To party or not to party: SRC 2011/12

Details

Published on Tuesday, 27 September 2011 07:44

Written by Anlage Situma

The time has come to ask an essential question: Who is the best person to represent me? The SRC elections of 2011 supplied us with a wide array of prospective candidates. Now that it’s over and the winners have been chosen, let us look back on the campaign process.

One hotshot decided to base his entire campaign on a minority hair color, suggesting that the solution to the eternal struggle for better res food is to ask Fedics to use more ginger, while the two-man CIA felt the best way to get a good point across was to dress it up in a suit and bow tie. 

Then there’s the girl whose tag line was “I (heart) Cait.” I certainly cannot be the only one who finds that slogan somewhat abstract. Who loves Cait? Does Cait love Cait? Does the person who printed those posters love Cait? Do I have an unknown love for Cait? I don’t even know who Cait is.

Alternatively, you could have voted for the SASCO members whose faces are on the back of every seat on every Jammie. Do you people not have the education you are supposed to be getting? 

This year we’ve seen a massive push on the part of the independent candidates. This made the elections interesting because, unlike most years, it is possible, or even likely, that they will outnumber the traditionally dominant party representatives.

When a nominee makes the decision to run with a party, they sacrifice a great deal for a certain level of security. As a party representative, life is good; you can ride on the party’s coattails and your campaign requires less innovation. To be fair, some of the party representatives seem pretty legit, but others just seem power-hungry, aligning themselves with the party because they’re looking for the easiest route to the top. 

How much of your own particular manner of leadership can you really bring to the table before you hit the rock-hard wall of party politics? Parties also benefit from experience with the system.

During interrogations I couldn’t help but notice how naïve the independents seemed. While their enthusiasm and perspective is refreshing, when you look at their manifestos and see goals like “night-time transport to clubs,” you start to worry about exactly where their priorities lie. 

Upon interrogation the nominee went on about how it’s a system that would reduce drunk driving and harassment by dodgy taxi drivers and that a similar system had been successfully implemented in Grahamstown. However, when you think about it, how hard would it be for that system to be successful in Grahamstown? Why would you need ANY transport in Grahamstown?

Then there was the independent who would implement a “female women run blue light system” for Clarinus. As opposed to what other kind of women? Have we started ignoring the rights of male women? What next? 

One of SASCO’s representatives said that the appeal of SASCO is that you have the freedom to form your own opinions and weren’t obligated to agree with everything the SASCO executive said. Though that seems to solve the issue, you have to wonder: is it counter-productive for a party to have representatives that do not endorse the party’s view? In the end I voted for the individual. Not the person who made the most noise but the person that made the best-sounding noise. You hope for the best, and welcome to the SRC of 2011/12.