Search

ARCHIVES
CONTACT US
WORLD NEWS

Labor issues need solutions

To the editor,

I would have enjoyed Tuesday's SAS editorial even more if there was a real course of action prescribed, rather than paragraphs of "aren't you proud to be an American?" hyperbole that should have been accompanied by an MP3 of swelling orchestral music.

Lauding the SAS for their right of civil disobedience isn't the answer (and has anybody been disagreeing with it?): facts and figures are needed. Why is the WRC much better than the FLA? The lack of corporate heads?

How much influence does the WRC actually have in comparison to the FLA?

Equal? Unequal? How much money do the WRC participants kick in, where does it go and what does it do? Will it really make a difference? Can more be accomplished with the WRC than the FLA? (Even the Gabrielson article's POV doesn't answer those questions.)

The sit-in last year at Chapel Hill was a true sit-in because no one left at all: people remained there. Conversely, the sit-in at the UA was conducted like camp: people coming and going at will for class, ordering pizzas, singing songs and the endless beating of The Drum. Now, people have to do what they need to keep sane, but the Chapel Hill demonstration made the UA's protest seem campy in every sense of the word, salvaged only because of an agreement the SAS reached with President Likins, an agreement that by all outward appearances, is on the SAS wants unfairly to hold in abeyance before the target date is reached. If that perception is wrong, why has none one decisively countered it?

Can't somebody at the Wildcat even try to answer these questions?

Yisrael Ari Espinoza

Near eastern studies junior