Show your support for SFPIRG!

In response to “What SFPIRG Does” Opinion piece in The Peak, March 8th.

This piece was submitted, but not chosen to be published by the Peak

—– Original Message —–
From: “Maria Persdotter”
To: opinions@the-peak.ca
Sent: Friday, 12 March, 2010
Subject: Re: What SFPIRG does, Open Letter to Graham Templeton (for publication)

Don’t throw rocks when you live in a glass house. The old saying basically summarises my critique of your article “What SFPIRG does” , published in the March 8 issue of The Peak.

Let me explain.

The fact that your readers “still don’t know what the SFPIRG does”, above all reflects the unwillingness of The Peak collective to give a balanced account of the organization and its activities. Your article is an example of this.

You claim to provide a breakdown of what the SFPIRG does. However, the only thing your article helped me clarify was the simple fact that you don’t like the organization. Fair enough. I respect your opinion, and as someone who frequently utilizes the centre, I am open to having an non-judgemental conversation about this.

What I find difficult to accept, however, is the tone of your article. It is belittling, derrogatory, and reflects extremely poorly on your abilities as a researcher and writer.

The fact that you choose to call SFPIRG an “incestuous” group is offensive. I really see no need to use such aggressive language. SFPIRG has a large number of volunteers and supporters. Sure, some of us are friends, but what unites the different students at SFPIRG is, above all, a passion for social change.

Also, if there is one group on campus that could be accused of being cliquey, it would be the Peak collective. I know a number of people who have submitted articles that go against the general grain of The Peak, including recent submissions in support of SFPIRG. However, none of these have been published. I find it hard to believe that all of these articles were so poorly written that they didn’t qualify for publication.

Also, the latest issue of the newspaper features images of you and your roommates – Associate News Editor David Proctor and Humour and Web Editor John Morrisson III – swimming in the Cornerstone Fountain… (which, by the way, is something I generally support, haha).

I also think that your comment about how SFPIRG fails to live up to its committments as a non-partisan group is quite problematic. As an organization dedicated to social justice and environmental sustainability, it is hardly surprising that some of its memebers are critical of the current conservative government… as well as of the Liberal Party… and the NDP… and the Green Party.

For me, SFPIRG represents a venue for critical assessment of existing party policies, and a space to discuss and organize around issues that are ignored or inadequatly addressed in partisan politics.

Even if there is any similarity between SFPIRG’s views and the Green Party’s political agenda, it should pose no great concern to the students of SFU. The values of environmental responsibility are shared by many members of Canadian society. Furthermore, the values of human rights, dignity and justice are part of the rhetoric of many political parties.

(What is more concerning to me are the similarities between your facial hair and that of your fellow staff members and rooommates. It’s funny, I wasn’t aware that we could make beards mean whatever we wanted them to mean.)

Coming back to the issue at hand, is it a problem when these similarities between student groups and political parties do arise? I’m curious what you and The Peak collective honestly think about this fundamental question. If that is your view, logic would assume that you probably don’t think students should continue to fund The Peak.

While I appreciate the inclusion of Ian Bushfields latest piece, I have noticed a general trend within our student newspaper to favour more right-wing viewpoints in the articles published. In the last couple of months, The Peak has featured a number of articles that align closely with the Conservative Party’s views and values (see for example J.J. McCullough, Your guide to being Conservative @ SFU; Conor Meade -Rules for Radicals: The further destruction of Progressivism). Does that mean that those of us who don’t agree with this right wing rhetoric should demand to revoke the portion of our student fees that goes towards The Peak?

If it wasn’t for the fact that I value an open, and respectful atmosphere for political debate, I would definitley ask to have my money back! However, just like I support the SFPIRG, I recognize the value in ideological diversity.

As a final piece of advice, I try to avoid throwing rocks in glass houses. You should probably do the same.

Regards,

Maria Persdotter
2nd year student in Dialogue and Geography

ps. Which hats are you referring to when you speak of SFPIRG, PETA and their hats? I’m just curious…