Causes are important. Any cause. Pick one, stay devoted, and few could ever argue that you didn’t care about something. Want to save the rain forest? Good for you! Get out there and picket away. Hate the president? Join the club and contribute to his never-ending downward spiral. Want to protest outside Heath Ledger’s funeral with the Westboro Baptist Church, go ahead – even though those a-holes are the worst humans in America. My point is that it is important to be passionate about something, which is why I could never knock OSPIRG for trying to make people care, for saving the environment and for all the other fantastic services they do for students, which now includes stealing students’ money.
Before anyone gets fanatical about OSPIRG – whichever side of the ball that may be – let me say that the individuals’ priorities at OSPIRG are not in question; contributing to make the world a better place is not a crime. But taking student fees, which students have no control over paying, and allocating them to pay for the salary of someone who is unseen physically or intellectually by students is downright treacherous.
I admittedly do not follow many sociopolitical causes, and you know what, I am totally OK with that. But what was most recently revealed on Tuesday’s Emerald front-page (“The OSPIRG you don’t see,” ODE, Jan. 22) was sickening: A liberal foundation whose purpose on campuses was to inspire hope for a better future world is just as backstabbing and manipulative as the big business opponents that OSPIRG existentially challenges. All of a sudden, the obnoxious OSPIRG volunteers on campus are no longer just pests, whom I vehemently avoid with an iPod or cell phone, but now they are also bureaucratic minions fighting to get our money.
Look, I see this whole OSPIRG situation in three ways. First, how perfectly American is it for people, students, or anyone else for that matter to answer the call to saving the world with the almighty dollar? Instead of actually doing anything, we – as lazy American consumers – think that a $10 contribution is going to change anything. How can people care any less if these “donations” are really a euphemism for: “Hey, this sounds like a good cause, but not good enough for me to devote my time, energy, life, heart and mind to. So here’s some green.” My point, OSPIRG, is that if people really cared, they would be out doing something instead of throwing cash in your direction. You have become the panhandlers of the campus organization community; we give you money in the hopes you will go away and leave our conscience clean.
Secondly, personal love, courtesy and conviction toward saving the environment is a fabulous cause. I fully support anyone who works to save the environment, and I try to do so without forking over any cash to sketchy foundations. So first off, I applaud all tree-huggers, hippies, naturalists, hikers, gardeners, bleeding heart liberals, organics, feminists, freedom fighters, eco-terrorists (except those in “28 Days Later”), etc. I defend personal choice toward making the world a better place, and those that genuinely want to save the planet will find a way to do so without hocking more money over to businesses, foundations and organizations who seemingly have a very comfortable role in ripping off students and other contributors. People who want to help will help with their hearts and hands, not with their wallets.
And finally, let me say this: Is saving the environment really an issue here? I don’t think it is. Look, I love this world because generally speaking it is pretty dang sweet. But save the environment? Humans have been on this world for like 200,000 years according to Wikipedia, and in that time we have hit at least a couple of ice-ages, right? How much of the environment is really in our control? I understand global warming and humans’ waste contribution is speeding up the process of a destroyed ecosystem, but is there really anything we can do? If a meteor hits like it did with the dinosaurs, do we really have the Armageddon-like technology to stop it? If another Pompei explosion covers the globe in ash, what can we do to stop it? I really think hybrid cars aren’t going to be able to stop that. George Carlin said it best – and I’m paraphrasing here – when he said if Mother Nature doesn’t want us around anymore, she will just dump us. And the earth is four billion years old, meaning humans have been inhabitants on this planet for roughly .005 percent of its existence. So which are we more truly concerned about: the welfare of our planet or the welfare of its inhabitants?
Unless we develop a sweet spaceship like in “Titan A.E.” – a totally underrated animated sci-fi masterpiece – then you can pretty much guarantee humans will not defeat the environment; the environment will defeat humans. History shows that we will be wiped out of reality regardless of what we do or do not do to save the environment. I mean, cow feces are a leading cause for global warming, so why don’t we just kill all the cows in the world? It is probably cheaper than manufacturing new technologically and environmentally sound vehicles, and places like Taco Bell and McDonald’s won’t suffer because they don’t actually use real beef.
So if saving the environment is a top priority for you, then congrats. But know that throwing some change in OSPIRG’s direction won’t do anything to actually save the planet, change the world, or stop political oppression. It just greases up the bureaucratic machine a little more. Save yourself first, and when you are comfortable with your own salvation, find a good a cause.
[email protected]