Hello UC Race, Goodbye Sanity

Can you hear it? Off in the distance? That faint "tap-tap-tap" sound coming from Mather and Currier Houses? Listen carefully late at night, children, and maybe you'll pick it out: that's the sound of several dozen Harvard students masturbating furiously. Or, as we call it in public, the UC election!

I've been putting off writing this blogpost for a while. As you may remember, last year's UC race turned Dem Apples into a flaming pile of crap for like two weeks on end, and I hesitate to go there again; but something inside me just wants to contribute. (I'm assuming that "something" is my desperate need for attention, which everyone involved in Harvard politics surely understands.) So, with a helpful reminder that the stakes here are so low we can't possibly do any real damage to anything, let's take a look at the candidates:

MATT SUNDQUIST & RANDALL SARAFA. Everything that has been said about these guys has been said. Sundquist is a genuinely nice and caring guy who will work his heart out for the student body, etc etc etc, and Randall Sarafa is... well, he's there. Sundquist and Sarafa also have the whole establishment (including the Dems, and the Crimson as of this morning) as well as a dedicated campaign team behind them, who are working very hard to dispel the notion that Sundquist is OBVIOUSLY GOING TO WIN; this widely-held idea poses a problem for the Sundquist ticket, since voter turnout would suffer considerably if everyone thought they were OBVIOUSLY GOING TO WIN. (I myself am certainly not trying to spread the scurrilous rumor that Sundquist is OBVIOUSLY GOING TO WIN. No sir.) Still, if they can accomplish that task, Sundquist and Whats-His-Name, Li'l Sundquist, will run an effective and intelligent UC with all the quality that we expect from blah blah blah blah blah.

ROY WILLEY & NICK SNOW. Immediately disqualified because they used "Baba O'Riley" by the Who in their campaign video. I'm serious. I cannot vote for these guys for the same reason I do not watch CSI or any of its spinoff programs: because what our media has done to The Who is just inexcusable. They have taken one of the giants of classic rock, a band that deserves to be considered on the same level as Zeppelin and the Stones, and reduced them to a goddamn commercial cliche. Come on! That hair-raising yell at the end of Won't Get Fooled Again -- that's supposed to be a amazing cathartic release after seven minutes of Pete Townshend noodling on the synthesizer, and instead CSI: Miami turned it into a slogan on the same level as the "Oh yeah!" from the execrable Entourage theme. You know what? Let's move on.

FRANCES MARTEL & LEO ZIMMERMANN. Frances has a long history of writing hilariously whacked-out shit about Communists for RedIvy (I wish you guys would post more! We need material!), and both she and her reluctant anti-running-mate Leo have a demonstrable record of being awesome. As evidence I submit these two recent quotes -- Frances, on GOP-Open tonight:

The only thing I'm "reeling in disappointment" about is that humanity has to deal with your existence, and that because you go to this school there's a chance your tripe will be propagated to the masses. Oh, and I've never "casually lobbed" an insult at you that didn't come from the bottom of my heart, Mr. Lacaria.

And Leo in their Crimson profile:

When Zimmermann is asked if he would be excited if he won, his face reveals no emotion.

“In a sense,” he responds, staring down at his plate.

When urged to elaborate, he adds: “I’d be neurologically stimulated in the sense that it would make a response.”

This is clearly the kind of leadership our student body needs. Thus, I wholeheartedly endorse the Martel-Zimmermann ticket, and I urge you not to vote for them -- because these people are way, way too cool to send into the hellhole that is our UC. Frances and Leo must be saved from themselves. (And I'm pretty sure their campaign is just a well-choregraphed joke anyway, though you never know around here.) So friends, I aks you to follow my lead, and DON'T VOTE FOR THE MARTEL-ZIMMERMANN NON-JUGGERNAUT -- if we can win over enough hearts and minds in the next four days, maybe after all these years we'll finally be able to accomplish nothing on this campus!

...So that's where I stand. But to turn to a more serious and analytical perspective: this race is consistent with a number of things I've observed about the Harvard student body and its (often perverse) social structures. These patterns have shown up in both this race and last year's; I was too intelligent new to pay much attention to the 2005 race that gave us Haddock-Riley, but I wouldn't be surprised if that one was much the same. Here's what I think (over the jump):

Read more »

Why I give a shit about this anyways

I also want to take the chance before I take a dip and end it¹ to come out with something unequivocally positive about this UC imbroglio. The true reason why I give a shit about this is because I honestly, genuinely believe that Matt Sundquist is the exact example of people we need at the head of this campus and that he is, all around, one of the most valuable assets the UC has. Let John Nance Garner say that the Vice President's role "isn't worth a pitcher of warm piss." I maintain that having Sundquist as our Vice President would be an enormous boon to our campus mentioned far too little in this campaign season.

Yes, this post is going to have a lot of ass-kissery. But in contrast to the rampant ass-kickery that's been going on, it can only be a good thing.

Read more »

Why the Dems Made the Right UC Endorsement

While I have immense respect for Hadfield, Zaidi, Anene, Gillis, and Hwang as people (and I really do mean that), this campaign is about ideas, and all of their tickets revolve around reform.

Reforming and restructuring the UC has been non-stop over the past 3 or so years and what do we have to show for it? The students are still dissatisfied with their student government. The solution is not more reform or restructuring, instead it's using the current format (a streamlined effective advocacy organization) to make real substantive progress. It is not the council itself that should be the focus, this is really about how you use it.

As Ryan said last night at the debate, "Every day the council spends talking about itself, is one less day the council works for the good of the students." With all of the serious issues facing our campus, we simply don't have the time to go through a tedious reform process or "constitutional convention" again.

Ryan Petersen is in large part responsible for Lamont 24/5 and the Lamont Cafe. He has been a champion of co-ed housing and transgender issues, and mental health issues. He has also led the fight on the "Hidden Costs" campaign which includes Amadi's CCAP but addresses other issues facing the financially disadvantaged at Harvard. You hear time and time again from student leaders and administrators on this campus, stories about how Ryan took the initiative to reach out to them in addressing a problem. The fact that he has a good relationship with University Hall is not evidence that he is part of the problem, but rather evidence that he has the power to be the solution.

Matt, for his part, is as amazing as Ryan. In his tenure on the UC, he accomplished universal keycard access (upperclassmen swiping into Yard dorms) and free condom boxes for the freshman dorms. Anyone who knows Matt personally has no doubt in their mind why Ryan chose Matt as his running mate, and knows that Matt, like Ryan, is one of those rare public servants that truly cares about each and every person he talks to.

They have the experience, and the common sense to get important things done quickly and efficiently, and I strongly urge you to vote for Ryan Petersen and Matt Sundquist in the upcoming UC elections. To learn more about their specific plans for change, please visit www.itsaboutstudents.com