Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (March 1, 1999)
©regotv®£meralir - NEWSROOM; (541> 3^6-5511 E-MAIL otfc<?oregoa uoregonaiu OS-LINE EDmoV www liiihanenidconi EDITOR IN CHIEF Ryan Frank EDITORIAL EDITORS KameronCole Stefanie Knowlton Campus politics: Where is the lovePt Opinion Kameron Cole Gknmm .'ii»vna Emeroki Student activism is back — with a vengeance A friend (ailed me up the other night positively livid. It seems that he had just engaged in a very heated, very public discussion ig nited by, of all things, a Garden burger. After debating the merits ana iomesoi sec ondary boycotts and migrant labor, he | dialed me up to vent his indigna 0 tion. As I listened to him rant for 10 minutes or so, I had || only one thought. This is so great. At last, casual politi cal debate raised from 1 the dead. Those of you who have been keeping track of cam pus politics forthe past couple of years might understand my exuberance. Whereas the University once stood out as one of the most politi cally active campuses in the coun try, recent years have seen student activism fail. Outside of the occa sional flap, like last year’s OSPERG vote, grievances about how many candidate fliers can be hung on a bulletin board, and ongoing anti Nike sentiment, there hasn’t been much going on. This year, however, has been a doozy. Whether it’s the Athletic De partment trying to screw students out of their seats or chicken-grams left on doorsteps, students are once again interested enough to get in volved. But then my friend continued his story and made me less happy. He told me that the argument ended when the other party accused him of not caring about human rights, a remark he found deeply offensive. This wasn't the first time I'd heard a story about a debate that de generated into an insult session. In fact, I've seen it happen first hand. And the more I think about it, the more it seems that all this pro-activ ity has a disturbing dark side. Campus politics is no longer about shiny happy environmental ism. Quite frankly, things are get ting kind of ugly. People have forgotten (or per haps never learned) the most basic tenant of rational political dis course: People are allowed to dis agree with you. No matter what side of what issue you champion, have yourself a long, hard think before you fling an insult or acx:usation. Make your argument strong enough that you won't have to resort to labeling people as racist, radical or anything else. If we’re going to have campus politics, then we need to have some measure of civility. Without at least that much, we might as well scrap student government and all out standing campus issues and con tent ourselves with debating the cancellation of Melrose Place (an idea not entirely unappealing). Without rational discourse, politics at any level becomes little more than a forum for grandstanding and intellectual wanking. If you can’t make your point without resulting to name calling or some other type of cheap shot, go check out a book or read a pamphlet until you feel secure enough in your beliefs to have a civil discus sion. Otherwise, you will only be hurting whatever case you were try ing to make in the first place. In the grand plan, I doubt this col umn will do much to change the way people conduct themselves. It will probably cause some people to insult me or the Emerald. I’m OK with this. I'm OK partly because I’m ever so close to graduating and catching the first thing smoking out of this town, and partly because I actually get a bit of a thrill from the possibili ty that at any moment, someone could spring forth from the bushes, call me a nasty name, and start pelt ing me with Gardenburgers. To paraphrase the old admoni tion about playing nice, if you can’t say anything logical or intelligent, don’t say anything at all because it makes you and vour cause of choice look stupid. That being said, you may direct your ire to kcole@gladstone. uoregon.edu. Kameron Cole is an editorial editor for the ErneraU Hervieivsdo not necessarily reprvsetu those of the netespaper Letters to die Editor Article appreciated I am so pleased to hear that finally someone has spoken out about the dangers of dioxin. This very com mon toxin is all around us because of massive amounts of pollutants in the air that we breathe and the water that we drink due to industrial com panies. In my own readings and research, it is so apparent that recent reproduc tive problems lincluding the breast cancer link so presdently mentioned in your article) are due to the many dioxin and dioxin-related materials in our environment. As a Willamette River salmon fisherman. I have been very worried about dioxin levels in the fish that I catch and eat. Often times. I decided not to fish based on concerns about the amounts of diox ins in the fish I catch. Because of these long-lasting toxins, anv fish I would eat would contaminate me with high levels of dioxins. I would like to sincerely congratu late both the student environmental activists and the Emerald on this fine article. Jim Tung Inorganic chemistry Transfers unfair I usually tend to agree with the opinions set forth in Rob Moseley's sports columns I must mention, however, my disappointment with his latest column about the stan dards involved with the NCAA's rules regarding transferring (ODE. Feb 18). The student-athlete must realize that, as sad as it may be. col lege athletics is basically a business and coaching changes are part of it. If you w ere to allow the student ath lete at "State U." to transfer to "East Coast College ' if his old college coach switches jobs, what do you tell the student athlete at E.CC. whose spot on the roster has been removed? If vou were to allow a stu dent-athlete to transfer at will to be with a coach, how different is that than free agency? We often see play ers in the NFL move to be with a coach they are comfortable with. The mandatory redshirt rule was made to combat this, among other things. I agree that it would be tough to play and stay motivated for a coach you are not used to. Once you reach this level, however, vou must suck it up and be a man. Quitting is the easy way out. Tony Fox Business administration No joke I am not amused. The denizens of Suite 4 are suc ceeding in undermining the little trust people had in their "voice." Once again, the elections process is being tampered with: once again groups try to sneak back onto ram pus and into student's pocket books: and once again the students are supposed to lie bark and take it. Apathy is not an excuse. Every group on campus should remember that they are really sup ported by only 10 to 15 percent of the greater student body. Simply be cause the great majority of the stu dent body doesn't care enough to voice their opinions at the ballot box doesn't make a bad thing good. Look at exactly who is out there. You have protesters putting dead chickens on the doorsteps of Consti tution Court officers. You have an executive that sees nothing wrong in tinkering with an already unsta ble elections process, and they cry "foul'' when they don't get their way. Perhaps the people involved with this issue should place blame where it started and let the Constitution Court do its job. BronINl Itiskin Salem CORRECTION The entertainment brief titled “Folk singer to perform on University campus" [ODE, Feb. 26] should have said “The UO Cultural Forum will present folk singer Joules Graves on Tuesday, March 2." The Emerald regrets the error. In the Feb. 24 ODE arttete ti tled, “Anti-neon campaign holds public torum," it should have said dioxin is any of several carcinogenic or ter atogenic hydrocarbons that occur as impurities in petro leum-derived herbicides. In the recycling process chlo rine attacks the hydrocarbons In the paper and inks creating dioxin. Tire Emerald regrets the error.
