EDITORIAL Cluster requirement should be dropped With any luck, by this time tomorrow, getting a degree from the University will be Just a little bit less of a headache. This afternoon at 3:30 p.m. in Room 150 Columbia, the University Assembly will discuss (and hopefully approve) a proposal from the University Senate to eliminate clus ters from the list of requirements for graduation. In order for a student to fulfill a cluster under the cur rent system, that student has to take all three courses in a year-long sequence, or, in some cases, throe interrelat ed but non-sequential courses in a particular subject. The requirements are outlined, albeit rather cryptically, in each issue of tho schedule of classes. The rationale behind the cluster system is this: In order to gain a satisfactory understanding of a given field, a stu dent must receive at least a year's worth of instruction in that field. This is undoubtedly true in many cases, and it is freouently. if not always, to a student’s advantage to complete the entire sequence. Even if this is the caso, however, thoro are serious doubts about a system that forces students to fulfill such a require ment. Whatever advantages that may have been gained by the cluster requirement have been nullified by the con fusion and inequities that tho system has created. When the cluster requirement was implemented in 1981, the number of sequences that qualified as clus ters was considerably loss. That system, while admittedly rather inflexible, was at least easier to understand. In the years that have followed, numerous clusters nave been added, and now nearly every department on cam pus offers at least one. while some of the larger depart ments support half a dozen or more. Most clusters consist of three courses of three credit hours each, totaling nine credits, although there are some clusters with only two courses of four credits each, total ing eight, and others that consist of three courses of four credits each, totaling 12. Students who have completed a cluster at another school sometimes are unable to apply that cluster hero, for reasons that few can satisfactorily explain, much less justify. All this adds up to a nightmare of confusion for stu dents and advisers, and misunderstandings have in some cases led to delayed graduations. Each term, about 50 stu dents petition for exemption from the policy. Arguments in favor of continuing the cluster system all hinge on one fundamental belief: without the system, stu dents will not voluntarily choose to take year-long sequences, and the quality of their education will be com promised. This misconception doesn't give the students very much credit. Most students have a few favorite subjects and will tako several courses in those subjects without boing required to. if the cluster requirement was ever worthwhile, it has outlived its usefulness. The University Assembly has the opportunity to put the last nails in the cluster require ment's coffin. Let’s hope it has enough sense to pick up the hammer. Oregon Doily Emerald Managing Editor Editorial EdMor Graphic* Editor Fraalanca Editor Tha Oregon Oar, l mataid >* published daily Monday through Fnday during lha school year and Tuesday and Thur»d»y during lha »ummer by the Oregon Daily Emeiald Publishing Co Inc . a! me University ol Oregon. Eugene. Oregon The Emerald operate* independently ol the University erth olhce* at Suae 300 ol the Erb Memorial Union and amy Mason. Mchaal Miietle Van V O'Bryan II. Rachael Trull. Kelsey Weke« Angn* Wmdhwm Classified Becky Merchant Manager Victor Mr. ,* Srm Tye Tec* Distribution: Eirandon Anderson. John long. Graham Simpson Buslnasa: Kathy Carbone. Supervisor Judy Connolly Production. Dee McCobb. Production Coordinator Shawna Anew Greg Desmond. Taia Qauhney. Br»J Joss Jennter Roland Natl Thangvigrt. Clayton Vee Newsroom ...JM-5511 Display Advertising-M6-17I2 Business Otftca.34P-5SI2 Classified Advertising f'Jere feeling poor. Tired of your IwdcJ/ed masses, Wen yeirnwq to be free Of yoor wretJied refuse IJsewing to our sliore ^ * implied»traffic signal Bes ide the golden £» r. So MucM Poft PoCTTSy As Public Povicy — OPINION Economics balkanizing force in U.S. Marii s Mki.and fm> is spreading through out the world It's burn X X mg in India, in Russia, in the former Yugoslavia, in Ger many and in South Africa And now it has spread to Cana da as well. At last, nationalism has las onnt a forc e to reckon with on the North American continent. After Canada's parliamentary elections last week, the second largest party in Canada is more than "Her Majesty's loyal Oppo sition." Bloc Quebucois isn't only opposed to the government; it is, in fact, opposed