In his Feb. 19 letter to the editor, Curtis Nash was right about one thing: There is a cloud of disdain and distrust hovering over this campus, but this cloud has been created by administrative ineptitude and indifference to student concerns. Moreover, students like Mr. Nash and the majority of our student senators have contributed to this undesirable atmosphere by their complacency and their willingness to participate in a system that turns the only voice that students have into a rubber stamp for the administration. If Mr. Nash is truly worried about the atmosphere on campus, he shouldn't blame The Post, Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) or other groups that have been working toward shared and transparent governance. Dedicated activists and a free press are all that stand in the way of an administration that would prefer to dictate to students rather than taking our input under serious consideration.
It should also be pointed out that Mr. Nash's assertion that activists have not been involved in a civil
professional approach to campus issues is false. SDS members were involved in the free speech committee responsible for advising the administration on the creation of new speech and assembly policies. SDS member Olivia Dawson served as a student senator until it became clear to her, as it has become clear to many students, that Student Senate is more interested in pageantry and conforming to administrative standards than it is in pursuing a meaningful role for students in university governance. The truth is that campus activists have tried civil dialogue. What separates the activists from complacent students like Mr. Nash is that the activists are willing to pick up a banner and march to Cutler Hall when it becomes clear that the administration is still unwilling to listen, while Mr. Nash and others endure an endless barrage of committee meetings, forums and dialogues that end in minimal gain for students. When Student Senate inevitably stands down in the face of administrative stubbornness, it is the activists who continue to stand up for student concerns. Mr. Nash should be thanking them, not attacking them.
Perhaps the only good advice that Mr. Nash offers is a more respectful relationship between student activists and the administration. Yet it must be pointed out that respect is a two-way street. It is difficult for students to respect administrators who cannot offer them any concrete changes that they will make to address student concerns. Moreover, Mr. Nash should try practicing what he preaches. There is nothing respectful about accusing others of being na+ 17
Archives
Nathan Nelson
200802227180midsize.jpeg
