|
Volume CXXXII, Number 17 |
 |
Now is the time to take a stand, BSG
To the Editors:
Democracy…democracy…d-e-m---oh, here it is, in Webster's Ninth Collegiate Dictionary: "1 a: government by the people; esp: rule of the majority." Heavens! How simple! Had I only known, standing there at this week's Student Government meeting, I would have marched myself right up to the president of the BSG himself and whispered it in his ear. Or held up a sign in clear block lettering. Or submitted my dictionary in a ziplock bag as evidence, exhibit A.
But wait… now that I think of it…I did know the definition of democracy at that meeting. Indeed…who doesn't know the meaning of democracy? The answer apparently-woefully, regretfully- is the Bowdoin Student Government.
Now, angry reader-reader who is appalled by such accusatory language: please quell your outrage, and I will respond to the criticisms of this observation (one that is not intended to hurt feelings, but rather to promote healthy and much-needed change within the administrative facilities of this school) in the order in which they were received.
Question 1) The question, Ms. Ramey, is not about whether or not the people of this campus know and understand the meaning of the word democracy. Rather it is a simple matter of defining the jurisdiction of the Student Government, taking into consideration what it has been, but moreover what it should be.
Answer 1) An excellent point, thank you for bringing it up. What is the role of our Student Government? Based on precedent, the members of BSG are the guardians of this school's most cherished items and issues, namely: T-shirts, washing machines and shuttle service. And as the refusal to adopt this week's resolution illustrated very clearly, the BSG does not see itself as the appropriate arena for political debate.
But let me pose a few questions of my own: by insulating the government from all politics, thusly taking away a student's right to be fully represented in their government, do we not create a system that fosters, nay, promotes apathy? How can a government choose what and what not to represent from the student body?
This week the majority of the student population presented itself to the student government and was roundly rejected…is this not indicative of an ill-functioning democracy? Of indifference settled in the very marrow of our administrative structure?
And, and is that choice to not address this issue also a political statement of it's own? Is it not true that were we to remain silent on this issue, that that silence would NOT be out of a commitment to non-partisan values, but instead a deeply motivated (while quiet and manipulative) maneuver to exercise the wants and needs of those opposed to the resolution? Indeed, if we do not pass the resolution, we shuffle along, lemming-like, with the rest of our country in deferent support of preemptive action. And this is not an unhappy accident. There is no such thing as non-partisanship in times like these, and so I would ask that those highly partisaned folk check that misleading, stealthy and strategic language of impartiality at the door.
Q2) Wait, but isn't it dangerous to politicize the student government? What if student government suddenly passed a resolution in support of a Pro-Life stance? What then, Sarah?
A2) In such a situation, the bottom line is that my outrage, no matter how great, would not allow me to change the rules of democracy simply to suit my own needs. No matter what the specifics of the political agenda, a democratic government carries a very serious responsibility to represent and speak for, unapologetically, the majority of the student body.
Q2) But why not just let it all go to a referendum?
A2) The answer is two-fold: a) the majority has already spoken and been accounted for via the petition, therefore deserving the recognition of the student government. However there is dispute surrounding the legitimacy of said petition and thus the call for referendum, but the problem is this: b) a referendum, while cloaked in "officialness" is actually subject to comparable pitfalls that the petition was criticized for. We already have signatures of the majority…a referendum is not so foolproof as to guarantee a more 'representative' count.
Q3) OK, but what say you to the obvious problem that this adoption, on which we put the entire college's name, does not in any way represent the entire college?
A3) I'll be brief. Put simply, in familiar language: this is what democracy looks like. The hard fact of democracy, as stated before, is that the majority does rule. Democracy does not boast of making decisions 100% amenable to its representatives. Is this perfect? Of course not…but that is how democracy works. It is ridiculous to suddenly pull out a bunch of Quaker/consensus rhetoric in the middle of a democratic process. That's what we call cheating.
Additionally, the Resolution, in its wording, does not claim that it represents the moods and motivations of every single student at Bowdoin college.
Q4) But Sarah, I feel alienated.
A4) Well, sorry. Welcome to being a minority.
Q5) So maybe you're right. But, tell me, do you really believe any of this petitioning will have a real effect on the outcome of this war?
A5) Excellent point. Why do anything at all? What else have we learned at this school, as exemplified perfectly by our student government, but to turn away from challenges when those challenges loom large? We stand at a moment in history where we can either stand up and speak for ourselves or sit on our thumbs and let a wave of quietly partisaned apathy wash over us. There are two choices. There is no middle ground. Regardless of the imagined effects or lack thereof in signing a resolution against preemptive strike in Iraq, we must choose. Not choosing is choosing. Either take a stand or step aside, but in the event of a horror that none of us can begin to imagine here in quiet New England, you must know, know, that you stepped aside.
Sincerely,
Sarah Ramey '03
|
FastCounter by bCentral |