Thoughts on the Issue at Hand
Well it sure has been a crazy 48 hours. That’s the biggest reason that I haven’t written one of these already. I wanted to take some time to let things filter out and crystallize a bit. Haste makes waste they say. That and throughout the whole process all I found myself wanting nothing more than a drink. Not the best mindset to be in when you have to weigh in on an issue such as this. But I believe I’m ready now to say what I think needs to be said and to outline and compare what will and should happen over the next two weeks.
Things have gone beyond sideways. As I read the press releases and subsequent articles that came out I felt as though I was slipping into another dimension. How could this be? I think is the question on most people’s minds; and rightly so. How is it that a democratically elected President whose personal crusade is to ‘the eradication of oppression’ (from his facebook) so whimsically cast aside democracy, process, trust, and, lets be honest, common sense? As a council member, I feel oppressed. So do many students judging by the expected attendance at tonight’s council meeting. In truth, it would appear that Blake and Tim (Blim) have actually increased the net oppression on our campus during their time in office. Their actions have eroded the AMS’s ability to engage in any form of discussion with the university administration, VANOC, the BC Government and the federal government making student voices weaker than they were before.
How do I know that this has happened? Because as a senator and student leader I interact with people in these areas on nearly a daily basis. If I was polite I would say that the reason for these burnt bridges was because of a lack of cohesive stance on some issues. If I was truthful I would say that, in the eyes of bodies higher and more important than us, we look like whiny, spoiled little brats, throwing a tantrum in the aisle of the grocery store until Mom gets us the candy that we want. Is that how student leaders are supposed to act?
So how exactly did we get here? The answer is longwinded so I’m going to try and summarize it as best I can. Note that this is only how I see things. I think that many people will agree with me.
What is happening now is the climax of a war that has been raging for quite some time in the backrooms of the AMS. There are two sides in this conflict: idealists and realists. Steve Janke wrote a fantastic article about idealists and realists and he explains it much better than me but I’ll try and sum it up (here: just the first couple paragraphs). It encapsulates our situation very well. Idealists are individuals who have a view of an ideal world and work tireless to achieve it. In their minds, the ends always justify the means. As long as the real world moves incrementally closer to their perceived ideal world then it is worth it. In their minds, trampling on democracy, civil disobedience, and just being batshit crazy can all be justified by the world that they are trying to build (which to them is the world we all want, some of us just don’t know it yet). This is exactly the defense that Blake and Tim have used to justify their claim to the UN: we are lobbying for lower tuition for UBC students. The UN complaint may bring us a planck length closer to lower tuition, so to them, it shall be done by any means necessary.
On the other side of this war are the realists. They don’t have a teleological view of the world. To them, the way the world works is a summation of causes and effects that have lead us to this point. An ideal world doesn’t exist, in fact many of them would probably say that there are moralities such as right and wrong and not universal and are subject to vantage point. There are costs and benefits to every decision. If the benefits to the group outweigh the costs then action should be taken. They don’t oppose tuition reduction in our case, they just don’t want to drop a nuclear bomb on valuable relationships to do it. The costs outweigh the benefits. From reading the comments on posts and blogs this week, I would say that most of the students at our university are realists.
It is important to note that realists or idealists are found all across the political spectrum. There are idealist conservatives as well as idealist liberals.
Over the past couple years and AMS executives the idealists have been winning the war. We can tell this because of how our system now. Is it any coincidence that Tristan Markle, notorious Knolly, former AMS executive is the partner complaintant on the UN claim (even though he isn’t a student and didn’t contribute a dime to the legal fees)? Is it any coincidence that Stefanie Ratjen, another Knolly and former AMS executive as well as an outspoken and radical critic of the 2010 Olympics, was recently given almost $20,000 by the Student Legal Fund Society to educate students about their rights around protesting at the Olympics?
