Letters to the Editor
Campus Times
December 4, 1998
Dear Editor,
Last week's article ["Apathy sickens
dedicated voter," Nov. 20] raised some interesting points but also
made assumptions that should be reexamined. Dissatisfaction with the "political
system" and the reasons behind the electorate's apathy may become clearer
after examining those assumptions.
The author states he is "disgruntled with both our political parties,"
and that the political system is the way it is because the American electorate
is "uneducated about major issues." This second assessment may
hold some truth, but let's look at the issue of general dissatisfaction
with the two parties. First, we must realize that there aren't two major
political parties. Realistically, the U.S. has one party-that of big money,
big business, privilege; call them what you like, but the two major parties
don't serve the people's interests and haven't for some time. In matters
important to the average consumer (uh, I mean citizen) the two major parties
differ very little. We need only look at the increased corporate welfare
on one side and social spending cuts on the other to see whose interests
are being keenly looked after and whose are being disregarded, if not outright
attacked. The dissatisfaction stems from buying into the two-party myth.
While it may be true that the electorate is "uneducated about major
issues," this is because people just don't consider themselves as true
participants in the system. If a society is democratic to the extent that
people have a meaningful opportunity to take part in the formation of public
policy, then the U.S. is no democracy. When post-Cold War military spending
increased after Americans favored decreasing that budget, it's obvious we're
either not heard or we don't know how to articulate our desires. With depolitization
and marginalization comes apathy. When people are unable to participate
in any meaningful fashion in the political arena and are excluded from the
relevant and important decision-making processes, they become disenfranchised
and indifferent. Many think their vote doesn't matter, and they're quite
right; we can vote however we want, but power and privilege still call all
the shots. This doesn't really mean we should abandon voting, but if we're
serious about democracy we must dismantle the systems that allow for people
to be marginalized and we've got to find meaningful ways to participate
ourselves. If they don't ask about the issues we care about, then we must
organize and tell them.
Tyson Dusch
Senior
Dear Editor,
Jennifer, you are a funny girl; I'll have to admit I have sometimes
laughed at how passionate you become on your position to various issues.
Although I don't always agree with all you write, I admire the strength
of your opinions and how thoroughly you express them.
I agree with you that people need to be more passionate about what they
believe, it is important to not be lukewarm or worse indifferent. I am writing
in regards to the "Voters set double
standards" article [Nov. 13]. I will have to commend you for being
the only voter, other than myself, who laughed at this proposition. I was
at first a bit upset with this proposition because I was wondering who was
wasting my time and taxes even putting that joke-of-a-Proposition 6 on the
ballot but your article shed even more light on this odd subject. Horses
are in my opinion not to be eaten but who am I to make a law against it.
You are right that it is very contradicting and sets strange standards for
what animals may be consumed and which may not.
I love horses as much as the next person but I think there are other
issues that need voter's attention over a horses right to live a long life.
Maybe we should be focusing attention on the quality of life that some people
lack, let's not even get started on the subject of abuse or homelessness
and poverty because last time I checked I don't think California had a zero
percent poverty, unemployment and homelessness rate. That's just a thought.
I believe whoever wrote that prop needs a priority check and can call either
of us if they have enough money to propose news laws for every minute problem
they encounter.
Sarah Neri
Sophomore
via Internet