to the very idea of Canada. The second-largest party in Canada wants to destroy the country. Imagine, if you will, a situation in which the minority party in Congress, the Republicans, were against the United States of America. Imagine if Hob Dole went on television and said. ''1 don't give a damn about health care, abortion, foreign policy or gays in the military. I couldn't care less about the size of our national debt and the increasing crime rate in our inner cities Hut as for the U.S., I'm definitely against it.” The last time the United States experienced a situation such as that was during the Civil War. It took about five years, morn than a million casualties, and an esti mated $15 billion in property damage to get over it. Those who survived it promised themselves that the United States would nev er again experience a division so deep and so destructive. And Americans taught their children to pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States and to "... one nation under God, indi visible, with liberty and justice for all." For more than a century, the United States has been a haven in a world tom apart by racism, nationalism and separatism. While nations with fewer inhab itants than Oregon have been ripped apart, the United States, with more than 260 million inhabitants, has remained uni fied and indivisible. Why is the United States so different from other countries? Part of the answer is found in the ingredients of the glue that keeps this country together. Most countries are cultural entities; the lJnited States is a political entity. Germany stays together txM ause Germans speak the same language, eat the same food and dress in the same clothes. Amer icans, on the other hand, stay together because they slum* ideas They believe in democracy, lib erty-, justice and civil rights Admittedly . these an- buzzwords that could be construed to sig nify anything and may tie more impressive than substantive Hut it doesn't change the fact that, ultimately, there's still a broad consensus about the values upon which this country was founded Meanwhile, the rest of tin world continues to think that nations should lie founded upon cultural identity. If some people in the nation don't conform to this cultural identity, there must be something wrong with them; therefore, the reasoning goes, they should Ire eliminated. In Germany, neo-Nazis are killing immigrants, and in the for mer Yugoslavia, various govern ments are practicing "ethnic cleansing'' to create an ethnical ly monolithic state. Of course, this kind of reasoning knows no end: There will never be a mono lithic state because individuals will always be different. In the United Status, hitherto spared from the nationalism and separatism destroying nations throughout the world. Americans look at the ethnic conflicts with shock and disbelief. To many Americans, the fighting between Bosnians and Serbs is no more than a big-scale version of the fighting between kindergarten kids who can't stand each other because they're wearing different overalls. But the problems that gave rise to the term "balkanization" are closer to home than many Amer icans want to acknowledge. With nationalism on our doorsteps after the Canadian election, some people have begun to question whether the fabric of our society is as strong as we may have believed. The fart is, the United States is already a divided nation. Not politically, ethnically or reli giously But economically. Decades after economists split Americans into the "haves” and tint "have- nots," this grim eco nomic reality persists. In the past 21) years, the rich Americans got richer, the middle class shrunk considerably and the poor retained their portion of the aggregate income. According to the Bureau of Census, the richest 20 percent now receive 47 per cent of the aggregate income, as opposed to 43 percent in 1970. And the gap continues to widen. latst year, a Washington. DC., study documented an increase in child poverty in 33 states during the 1980s. Karlier this year, a Tufts University study concluded that child poverty in the United States will soar to a record 28 percent by 2010. The poor ar») the "other Amer icans." They live on the streets, commit crimes, use drugs and join gangs. They can't read, don't go to college, don't work and don't have health insurance, enhances are they’ll end their lives with a syringe in their forearms or a bullet in their heads. That is. if the legal system doesn't save their lives by locking them up for good. The “other Americans" art) not prominent in our culture. Y'ou won't find a sitcom about their lives on television. And because Turn to OPINION. Page 3