This is a liberal arts school, and the student government reflects this status quo. The last election represented approximately 25 percent of the student body, a fair sample by any
pollster’s standards.
Let’s be honest, students are busy. Some take online classes or attend classes at satellite campuses, so engaging as many people as have been engaged is actually understandable, if not preferable.
It would be ideal if students engaged at any critical capacity, but with the rising cost of tuition and ever-increasing layers of bureaucracy, can anyone really fault the student government?
With many student unions, internships, interests and specialty clubs, the number of options is not at fault. Is it any surprise that there is low turnout in elections and participation in groups, when organizations like OSPIRG are so vehemently attacked any time they even think of holding a meeting or talking to fellow students? There is now a culture of anti-activism, a disdain of participation.
One cannot simultaneously disdain participation at one level and complain about a lack of participation at another. I would prefer that all students use and take advantage of the amazing opportunities in the ASUO and all its programs, since this is a model of options found later in life.
By the same token, if you really, fundamentally, oppose involvement and political systems all together, then take a hint from Plato: “The price of apathy towards public affairs is to be ruled by evil men.”
So either buy a gun and fight in a militia against the evil in the United States created by apathy or start getting involved and take the world around you seriously.
Cimmeron Gillespie
University junior