Houston could de-polarize campus

By Justin Levi

Recently, UCLA experienced what could mark the beginning of a
watershed year in its campus politics ““ the election of
Elizabeth Houston as president of the Undergraduate Students
Association Council. Even those who staunchly opposed her must
acknowledge her stunning victory.

But why was this election so important? Clearly, it is not
merely the fact that Houston subscribes to different principles
than those that have governed USAC for the past five years,
especially considering the eight-seat majority still enjoyed by
Praxis on the council. Something more fundamental is at work.

It is no secret that the most prevalent theme in campus politics
over the past several years has been race ““ who are the
oppressed, who are the oppressors, who deserves more
representation, etc. While many outspoken figures from various
viewpoints have loudly presented their arguments, no basic
understandings or agreements have resulted. UCLA remains, to this
day, extremely polarized. It is absolutely essential that those on
opposite ends of the political spectrum be able to see each
others’ points of view.

Enter Elizabeth Houston. During her campaign, she ran on a
platform of equal representation, and more importantly, equitable
funding, so that no student group would be left out of the
political debate. This is a huge step in the right direction, as it
promises to spawn a true dialogue regarding the racial atmosphere
at this school. This dialogue cannot exist if certain groups are
given extraordinarily disproportionate advantages with regard to
voicing their political views.

Last year, of 22 student groups that received funding, four of
those groups received 44 percent of the total money available. As
anyone can see, actions like these will only lead to silence, a gag
order. If you’ve studied American history, you will remember
the gag rule in Congress regarding slavery prior to the Civil War.
This history should teach us that silence simply impedes progress
and should be avoided at all costs.

Furthermore, a meaningful dialogue will also free USAC to
perform the duties for which it was intended ““ the creation
and maintenance of student services. By giving the council a
virtual monopoly on the meaningful political debate on this campus,
this issue has become its own monopoly, preventing USAC from
becoming a truly representative entity that serves the student body
as a whole. The members of the council have been so concerned with
the advocacy of a certain political ideology that they have lost
perspective on the issues they should be most concerned about.

For the past five years, we have experienced a polarization of
political thought at UCLA ““ the likes of which have not been
seen since the days of the Vietnam War protests. And we have one
thing to blame for that ““ silence. The path to true racial
harmony lies not in silence and segregation, but in dialogue and
cooperation. We will only make obsolete the racial tensions that
have divided this campus and this country if we are willing to face
the realities that accompany those tensions. If we ask the tough
questions and provide honest answers, it will be a step in the
right direction.

It is apparent that Houston has a firm understanding of this
reality. That is why we should embrace her term as USAC president,
or at the very least, refuse to blindly shun it before it has even
begun. With an especially open-minded group of Praxis
representatives, we may finally be approaching a solution to the
racial problems that plague our school. Good luck, Elizabeth, and
may next year be as bright and positive as your campaign platform
has promised.