Once I started to think about this certain atmosphere of remoteness and of inactivity-of not seeing or hearing either the SGO or products of the SGO (besides elections)-I, too, started to feel concern and even anger. But when I thought about possible reasons why this might be, I realized something very simple, yet often overlooked: to expect the student government to remain unchanged and unaffected in a time of such unprecedented confusion and uncertainty is both unfair and illogical.
The events that happened in America-combined with those on campus and in all the lives that comprise it, be they faculty, staff or student-on Sept. 11 have fundamentally altered our existences. Nothing is the same anymore; things once familiar and intuitive are now questionable, unsure. In the wake of recent terrorist attacks, a fog of uncertainty has engulfed our nation, even defying the walls of our little Amherst bubble.
No one really knows what to say, what to do, how to react, when to react or even what to think. Those who "know" what they are doing are fooling themselves. The claims of those who speak without deeply questioning and contemplating are both dangerous and unfounded. As they fight the cause they try to further, they don't realize the effects of what they're saying and doing. I find SGO's lack of presence on campus to be unfortunate; strong leadership at such a time of insecurity would be more reassuring. Yet I also find it unavoidable. Our elected officials are only human, just as we are.
I do not mean to discredit those that take issue with the lack of initiative that the SGO has appeared to have this semester. But at the same time, I feel it is a somewhat unfair criticism. In reality, much work and preparation goes on behind closed doors, largely unbeknownst to both students and senators. Even if inactivity can be fairly called a characteristic of the SGO, both sides in the debate have valid points. Although it is the responsibility of student senators to bring issues before the committee, there is nothing stopping the E-Board from taking charge and setting the agenda when none is presented to it. Undoubtedly, if meetings lack agendas, then meetings should not be held.
But for some reason, I think that such shortcomings are not so much due to particular E-Board members, but are more a consequence of the larger crisis we find ourselves in. When we are all still coping, mourning, grieving, coming to terms with what has happened; when we are still coming to understand what we have done, can do, and should do in response; when professors, mentors, parents and politicians alike cannot yet make sense of the new world we've been thrust into; when nothing is the same, even though it looks the same and feels like it should be the same; when over 5,000 deaths in a single day make us question who we are and how we got here-issues such as parking and free phones seem somewhat trivial, at least to me.
We have an odd tendency here on campus, and in the nation as a whole, to expect our leaders to be superhuman. We expect and require them to be things that they might fool us into believing, but in reality cannot fulfill. We expect them to know what to do, what to say, how to do it and how to say it, when everyone else is still looking around, trying to figure out just what happened.
We expect our leaders to always have the answer. They don't because they can't always. And because they don't, or if they have an answer we don't agree with, we chastise and criticize them. What if the SGO had taken a more vocal and active role on campus recently? What if the SGO had stood defiantly and uniformly against the flag burners? Perhaps by remaining silent, the SGO did the best thing it could have: trying not to increase the growing divisiveness that has recently plagued our campus.
I do not want to be misunderstood. I do not stand in defense of laissez-faire E-Boards or inaction. I, too, hope that the recent inquiry will resound within the chambers of the Red Room and within the minds of not only the SGO but of all students on campus. I hope that the SGO will finally step up and bring a reassuring voice to a student body in desperate need of one. I hope it will serve as an active presence on campus-one committed to perseverance, unity (even if one of harmonious discord) and leadership.
But I refuse to blame the SGO entirely for its past inaction. Change can begin from the bottom as easily as from the top. When Amherst is ready and students expect more from the SGO, the SGO will respond. And, if I know the E-Board members as well as I hope I do, they will respond nobly, diplomatically and successfully.
We are all vulnerable, insecure, lost-students, staff, faculty, mothers, fathers-more so now than ever. My final message is not one of blame. It is one of understanding. And change. Let us unite and defy the disruption of our lives caused by the terrorist attacks, attacks maliciously intended and meticulously planned. Let us not find solace in the Amherst tendency towards apathy and isolation. Let us find it in an active community.