The idealists hands are so far in the pockets of the AMS that it is basically second base (high five?). There strategy has been cunning and it has worked. Several groups and subsidiaries of the AMS, most notably the resource groups, have been hijacked by these idealists and are being used to actively pursue their own selfish political aims. Certainly the groups do provide important services to students through the Womyn’s Centre, the LGBT support, etc. But in the past years, there sinister side has begun to outweigh their benefits. Did you know that all students pay a small amount of money every year to pay for the Knoll. This rag is how the Knollies got their name and it is filled with hateful rhetoric, attacking all perspectives but their own. I’m sure you’ve all seen it at some point and I don’t need to go into the level of shit that is spewed out of that magazine. Besides, I didn’t bring my waders (fishing joke).
If students at large new about this, they would want it changed. I want it changed. But attempts to do so are criticized by the idealists as being driven by straight, white, christian, men who want to continue the oppression and colonization of indigenous groups through the disenfranchisement of minority…blah blah blah. I will have you know that being a white heterosexual male, traits over which I had no control often serve me badly in council as apparently my voice doesn’t count or accurately reflect students at this university. For more information on this see the minutes of the disability seat debate. It strikes me as humorously hypocritical that these idealists claim that my skin colour should disenfranchise my voice while trying to promote the voice of other disenfranchised groups. Actually that is really funny.
So what will be done to remedy the situation? In about 3 hours council will have an emergency meeting to call for the resignation of Blake Frederick and Tim Chu. They have become the puppets of this idealist movement, the strings being pulled by shadowy figures out of the view of students and councilors. How else can Blake turn around on his facebook page yesterday and claim that the he has received an outpouring of support from students regarding the issue (he has since taken this down, but a photo of it can be found here)? It is the same small group of radical idealists who give him the ideas to run with, pave the way for them to happen, have him do them, then congratulate him on them afterward.
I’m actually surprised that Tim or Blake won’t be at the meeting tonight (the BC NDP convention took priority I believe). They seem to enjoy being martyred for their agenda, like two Jesus Christs of social justice. If we brought a crucifix to the meeting they would probably be the ones driving in the nails.
No doubt we are angry at them, no doubt they have committed a crime against democracy and students at UBC, no doubt that something must be done to remedy the situation. My concern is that it won’t stop with the two traitors this week. The idealists pulling the strings are everywhere in the AMS and they will keep pulling the strings whether Tim and Blake resign or not. They will find more weak willed cowards to put forward as candidates in the next election and the war will begin anew.
As a result, the realists need to think very hard about how to proceed this week. If impeachment is brought forward a week from now I will vote for it, that’s what students seem to want. I hope though, that it doesn’t come forward. The costs of losing an impeachment vote are much greater than the benefits of winning it. If a discussion occurs in which Blake threatens legal action against the AMS or even specific councilors some of us will undoubtedly back down. If an impeachment vote is lost then we will have been viewed to endorse Blake and Tim, re-solidifying their delusions of support.
There are other ways of punishing Blake. Remove every possible power that he has. I firmly believe that Blake and Tim are ideologues. They truly believe in their perverted minds that they have the support of council and students. If we stop their ability to do anything then we separate ourselves from the executives. Telling the university and all the other damaged relationships that Blake or Tim have no ability to represent students or council will be enough to start on a path to recovery. We must maim them so badly that they become lame ducks until the next election in January.
The best way to win this war against the radical idealists isn’t to remove Blake and Tim. That will feel good and appeal to our desire for vengeance but it won’t fix the problem. I ask you then whether it is worth risking it. It may just add fuel to their fire. What really needs to happen is several years where real students run for positions. Students need to vote in the election. That is the real point of all this.
Hopefully this will be a catalyst to get an truly engaged and representative student society. That is the real lesson in all of this.
Let the circus begin.
Dec 1 – Updated tags, removed note at beginning, expanded SEO Pack
(5 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)
Loading ...
Great article Geoff – see you at the meeting.
Social comments and analytics for this post…
This post was mentioned on Twitter by Geoff Costeloe: My thoughts on the issue at hand – http://bit.ly/56vZgo...
I appreciate your perspective. Great Article.
Well said.
Thanks for posting this Geoff.
Great article Geoff. I wish there was a live webcast of the council meeting tonight – I think it would be a fun watch!
