Down in front

If you’ve already read the front page then you know that all hell broke loose on Monday at the Martin Luther King Jr. Day high school basketball tournament, which was held at Cintas Center. If you have not read that, it is appreciated that you pay this much attention to the Op-Ed page, but we recommend you go back before proceeding.

Basically what happened is that members of the crowd would not sit down during the game and fights broke out because of this. There was also a rush of fans onto the court during a performance by Sammie, an artist performing in-between games.

Withrow High School basketball coach Walt McBride is quoted saying, “What it comes down to is, they just need more security for an event like this. They need to pay whatever it takes to have more security.”

Well, the Newswire disagrees. What it really comes down to is the fact that the fans who refused to take their seats need to learn control. Basketball games, speakers and major concerts are held at Cintas on a regular basis, not to mention the same tournament last year. The security at Cintas is lacking in nothing, except for apparently riot gear which they need to control a high school crowd.

There is no reason that a crowd needs to riot at a basketball tournament. This isn’t Serbia. No one is throwing flares during a game. The crowd has to learn control. It isn’t the Cintas security’s responsibility to baby a crowd or coerce them into some docile submission.

What does this say about today’s society? Well, for one it says that fans of local high schools feel the need to bring brass knuckles into a basketball tournament on Martin Luther King Jr. Day, which to the Newswire doesn’t say anything good. Making Cintas security your scapegoat is a cheap way to pass off responsibility. The true fault lies with the fans that can’t control themselves.

Rowdiness isn’t uncommon in sports. In fact, it is just the opposite and almost unique to sports as well. The Newswire staff doesn’t go out and burn things on Dana Avenue after a good issue. This is partly because, of course, every issue is amazing and we would run out of things to burn. But it is also due to sports celebrations’ distinctively disruptive nature.

When Ohio State University beat Michigan this year, everyone went crazy but there were still only a few arrests made, and they were for lighting things on fire, not for trying to pummel Michigan fans with brass knuckles. The same is true for most sports riots. Fans from the University of Maryland and West Virginia University light couches on fire to celebrate a big win. At Auburn University, the students toiletpaper parts of their campus after a football win.

Yet, there is a common theme found in these celebratory acts: they manifest themselves in the destruction of property, not the destruction of someone’s face. So again this begs the question: why was Tuesday’s crowd so violent, especially considering that they weren’t even celebrating, they were just fighting. We’re not condoning destruction, but breaking things is better than hurting people.

The Newswire thinks people like Walt McBride need to stop passing blame, and need to start putting responsibility where it actually is, namely that a lack of discipline and control on the part of the crowd.

TOP OF PAGE

Our core and the student imagination

Patrick Stevenson
Asst. Op-Ed Editor

As I sat at my computer over the holiday break, frantically refreshing the “My Grades” page on the MyXU Portal in the hopes of learning my academic fate, it occurred to me how preposterous it is that my astronomy class has an equal impact on my GPA as any of the classes for my major.

This is not a revolutionary sentiment; mostly everyone has complained about this at one point or another. Unfortunately, most students just denounce the current core structure, rather than actually proposing a viable alternative to the current status quo (though, this is the exact strategy the Democrats used to win the midterm elections).

In an effort to encourage more students to advocate the reform of the core, I sketched out what alterations I would make to the system. My actual suggestions are less important than the intent with which I offer them.

I will hardly be shocked if my suggested reforms are completely ignored by the Xavier administration (I do not know what qualifies one to construct core curriculum, but I am almost certainly unqualified to do so). Rather, my hope is that if enough students are encouraged to proactively advocate for reform, changes will happen.

So here is how I would reform the Xavier core curriculum:

The science requirement would be dropped from nine credits to six credits. My hypothesis: there is no rational explanation as to why non-science majors must take nine credits of science.

The science courses offered to non-majors should offer students practical information that can be used in their daily lives.

Instead of drilling students on concepts like cellular structure and wavelengths, which have limited practical application, science classes should focus more heavily on teaching students proper nutrition (there is a nutrition class offered, but I still feel it should be emphasized more), disease prevention and first aid. Study after study shows how obese Americans are, so why not try to combat that in the college classroom?

