Solution or Soapbox

When I was at University, (during the radical years) there was a particular protocol we found abhorrent and drafted an Ultimatum for the administration. There were those who felt we had a better chance of getting our demands met if we toned down the language a bit and presented it as a "Proposal". Working on the "Proposal", as everyone was busy running around and getting attention, I unofficially gave an influential member of the Administration a 'draft' for his opinion. He told me that it was a good idea, and he could almost assure me that it would be passed. This would mean that the injustice would be rectified without confrontation, riot, argument, and all other forms of excitement. I told the drafting committee what I'd done, and one of them, who had a power complex, decided to inform the "leadership" of the organisation that 'she' had drafted a proposal and unofficially gotten agreement to it, so that all "she" needed to do was to hand the document to the Administrator and the problem would be solved.

This caused an explosion of anger in that, as it would presently become clear, the "leadership" did not want a peaceful settlement. The entire point of the exercise, the "secret agenda" was to cause dissension. Was to create a radical organisation, a powerful leadership, get media attention, make the Administration look dictatorial and polarise the campus. As I was not in the frontline, (having been usurped by one of the usual power mad attention whores) I could resume my seat in the last row. I watched events unfold as if it were a play, seeing how the characters interacted. I realised it wasn't the Abhorrent Protocol that was the issue, it was getting attention that was the purpose. That students were being seriously effected by the protocol,that our proposal would have removed it, was of minor note to the attention whores. Recently, in an article I wrote about Gay Marriage, a responder seemed incapable of grasping the substance.

He focused on making vituperative posts, which neither furthered the "cause" nor betrayed a logical basis for dissent, while claiming not to have personal involvement in the issue. This kind of behaviour is indicative of one who more desirous of attention then solution. Just as the word "proposal" was more palatable to the Administration then "Ultimatum", and just as toning down the wording would have caused it to be accepted, there were those who didn't want to resolve the issue but use it as a soapbox. When one is involved in political/social issues it is vital never to forget the goal. Never forget that in fighting injustice the quicker it ends, is the victory. Those who pretend it is "principle" or demand specific wording are not interested in solution, they merely want a soapbox.