Union chaos
As the Union makes our front page again (what would we do without it?), now is probably not a good time to show any degree of apathy towards the place. But, to be honest, how many people really care enough about it to read all the column inches it seems to be taking up this term? To how many of its members is it little more than a cheap, albeit sterile, pub? We may as well be reading about the marital strife of the couple that own the local. Actually, that would probably be more interesting. And the impending threat of violence at the Irving debate on Thursday will only make it more like a pub than ever.
Of course, it would be nice if the Union was more than this, if it actually did fulfill just a few of its promises in providing top quality speakers and stimulating debate. But, ultimately, what is the point in complaining about it? They're never going to listen. Nothing will change. Because, as I highlighted last week, the people in control appear to care as much for the institution they represent and its reputation as they do for each other. The constant prevarications over whether to cancel the Irving debate seem to be more about saving face than anything to do with freedom of speech or public safety. As long as Amy Harland completes her term as President unscathed, her term will be a success, no matter what the implications for those she is supposed to represent.
Just as many of us see the Union as a glorified pub, so those at the helm apparently view it as a natural progression from the public school system, providing them with all the vital lessons to get on in life but no real education. I'm sure they could learn a lot more about real life down the pub. And probably have a lot more fun.
17th May 2001