| Deg/Mac supporters remaining silent after poor campaign platform | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
| Written by Branding Iron |
| Wednesday, 20 April 2011 21:05 |
|
I’m writing in response to the conversation generated by Zach Spadt’s April 18th article. Spadt volleyed a criticism of ASUW as “pretend government”. Commenting on his article via the online edition of the Branding Iron, former ASUW Chief of Staff Liz Rader lobbed back a somewhat reasonable (albeit rife with errors) defense of ASUW. Rader argued that those involved in ASUW are “doing the best they can”. If we accept this as true, it begs the question: why did we elect them, and why have we seemingly chosen more of the same this time? Rader asserted that those with complaints should “step up”, an argument that has been made since democracy was barely a gleam in its father’s eye: if you’re unhappy with your government, run for office and fix it. The problem with the “why don’t you run” argument in this squabble is that uh…someone did. A student with a concrete background in leadership and service (like shoes-on-the-ground action, not the masturbatory resume-fillers that we have somehow come to justify) ran for ASUW President. And lost. My problem is not with Deg/Mac or even with ASUW (because God knows, I have a real life with responsibilities that go beyond wringing my hands about the student council). No, my problem is with the student body’s apparent lack of ability to diverge from the narrow perspective and outcomes produced by the misconception that “leadership conferences” are anything other than an expensive and boring way to get drunk in a hotel room. Not to be weird, but I think it’s preferable for ASUW to be helmed by someone with, for example, AmeriCorps experience, rather than someone who thinks ‘relatability’ is a word and can call themself down-to-earth with a straight face and a Denali parked outside. If this whole exercise/spectacle really is meant to educate students about, and prepare them for the “real” government, then instead of making up words and printing pretty posters, candidates need to propose specific, plausible policy goals that have a shot of being implemented and effective. Megan and Ty want to act like real leaders? Holding people in positions of power accountable (like Unangst/Brink proposed to do regarding UW administration’s failure to live up to their promises) is LEADERSHIP. Insisting that the University fight for students who have become victims (as in formulating solutions to mend the closure of the sexual assault center) is LEADERSHIP. Attempting to sustain a program that hundreds of University students regularly use (SafeRide!) is RELATABLE. Condescending to constituents about how you’re “…gonna work really hard to keep the student fee low for you guys” has nothing to do with either, and if Degenfelder believes she has a snowball’s chance in hell of that campaign promise coming to fruition without program cuts, she is not only the new President of ASUW, but also the Chief Executive of Fantasy Land. If the voters can’t see that, they get what they deserve. More important than the responsibilities that lie with the candidates, the voters have an obligation to protect themselves and their dollars, by educating themselves and using that critical thinking thingy the education system seems so keen on. Buying into baseless rhetorical devices rather than conceivably workable strategies gets all of us nowhere, and as a fellow fee paying student, I have a right to be upset that 1,246 people drank the Kool-Aid. I’m calling you out, Deg/Mac supporters. Students who voted them into office, where are you hiding? We haven’t yet heard a word from you in this circus, so I want to know: why? What in the world convinced you of their competence? How did you, aware of the problems in ASUW, and stagnant governments everywhere, watch the prosaic, vague, Eminem-soundtracked Deg/Mac campaign video and think “Ah ha! Now THIS is our solution!” Why did you think Degenfelder and McNamee’s inability to explain sustainability in relation to their goals, rousing promise to “change stuff on campus”, and willingness to fold, spindle and mutilate elections guidelines meant that they warranted your vote? Step up. Get involved. I’m all ears. Nora K. Gayle UW Student |




Comments