Editorial: Wrongful protests

Last Tuesday, 30-plus student protesters stormed a Duke Student Government legislative meeting and accused the organization of inefficiency and ignoring student concerns about the war in Iraq. The protesters criticized DSG for voting down a resolution condemning a unilateral military effort and for not devoting a large enough portion of previous meetings to discussion on the topic. While the protesters' right to express their views should be respected, their methods were undemocratic, and many of their criticisms were baseless and unwarranted.

Protesters claimed that a take-over was necessary because DSG failed to take action on behalf of students who oppose the war. Protester Jessica Rutter, a junior, referred specifically to a resolution that opposed unilateral action in Iraq, and was voted down by the Legislature. The fact that a resolution was drafted, introduced and debated signals that DSG did give students opposed to the war an opportunity to voice their views in an open, democratic forum. DSG's majority decision not to pass the resolution is not a sign of inefficiency, but proof that the organization recognizes that formal stances on the war lie outside the boundaries of its jurisdiction.

Protesters also berated DSG for not spending enough time debating the resolution. They claimed that the 30 minutes DSG spent discussing the topic was insufficient and supported their argument by citing a four-hour discussion of wartime issues by student legislators at the University of Texas. However, what the protesters fail to recognize is that it is not DSG's job to devote large blocks of their agenda to non-University issues. The Legislature correctly acted to limit the amount of time spent debating the war and moved on to debating the University-related issues they were elected to address.

The resolution and the concerns of those opposed to the war were given sufficient, democratic consideration by DSG. It is irresponsible of protestors to stage a take-over of a legislative meeting because democratic methods of expression did not allow their viewpoints to prevail. If the goal of the protestors is indeed to educate members of the Duke community on wartime issues and the conditions in Iraq, interrupting DSG meetings is not the way to start. More interactive, informative forms of protest, including legitimate teach-ins, flyering campaigns and organized speeches would serve to inform the student body, and those opposed to the war should consider using these methods, rather than alienating student leaders and preventing DSG from conducting its stated business.