Hey Geoff,
Good post.
Cameron, of old SUS
[...] Geoff Costeloe, vice-chair of the UBC Vancouver Senate with a very good piece on idealists and realists. [...]
Great Post Geoff. Appreciate hearing your opinion on all of this.
You do know, Geoff, that by voting to leave CASA you helped erode the AMS’s relationship with the federal government.
Geoff,
It’s been a long time but I am really impressed with how involved and passionate you have been with UBC student politics. All the best, buddy.
Jesse,
I’m willing to accept the criticism for that. Given what we have seen in the last few days though, and per this article, the information provided to council and the reasons behind leaving may have been a bit more of an agenda than was thought at the time.
I do think that there were some serious flaws with CASA as well. For one, they are primarily focused on federal lobbying. While it is always good to get student representation in political offices of any level, the important decisions regarding education (and tuition/accessibility) almost exclusively stem from the provincial government. Being a national program, CASA’s primary obligations were to the national level of government. In my opinion I don’t know if the return per dollar spent at that level is worth it. Lobbying needs to primarily occur at the provincial level to see significant gains for students.
Case in point would be the BC student loan program which is, almost without question, the worst in the country. I have certainly heard from upper administrators that they are keen to work towards changes in the student loan system. They have difficulty in doing so when our student government has such a tarnished reputation with the province. In fact, they are probably scared to get in the same room as our student government executive and throw their reputation in with ours. Tim and Blake may indeed feel like they are standing up for accessibility and lower tuition but at the same time are giving up be able to affect change in our own province directly.
Proverbially, we are gaining an inch and giving up a mile. Idealists like Tim and Blake would probably say that this is a real inch for a potential mile.
Myself and realists would just say that an inch is an inch and a mile is a mile. Especially when the inch is probably more of a fantasy than the mile is.
Geoff! This was excellent… you’re a “real student”… Ever thought to run for Pres?
As a member of the student body at large, I would like to disagree with most of what you’ve stated here. You speak on the fact that actions should be based on whether they are warranted or not, etc. After reading your article, it seems that this is largely based on your opinion and much less based on fact. You accuse Blake and Tim of acting irrationally to gain followers, but at the same time, I think you could almost be accused of the same. Quickly writing up this rant on your blog, trying to make your case heard in whichever way you possibly can. Whether that involves demeaning other individuals or not. From an adult perspective I have always thought the best way to conflict resolution was through a matter of mature discussion not petty insults back and forth to one another (via internet, in this case!)
From the perspective of an educated student, your claims might have been slightly more substantiated had you taken 2 seconds to use a spelling or grammar check, although I strongly believe it would have taken more than that.
You say you think real students should run for these elections? Please, be my guest and define what a real student is to you. As far as I knew, Blake and Tim qualify as real students.
While you beat down Blake and Tim, you may want to take the time to defend one of your ‘realists’ recent actions. I am referring to those of Tom Dvorak. I don’t think the general student population is in support of trivialization of such events as the Holocaust.
Although, your frustrations may be real, you might want to further substantiate them before trying to make a case based on them. Next time, base your case on some facts and not just your outlandish emotions.
Geoff,
You have my respect for accepting criticism on that. I don’t think CASA is beyond reproach but it’s all that UBC students have on a federal level.
Provincially, I find the AMS is better at lobbying for itself than is the alternative (the CFS), which I’m still convinced that Blake and Tim would usher right past Blanca and on to campus if it had the chance. Thank goodness for the organization’s antiquated laws that require a referendum to adopt it.
Aside from the CASA vote I’m very impressed at the work and the commentary you’ve brought forth on behalf of students.
As for your other critic above, I’m surprised she’s so hard on you. One of the people she supports, Tim Chu, can barely string a coherent sentence together. Anything these guys bring up to defend themselves is a straw man that detracts from their corrupt actions in going behind council’s back.
Chelsea,
Thanks for your comment.
