Commentary On Campus 'Social Justice'

Some of this commentary may be a little out of context, my apologies. It was written in response to a fellow student's defence of a UofA SU Presidential candidate's proposal for increased activism on campus. 

First, with respect to the "white,male student" comment, I have to disagree with you. While it was quite the statement, I don't think there is folly is trying to make the population of a University representative of the greater population. And that goes both ways, there needs to be a greater focus on getting females into engineering, for example.

As far as curtailing free speech, I would concede that the Admin's response to Derek Warwick was overly aggressive.

With respect to APIRG, I feel that herein lays the problem and solution to social justice/activism on campus. To consider them anything but partisan is to ignore the reality of the campaigns they sponsor. It has gotten to the point where applying for funding for anything not aligned with their obvious view is a waste of time. Their actions have done much to sour the population's view of institutionalized activism on campus. Mine included. Overhauling their mandate and ensuring some sort of non-partisan participation would be far better than creating another institution capable of reaching the same, sad state of affairs.

Whenever you create something that is, de facto, representative of the population of a school, you run the risk of entirely disenfranchising anyone remotely interested in contributing. I agree, social justice is an essential and admirable goal of any institution of higher learning. However, why vest the power within one position?  Save referendums on every initiative, I feel that the risk of having a body representative of the students pursue a goal many students are opposed to.

And I totally agree, apathy is a huge problem on campus. It is pathetic. Perhaps, a better goal for Adi, and others, to pursue is some meaningful way of increasing student participation in special interest groups. As far as I know, some other Canadian universities ( UWO, as far as I know) mandate students be involved in clubs. Is that not a better route to pursue? You will have students being involved in initiatives they, ideally, care about.

I did not imply that he is using it to pursue selfish/less goals, Adi is a great guy. However, this possible position creates the potential to be abused. I don't disagree that there exists a 'good' in pursuing social justice. I commend the end achieved by activism, in this case, however, I oppose the means. If we want the University to represent us, why put in place a position that allows someone, potentially, to imply "We, the Students of the U of A, support goal X". I am uncomfortable with having my values told to me,albeit implicitly. I concede that if this office is focussed on things generally considered 'good', such as ending the crisis is Darfur or reducing corruption in developing countries, I have no problems. That said, if this position is used to advance contentious issues, such as the opposition to a honorary degree for an individual who may be "considered to be a criminal against humanity", I can't help but oppose that.

I have my values and beliefs. I do things that deem to be in the interest of advancing what I consider to be 'good'. Encourage others to do the same through some sort of policy pursuing student involvement, not through creating a potential pedestal for a vocal majority/minority.