With AUS elections underway (voting period is from October 4th-10th), debate on the importance of student politics is particularly potent. The recent discussion on student politics in the Tribune has suggested two things: first, there are core reasons we should be politically active on campus; second, political activism helps students identify with those reasons, providing an impetus for these students to get involved.

However, students should not be expected to come to McGill with an understanding of their role in McGill civil society, nor should they be expected to understand the political context in which they entered McGill. The lack of involvement in student politics suggests a lack of grassroots engagement with students. Any civil society’s reach is dependent on its ability to demonstrate its cause to be important.

Sometimes, students are simply unaware of the issues on which they are able to take a stance. The AUS and other faculty associations should focus on how to illustrate the importance of political involvement on campus. It is a long-term goal, and perhaps waiting to reap its benefit could seem too distant. However,  without an effective ability to elect individuals who can identify and communicate the issues that would mobilize students to vote, it would be pointless to run a political society in the first place. Reliable and effective dissemination of information regarding substantial student issues have become underrated. Modes of communication, like listservs, have arguably proven themselves to be less user-friendly than they should be. As a whole, spreading awareness has become far too undervalued to make any meaningful progress.

[pullquote]The lack of involvement in student politics suggests a lack of grassroots engagement with students.[/pullquote]

Political leadership, especially in a student society, necessitates striking a balance between taking one’s own initiative and accommodating people’s needs. Unfortunately, to compel engagement in civil society (voting), student leaders tend to inadvertently become too representative, and this has upset the balance needed in student leadership. Taking too much individual initiative breeds stagnation, in part because students are unaware of many issues. As a result, candidates end up failing to voice issues that resonate with them the most, all the while making empty promises of “this is how I would deal with your hypothetical issues.” This, once again, ultimately leads to a failure in progress through their own initiative, as well as the hypothetical initiative of students.

The question thus lies in whether McGill student associations can make their automatic memberships serve a clearly defined purpose. The problem with the lack of student involvement in campus politics alludes to a structural issue, and begs the question of whether there is a need to manipulate the structure of campus civil society to necessitate student government as an entity in the first place. There is a need for more encouragement to engage in the democratic process.