest on the Hampshire College campus last May. It was my hope that the unnamed person I referred to, identified as a Hampshire student and since confirmed as a Hampshire graduate, would likewise find other, less mean-spirited ways to express her support for opening America’s borders. That has not been the case. Nicole Loeffler Gladstone has continued to post libelous and mean-spirited materials to the Imagine2050 website. She joins Jesse Sanes and Rebecca Poswolsky in finding that among the results that appear when someone Googles her name is an entry here at  Although I can’t be certain that she was aware of my own activities in trying to break the sleazy and slanderous connection between Hampshire College and Imagine2050, she has continued to accuse progressives who publicly worry about U.S. population growth of collaborating with, indeed with being the equivalent of, white supremacists. Nicole has now earned herself the status as one of three young Americans whose future job searches and other endeavors will be encumbered by an online account of their unsavory smear-artist activities.

At this time, I won’t elaborate here with a detailed analysis of Nicole’s various postings to the Imagine2050 website. Although they vary in the particulars, these articles conform marvelously to the general patterns that I described in my earlier entries, most notably the piece entitled “Meet Jesse Sanes and Rebecca Poswolsky: Open Borders Activists, Devout Followers of Betsy Hartmann, Fledgling Smear Artists.”  Suffice to say that in all her recent blogs there is no thread of argument that was not already addressed in detail in that earlier critique of JessBecky.  Nicole’s submissions are also devoid of the elements of respectful discourse as they would ideally be practiced among progressive people with differing perspectives. Of course, my earlier piece was based not just on my analysis of the work of those two fledgling smear artists, but my own experiences witnessing specific events, observations which sharply contradicted with the accounts offered by Rebecca Poswolsky. I was there at the time of the events she reported, and I know that what she wrote was not true.  With Nicole’s work, I have read enough to know that the same strategies and principles apply. As in the work of JessBecky, Nicole’s attacks focus on attributing evil hatreds to those with whom she disagrees, not on the real and tangible concerns they raise.

Oh, well.

As I have stated before, I had hoped to add no more names to the list of young people specifically identified here and publicly branded by their association with Hampshire College’s program of character assassination.  In my November entry, I specifically mentioned the ongoing activity of a former Hampshire student who may or may not have known of my protest last May and the posts I had offered since that time. So here is a new question for some ambitious Hampshire College journalism student:  Did Nicole Loeffler Gladstone continue to contribute these more recent smear attacks in full knowledge that her online reputation could be tarnished in this fashion?

I don’t know much about the algorithms used by modern search engines such as Google and Yahoo.  But I do know this; while Betsy Hartmann and Hampshire College are relatively safe from exposure due to the high volume of material that has been produced by or about them, individual Hampshire College students have far less prodigious online histories.  Post a blog about Betsy Hartmann on a small unadvertised blog, and that modest entry to the online universe will take a place in line behind the hundreds, easily thousands, of already existing entries.  But post a similar piece and tag it with the name of a less-prominent activist, and it could easily rise to the top of the list of results.  That is certainly what happened when I posted my critique of Jesse Sanes and Rebecca Poswolsky, as you can confirm readily enough with a quick Google search of their names.

Nicole Loeffler Gladstone, on the other hand, falls somewhere in between. Her name pulls up a few pages of hits in various categories, some having to do with her POBAFS/smear campaign contributions, most having to do with her work as a dancer and choreographer.  This entry might not come up near the top of the list, although anyone researching her background in depth will have the chance to learn about my disagreements with the POBAFS (Pro-Open-Borders/Anti-Free-Speech) agenda and the training of smear artists as practiced at her Alma Mater. And Nicole’s participation in these attacks might even be seen as a positive experience by some in the artistic dance field where she is working to build her professional reputation. If she ever needs to supplement that creative work with a day job, however, she will have no assurance of finding that perspective in the minds of employers sifting through piles of resumes.

You see, I really can’t answer the question of how prominent this post will be in those search results until after I have posted it, nor can I say with certainty how it will influence those who might consider hiring or collaborating with her.  What I can tell you is that I submit this post with some regret. In November, I had offered what I consider to be fair warning to the people that who are paying attention (there was indeed a flurry of new hits in subsequent weeks), and I hope that they would have had the decency to contact Nicole and ensure that she knew that the connection between Imagine2050 and Hampshire College had come under some unflattering scrutiny.  If someone were able to convince me that Nicole’s posts since November were submitted without her knowledge of my own activities challenging the Imagine2050 sleaze factor, I would consider taking this particular post down.

I could be readily swayed on this decision, for I can’t confirm that she had seen my reference in November to a past Hampshire College student.  I not only referred to that past Hampshire student but provided sufficient details so that anyone who had read the post could easily identify her. It would have taken just a minute or so to identify that former student on the Imagine2050 website, and Nicole’s contact information is readily available online. With a minimum of effort and time, in other words, they could have informed her of the protest, of my critique of Jesse and Rebecca, and of the fact that, for reasons that have not yet been pinned down conclusively, neither Jesse, Rebecca nor any other Hampshire-associated individuals had posted material to Imagine2050 in the intervening months. I should think that people reading my post of November would have gone out of their way to ensure that Nicole was fully informed of the potential consequences of further smear attacks in this venue. Whether they did make such an effort is a question that some ambitious Hampshire College journalism student could answer more easily than I could.

In the end I think it’s pretty unlikely Nicole submitted these additional posts without knowing the risk she was taking with her online persona, but in fairness I will offer to remove this post, while the viewership activity is relatively small, if I am provided with information that persuades me that she had not known of my own challenges to these Hampshire-related activities.  If she did so without the benefit of knowing what has transpired in the matter of past and present Hampshire students, Imagine2050, and the material posted here at, then the grownups at Hampshire College really owe her an apology.

On the other hand, if she continued to submit in that full knowledge, I have to give her credit for being courageous, if not necessarily wise.  Until I am convinced otherwise I will let this post stand as is, and Nicole should look elsewhere, including in the mirror, before blaming me for whatever follows, including the impediments she potentially faces in her future attempts to find employment and build partnerships in her various endeavors.  If that is indeed the case, Nicole, that you were fully warned, then you have hung this albatross around your own neck  All that I have done is opened the windows to let the world know how badly it stinks.

Up next, KMB is welcome to respond.

Blog Stats

  • 2,892 hits

Progressive Populationist

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

%d bloggers like this: