|
Volume CXXXII, Number 19 |
 |
Where did all the discussion go?
SARAH RAMEY
COLUMNIST
I would like to begin with a rebuttal to my own letter to the editors.
In a tirade against the student government, Ms. Ramey, perhaps in an attempt at biting, nay, crippling wit, opened with a the Dictionary Definition of a democracy, which was: the rule of the majority. The effect, presumably, was to illustrate how the BSG was not living up to said Definition. However, Ramey's callous and oversimplified tactics failed to address some of the critical points that the word "democracy" is meant to represent, and in effect only served to further propitiate the usurpation of one of the most misused, misunderstood words today.
Democracy is a potent term. It's what we hold up when the world turns a critical eye. Our trump card, if you will. But look out! That word, that glittering, promise-filled word that hovers on the lips of our leaders has been usurped! Wielded left and right, it crashes through dialogue from our living rooms to our student government. It is presumably what we are fighting for…and yet, do any of us really understand what it means? Sarah Ramey obviously didn't. Not fully. The dictionary can only offer so much, and in a time when it is the one word our president is asking us to rally behind, well, we would hope that some effort would be made to a) understand the term and b) at least attempt to ensure that our governments (from student to national) function accordingly.
And so, we the rebutters of the afore mentioned letter to the editor, would like only to offer up a little finesse to that first, crass, misleading definition. And to do that, we're going to quote a real smart guy, John Berger, who printed the following in Harper's Magazine: "Democracy is a proposal (rarely realized) about decision making…It's promise is that political decisions be made after, and in the light of, consultation with the governed. This is dependent upon the governed being adequately informed about the issues in question, and upon the decision-makers having the capacity and will to listen and take account of what they have heard. Democracy should not be confused with the "freedom" of binary choices, the publication of opinion polls, or the crowding of people into statistics. These are it's pretense."
So says John Berger, someone whom we've never heard of, and that's OK.
Democracy made easy is the rule of the majority. Real democracy entails a responsible dialogue between governors and governed. Real democracy relies almost naively on honesty…and yet if we are to use it a our trump, we had better not knowingly be playing with aces up our sleeve.
Point well taken. Thank you, rebutters. (as a side note, I am delighted that "rebutters" actually turns out to be a real word. I thought for sure I was going to get the red underline. But no!)
So why rebut myself? And in public? Why crucify one's self as the model idiot? (Or: a model, idiot)
Well, to go back go the Berger quote, this has something to do with being a part of The Governed. First, I need to be adequately informed. So what do I mean by adequate? How can I ever measure what will be "enough" knowledge? And the answer to that is, I can't. But I can try. And moreover, it is my responsibility to try. To always aspire. To progress upwards. And here is the point of this whole article: how can I ever progress if I am not willing to admit to, own, and move past my own mistakes?
This campus is blanketed by a curious silence. Opinions are everywhere, and yet we seem to be biting our tongues. After the Student Government hullaballoo, and the subsequent outbreak of war, we've gone quiet.
So the question is why? One answer I can come up with is that nobody wants to be wrong. The stakes are too high, and to be wrong here-on either side of the coin--is to have slaughter, deception, arrogance, ignorance and blood on your hands, and because nobody wants that, most dialogue fizzles as soon as it is sparked.
In our fear of this Wrongness, we have rendered ourselves paralyzed. Some are so afraid of being wrong they say nothing at all. Others say lots of things, but refuse to listen to anyone else for fear of having to, gasp, admit some degree of Wrongness.
But to this Fear of the Wrong, all I can offer is this: no matter what, you're not going to get it Right. Unless you're Jesus, Gandhi or Matt Groening, the chances in your life that you speak something universally, unequivocally True are probably slim to none. But is this reason not to speak? Obviously not. We must speak. If we are to be citizens in this glittering democracy, it is our responsibility to speak. It is then how we speak that matters.
And so, in this regard, here is my best advice: write in pencil. Erasable pen might even be better because it carries the illusion of permanence. The more you write or speak, the more you encourage yourself to write or speak again. It's like any class here at Bowdoin…once you break the seal and start talking, it's more or less smooth sailing for the semester in terms of class participation. But if you don't get up the courage to say something dumb on the first day, you usually just give up. Nobody wants to be that guy who suddenly has an opinion on the last day of Moby Dick.
But life doesn't work in semesters. If life is like one big semester, we're still in the first few weeks. So speak up. It might be a little uncomfortable at first, but then people will get used to it, and you'll feel a lot better about yourself. But don't get cocky, you won't always be right…and the best comment in class is the one that you don't spout off the top of your head, or the one that has nothing to do with the one before yours…it's the one that takes into consideration that which has already been said, and simply endeavors to add on small smattering of innovation.
It may seem a stretch, but this is rightful participation in a democracy. The voicing of opinion, and then the ability to listen, really listen, to another opinion, using it then to inform your own. The more we huddle in our parties on the left and right, cowardly waiting for them to speak for us, the less we support our great Trump, our sparkling star, our Democracy.
Now I'm at the part of the article-writing where I look over everything, and must do all that is in my power to keep my right hand from shooting to the delete button and holding it down forever. For every point I have made, I have a counter point, or an imagined snide critique from some of my more cynical friends, or a half-baked philosophy of why any and everything I say is futile anyhow. I'm at the point where I have to ask myself why write anything at all. But not in such a polite way. Gripping myself by my lapels, pulling myself up to my toes, and looking into my own eyes with burning ferocity, I snarl "WHY?"
Funny I ask…because this brings me to my final point. All of my self critique, my self loathing, my Eggersian self consciousness…it is The Fear. It is exactly that which I have warned against for the last thousand words. I am terrified to print this article, and to keep silent, I will have lost nothing. But if I do print the article, there lies something very important. That thing is The Possibility. The Possibility that I might speak something true. The Possibility that one person might read one sentence which would inspire her to write something else true. The Possibility that her piece will become a series of truths. The Possibility that those truths will one day be bound into an edition to be read by thousands who will then be inspired to write their own truths. And so on.
I speak because in the kaleidoscope of things I might get wrong, there is the possibility of one small truth, and that is enough. I speak because I once wrote a letter to the editors and demanded Democracy, and it seems only fair that I would hold up my end of the bargain.
As a final note, there are napkin sized snowflakes falling from the April sky.
|
FastCounter by bCentral |