I did write the article in a bit of a rush so I’m sure that there might be a few spelling mistakes. I have run a spell checker on the article so I thought it was okay. It actually took less than your prescripted 2 seconds. Please point out to me where there are mistakes and I’ll be sure to fix them promptly. You’ll notice that the small italic note at the bottom of the post. That’s my way of trying to keep my article transparent so I’ll also be sure to include any changes in there.
I have never claimed for an instant that this article was not an opinion piece. In fact in the first few lines I actually state that this is my opinion but it will likely resonate with many councilors and students who interact with the AMS.
In regards to me writing this just to ‘gain followers’ I have a few comments. Certainly there is something a little selfish and egotistical about having your own blog and url (especially when it is named after yourself). The catchphrase in the header attests to as much. So whilst the purpose of a blog like this is to popularize my opinion, I don’t think that’s what you had in mind.
I would ask you then what the point of having more followers would be. I am not planning on running for any new positions during my time left here at UBC (except for maybe a committee chair on Wednesday but that’s small beans). I am not looking to start a cult or religion (although that be pretty cool…)
You are also correct that I haven’t defended Tom Dovorak’s statements. It isn’t my place to defend his statements nor to defend the actions of any other realist. He isn’t my realist as you suggest. As I stated in the article, realists and idealists come from all stripes and will certainly disagree on issues, we won’t want to defend each other all the time, we will want to attack each other.
Having said that, Tom (unlike Blake and Tim) was very forthcoming with an apology, e-mailing council before the meeting saying that he apologized and apologizing again at the meeting. There have been no more problems from him after the fact. If I’m gauging council correctly (an opinion again: watch out!) I would say that if Blake had apologized immediately for his action and maybe even shown up on Saturday council would be seeking slightly less blood. He hasn’t.
As for Blake and Tim being real students. Of course they are real. I can reach out and touch them. They even paid their student fees this year unlike their co-complainant Tristan Markle. Let me rephrase my word real then and replace is with ‘not crazy ideologues’.
Does that work better?
Great piece, Geoff. Please be aware that there are many students who appreciate your thoughts on these matter.
Oh man, December 2nd can’t come soon enough…!
Realists will never win ’cause they’re dishonest.
Reality is the original Rorschach, etc. etc.
A realist is merely a calcified idealist—or an idealist who is at best confused, at worst a straight-up liar. Pick one.
I’ve never met Blake or Tim, but the fact that they have all you straight folx up in arms is reason enough for me to believe they’re on the right track.
Here is the elephant in the room: why does any student believe in pay-as-you-go-tuition?
Answer: Most everyone is capable of doing a University degree; the limiting factor is money, especially during early childhood, as families without means will push their kids towards trades/etc. rather than gambling that joining the Convocation will pay off.
When UBC was founded, Liberal Arts Instruction was free—indeed, the University was to stand in relation to the High School as the High School stands to the Elementary school—anyone with capacity may freely progress through the system and come out the top a Gentleman—yea, even Women used to be “Artsmen.”
So, less empty bubble about “trust”, “democracy”, etc. The University has for many decades now ignored its purpose, which is to provide free Liberal Arts education to British Columbians, not to provide pay-as-you-go Courses for the sons and daughters of upper-middle-class Canadians.
And to top it all off, you use alcohol to relax. A creature stupid enough to enjoy alcohol mouthing off about democracy, trust, etc?
Go have some fizzy anaesthetic—it will take away the pain of having to deal with “idealists”, which appears here to be shorthand for “thinkers opposed to vicious herd animals.”
Richard,
Thanks for your comment. After reading it I think I might have to have a ‘fizzy anesthetic’ as my faith in humanity and common sense has been shaken again.
Its almost noon right?
I want to quote your post in my blog. It can?
And you et an account on Twitter?
[...] Geoff Costeloe, vice-chair of the UBC Vancouver Senate with a very good piece on idealists and realists. [...]
Leave your response!
How would Darwin vote? Geoff Costeloe from terrytalks on Vimeo.
Other Cool Stuff
Follow me on Twitter!
Previous Posts
This work by Geoff Costeloe is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 2.5 Canada License.
Most Commented
Most Viewed