Math courses for non-majors should also be geared toward providing students with information that can be used in real life, like balancing a checkbook, investing money wisely and dealing with credit cards. Credit card companies tirelessly pimp their cards to college students. It would be nice for Xavier to offer students some help with understanding the ramifications of credit cards.

As much as it pains me to say it, the films being produced today are better than the books being written (sorry Dan Brown, but anything involving high ranking Vatican officials leaping from helicopters isn’t joining the pantheon of great literature).

As such, Xavier should offer classes that help students to better understand the nuances of film, much in the same way that literature classes help students understand the intricacies of books. As an alternative to Literature and the Moral Imagination, why not offer Film and the Moral Imagination?

Most college students, especially non-English majors, are more interested in film than they are in books, so why not help students become educated moviegoers?
Too often, it seems, Xavier shies away from offering courses that would interest students because they don’t fall in the realm of traditional academic subjects. For example, the Xavier administration failed to use the hype surrounding “The Da Vinci Code” to help educate students about some of the issues addressed in the book.

Why not offer a theology elective about different Catholic groups, like the Jesuits, Opus Dei, et al? Even if it is not a traditional theology course, it would be a course that students would get more excited about and more actively participate in, than a more traditional, much less interesting theology class.

Sometimes I think that we forget that education doesn’t necessarily have to be unpleasant for it to be worthwhile. Instead of making the core curriculum an excruciating labor for students, why not make it more enjoyable and practical?

TOP OF PAGE

A Piece of Opinion: The race against racism

Matt Finger
Op-Ed Editor

Martin Luther King Jr. once said that, “I look to a day when people will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.” Have we as an American society reached that day?

Senator Barack Obama of Illinois seems to think so, as does the ever growing number of Obama’s supporters. That is why Obama announced the formation of a presidential exploratory committee to explore “the role that a presidential campaign might play in bringing our country together.”

In his announcement, Obama emphasized that America is “hungry” for different politics, and that the current government in Washington is overwhelmingly bipartisan and unable to work for the American people in an effective, practical and common sense way.

He calls for a change in politics and urges the public to come together around “common interests and concerns.” Obama also raises questions about the economy and its effect on working class people, mentioning also the rising costs of college tuition.

But is America ready for a change in politics? Obama, the son of a black Kenyan man and a white woman, is living proof of the opportunity presented by America. But he may also become living proof that America is not ready for the type of change he would bring, namely a black president.

Unfortunately it is not simply the politics, ambition, charisma or intelligence of a presidential candidate that influences the voting public. If this was the case it is doubtful that 2004’s election would have come down to a candidate who is borderline illiterate and one who sucks the enthusiasm out of a crowd so fast one could confuse him with President Hoover. Not to mention that they were both C (average) students in college.

Obama, on the other hand, is a highly intelligent, charismatic politician who truly believes in progress for America. But he is black. Does that matter? It shouldn’t. But if you really believe that in the long run, the gender, ethnic background or even the sexual preference of a presidential candidate does not weigh on the outcome of an election then you are living in a fantasy world, my friend.

So does Obama have a chance? Some would say that if he does decide to run he will not even be able to win the Democratic Party’s nomination, seeing that he would be running against stiff competition including John Edwards and potentially New York Senator Hillary Clinton.

I would like to think he does, but I’m probably just naïve. As much as everyone, including many Republicans, are yearning for a change in America’s current political situation, there is a large portion of the American population who does not want that change to be a woman or a minority, no matter how capable and potentially successful that person would be.

Monday was Martin Luther King Jr. Day, which for many people brings into consciousness the struggles this country has encountered in an effort to reach equality. But it also reminds us that racism is still an issue of today.

We, as an American society, have come a long way in the fight for equality. But it seems to me that America has not brought itself far enough for the election of a minority or a woman, which is unfortunate considering that both Obama and Clinton have the potential to dramatically change America for the better.

I think that Barack Obama is just what the United States needs. He is young, enthusiastic, intelligent and ambitious for America’s future. But I don’t think that Obama will be able to defeat racism in 2008. America isn’t ready. At least not yet.

Published since 1915 by the students of Xavier University

Down in front

Our core and the student imagination

A Piece of Opinion: The race against racism