Letters
continued from page 2
opportunity to say “no.” As one
of the few voting student mem
bers of the University Assembly,
I will vote for this resolution.
Levi Strom
senior
sociology/political science
SUVs are bourgeois
oppression machines
The problem with the owners
of massive SUVs is not just that
they are consciously driving a
vehicle that takes up multiple
parking spots, blocks other dri
ver’s views, requires an ob
scene amount of gas to go a
short distance and are so big
they limit the driver’s view of
small children, pedestrians and
bikers, putting them in a life
threatening position.
The problem is that these
owners are often the elitist upper
class who can afford a vehicle
that protects only them during a
collision with another vehicle.
These ego-stroking megalomani
acs seem to think that their life
is worth more than the lesser
well-off, middle- or lower-class
family who can only afford a
small Honda Civic to get around.
Well, you owners of SUVs may
not feel guilty about taking up an
extra parking spot, but you will
when your oversized, too-tall
bumper plows through the unre
inforced upper half of that small
Civic, which was meant only to
take blows from a standard, low
er-placed bumper, and you seri
ously harm or kill the non-elite
occupants inside.
Andrew Whitmarsh
senior
English
Pilliod, Senate rejected student Iraq ballot
Guest commentary
The Commentary section (ODE,
Feb. 26) displayed an illustration of
the University Assembly lifting its
nose to the students, along with
words stating that students’ views
would not be heard on the Iraq reso
lution this Friday because the Uni
versity faculty didn’t care to hear
from the students. This assertion is
patently false. Students have not
been given the opportunity to vote
before the Assembly meeting only
because their own representatives
in the ASUO Senate and Executive
refused to offer the students a bal
lot on the issue. I know this because
I, along with Levi Strom (the only
student senator who cared enough
to try), met with ASUO President
Rachel Pilliod and ASUO Elections
Coordinator Andrea Hall in January
to discuss ways for getting a ballot
to the students in a timely manner
before mid-March.
At the meeting, I was told by Pilliod
and Hall that it would not be possible
to get a ballot to the students before
April, due to all of the red tape in
volved in putting a ballot out. This
sounds to me like code for, “Yeah, you
can try to get a ballot to the students if
you want, but you’re not going to get
any real help from the ASUO Student
Senate or president.” I assert that this
was the implied message because
both the president and the senate had
the power to offer the students a ballot
on the Iraq Resolution, via a fast track
process not available to a regular stu
dent like myself. And both Hall and
Pilliod were aware of these fast track
options. But your ASUO president
and your Student Senate declined to
use their power to let the students’
voices be heard on the Iraq Resolu
tion.
So there you are. You, the Associat
ed Students of the University of Ore
gon, have not been given the opportu
nity to vote directly on the Iraq
resolution, not because the University
faculty didn’t want to hear from you
but because your own elected repre
sentatives couldn’t be bothered to of
fer you a ballot.
The best remedy left to you at this
point would be to let your 48 student
senators know how you feel about this
issue, so that they might represent you
properly when they vote at the Assem
bly Meeting this Friday (assuming that
they’ll even bother to show up). You
can visit your elected representatives
at the ASUO office in the EMU. And re
member when you go that everyone
working in that office is working for
you!
Paul Griffes is a senior geography major.
Faculty should send message: Boycott Assembly
Guest commentary
The University faculty, a thousand
or more Ph.Ds, meets today to “leg
islate” against war. Their aggregrate
wisdom will not amount to much
more than the modest wisdom of any
single one of them, or of the janitors
who clean the place afterward. But
all of us have a right and a duty to ex
press our political opinions. No dis
pute there.
It is dubious, however, that an as
sembly of professors, as such, has
any business collectively expressing
a view about foreign affairs, or even
domestic policy. Doing so also cre
ates a dangerous precedent of claim
ing urgent need for faculty resolu
tions that defend the integrity of
American democracy and the well
being of the people.
We academics have no higher
moral quality or deeper human wis
dom, none beyond what can be
-trln <•
round at any church potluck. When
it comes to relevant personal experi
ence, in international diplomacy or
military strategy, we’re also not spe
cial. Even great knowledge does not
alone determine what is right. Hitler
knew more about German history
than does any of us.
The author of the resolution uses
the same absolutist, apocalyptic
rhetoric that people of his persua
sion decry in Bush-Republican
Washington: “The university must
stand opposed to an unconstitutional
war of aggression, which will destroy
its very soul. If we do not, who will?”
The answer is, look around you,
professor, and not just during your
meeting. Freedom of expression
and the integrity of higher educa
tion are already being vigorously as
serted by just about anyone and
everyone, from the thugs of anar
chism and the extreme left (God
save us!), to moderate and conser
vative politicians. Indeed, the latter,
rather than a hall full of professors,
are the more effective counter
weight to executive excess, since
the dogmatic left has made it clear
that the president can never win
their support and therefore has
nothing to lose by ignoring them.
Academics, like all citizens,
should energetically exercise their
right and responsibility to express
their political opinions, but as indi
vidual citizens or in groups that ex
ist for the express purpose of politi
cal activism. It undermines
democracy and the legitimacy of
academe to co-opt, as the Nazis did,
bodies that were created for other,
specifically defined purposes,
whether they are faculty assem
blies, garden clubs, scouting organi
zations or sports teams.
To my academic colleagues who
believe that a faculty assembly has
no business legislating about war and
peace, I suggest: There are probably
more of you than Professor Frank
Stahl thinks. Some of you, including
some with bitter experience in other
societies, may support the war.
Maybe you think, as I do, that the ac
ademic left poses as much of a threat
to free expression on our campuses
as Professor Stahl claims the “pres
ent federal administration” poses
from outside them.
But you have no prospect of ad
vancing your views in a close-mind
ed assembly. Voting, even against the
resolution, legitimizes the “legisla
tion.” So boycott. Walk out before
the voting begins. If you thwart a
quorum, that sends one message. If
not, and those who are left pass their
resolution, the lopsided total sends
another, sadder message that the
public will understand: History re
peats itself — first as tragedy, in
sham elections in Iraq — and then,
in Eugene, as farce.
William B. Fischer teaches German
at Portland State University and serves
on the PSU Faculty Senate.
Please come
to the University Assembly Meeting
to discuss and vote
on ◦ resolution against the invasion of Iraq.
Today, Friday, Feb. 28
3:00 p.m, doors open at 2:30
Student Recreation Center, 1320 E. 15th Avenue
All University of Oregon Officers of Instruction and Administration and Librarians are voting
members of the Assembly. We also encourage students and others concerned about this vital
issue to attend.
Concerned Faculty for Peace and Justice