Commentary
Issue Commentary Back Next

Commentary

Oberlin's apathy is selective

Possibly students will read about Director of Security candidates Keith James and Frank Wiley in this week's Oberlin Review. That's the only way they will learn about the qualifications of the two men because nearly all of the student body neglected to show up to the recent forums.

This behavior is surprising considering the protesting last semester about Security's treatment of minorities on campus. Protesting which was powerful enough to prompt Dean of Student Life and Services Charlene Cole-Newkirk to create a 12-step plan for revamping the department.

Where is all that power now? Are students assuming the new Director of Security will have their best interests in mind without asking him? This lack of interest in a position with a lot of potential power illustrates the oddly formed apathy hanging over Oberlin.

Some issues, such as Kwame Ture and drug rights, illicit strong and emotional outcries in which the problems of unequal treatment and prejudiced thought are addressed, discussed, and fought. Inequality comes in many more subtle forms, however, and those invisible predators can do more damage than their more obvious counterparts. Yet, students chose not to recognize their chance to again fight for equality on this campus by assuring they have learned about the candidates for Director of Security before one is chosen.

Oberlin apathy spikes the air when students are too busy for protesting and too caught up in their own lives to care. Not all students are susceptible to the intoxicating smell. Far too many are.

History will repeat itself if steps aren't taken to communicate students' needs and wants with the various administrative departments. Don't assume that administration reads minds.

We are fortunate to be at a school where injustice is brought to light and discussed, but we can't expect the world to change by itself.

- Review (Editorial Staff) Editorials in this box are the responsibility of the editor-in-chief, managing editor and commentary editors, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the staff of the Review.
Oberlin

Copyright © 1996, The Oberlin Review.
Volume 124, Number 20; April 12, 1996

Contact Review webmaster with suggestions or comments at ocreview@www.oberlin.edu.
Contact Review editorial staff at oreview@oberlin.edu.