By Travis Freeland and Kyaelim Kwon
Dear editor,
I had to read Jan. 21’s “Student are apathetic and that’s OK” several times before I was confident that it wasn’t a hoax. While I suspect that this article, like a lot of “right wing” writing, is intentionally provocative and controversial,
I will give it the benefit of a response. I believe the arrogance displayed here necessitates it. I know there are many others that share my feelings. To begin, I’d like to dispel any notion that the opinions expressed in this piece can reasonably be associated with a rational, politically “right” mindset. That a legitimate conservative agenda would involve the celebration of apathy is laughable.
Activism was a founding principle of modern conservative politics. I’d like to see the author try to tell the innumerable conservative citizens’ groups and committees that work tirelessly to promote their ideas that “there are no illusions about how pointless protesting is.” Instead, the ideas and arguments presented in this article smack of the aimless, aggressive nonsense we already get enough of courtesy of Fox News and Glenn Beck.
When I’m looking for my fix of dismissive arrogance and underlying hostility, I’ll tune into Kevin O’Leary, thank you very much. The columnist writes about the way we’ve mythologized the “radical past” of SFU, and to some extent, I would agree. What about the past isn’t mythologized? Mythology is a powerful force on any university campus.
Certainly, our “radical past” is viewed in a romantic light by some, but the fact remains that the period in question was a truly defining time for our young institution. Like it or not, the messy formative years of SFU were instrumental in shaping its current configuration. The “apathetic campus” Onderwater celebrates is itself a notorious myth, one that many people here are working to reject.
“The Montreal protests seem more like something out of Egypt or the Middle East, rather than something that could actually happen at a university campus in Canada.” I will side-step the issue of a vaguely racist undertone in this statement in the interest of saving space. Onderwater claims that students no longer need to be radical, since we have it so good now. Tuition and cost of living are soaring, but hey, student loans are easy to get and part-time jobs abound. No need to complain!
This is the threadbare argument used by individuals who don’t face significant boundaries in attaining the education and experience they need to continue their comfortable, middle-class lifestyle. It is rare to hear it coming from single parents, refugees, the differently abled, victims of violence, or people representing racial and gender minorities for whom the process of applying, paying for, and excelling in post-secondary education (a process that is seemingly effortless for so many others) can be challenging and even prohibitive. I know, what a bleeding heart, you must be saying.
Onderwater attributes what he perceives to be a rightward shift at SFU to the eminence of the business program: “SFU is all about training future capitalists in the ways of making lots of money.” I know there are business students out there who are shuddering at the thought of being characterized as a bunch of selfcentered, money-hungry automatons, patiently putting in their four years on the degree factory conveyor belt so they can get out there and start earning at other peoples’ expense.
Onderwater then launches an all-out attack on the “Rotunda Four,” claiming that groups like SFPIRG and the Women’s Centre are relics of a bygone age. This is where my gears really start to grind. Personally, I find it completely disheartening to hear someone malign the core group of people on campus who are actually interested in something other than department socials, intramural sports, and networking wine parties.
The continued work of groups in the Rotunda Four, and elsewhere, as well as our very active labour unions, shows that the spirit of activism is very much alive at SFU. There are people here who continue to strive for a safer, more accessible, affordable, and tolerant place to learn. This kind of unprovoked, unsubstantiated attack, primarily directed at women and racial and gender minorities is what poisons politics and turns many conservative and otherwise-oriented people away from productive involvement.
This article provides us with a rather grim portrayal of conservatism indeed. Well, what do you think, my friends on the right side of the spectrum: is it fair to say that you’re all lazy, business-oriented, and thriving in an atmosphere where no one gives a shit about anything? Tell me this is just an unfortunate and unproductive characterization.
Tell me you don’t really believe in blindly, naively attacking political involvement. Tell me you don’t instinctively resent the funding of student groups because of some misguided attempt at replicating the “anti-big government” debate here, at a government-subsidized institution. We also happen to be paying for The Peak, which this week, unfortunately, served as a platform for dispiriting, ineffectual rhetoric. “Write Wing” indeed.
Sincerely,
Travis Freeland
Graduate Student
Department of Archaeology
————————————————————————-
Dear editor,
We are young and small, but we do an exceptional job at “engaging the world”. Our students travel the world, studying, volunteering, or working, as ambassadors of SFU and of Canada. Our professors, among the best in their respective fields, come from every corner of the globe, from Norway to Portugal. Our Human Security Report is cited by academics and policy advisors across the globe. Together, with the exceptional staff, we have built an interdisciplinary research and teaching centre of international studies — one of the few in the world.
We, the School of International Studies, are perhaps doing the best job in fulfilling the university’s mandate of “engaging the world.” Indeed, in today’s globalized economy, employers seek for candidates with global perspective and experience.
It explains partly why the School’s programs are highly demanded by the students: currently there are only 207 declared majors admitted with 258 additional students that wish to enter the programs.
This is why it is hard for us to understand the lack of the support from the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences. Since 2006, the number of students has increased over 2000%. Yet, the School has fewer faculty members in 2013 than in 2006. Concretely, it means that less classes are offered; that our students are burdened with more loans in prolonging their studies; and that the faculty have less time to engage with undergraduate and graduate students, or to publish cutting-edge research that gets cited widely and worldly by their colleagues.
To continue engaging the world, by attracting the brightest of minds and sharing the international perspective, the School of International Studies needs the university’s support to hire one more tenure-track assistant professor. For us, one more professor would mean four more classes offered per year for 120 more students!
We will be holding a Townhall meeting on Feb. 6 in AQ3181 at 6 p.m. International Studies students: please come out to air your concerns about the program. All SFU students: please join us to support our cause. One more faculty, to engage the world, together.
Sincerely,
Kyaelim Kwon
Departmental Committee Representative
International Studies Student Association
