Resist hatred, apathy cycle
Wiesel’s words inspire new understanding

When Elie Wiesel finished his speech Wednesday, I wanted to jump up and yell at the beauty of his words — the beauty of his spirit. I looked at the man behind the lectern, and I saw a man with courage, dignity and strength beyond anything that I have ever seen. He is, very simply, beautiful.

Along with millions of other victims, Wiesel has seen human souls at their most corrupt. Along with millions of other victims, Wiesel survived one of the darkest times in recent history. But instead of giving up on the human spirit, he has taken his place in the world as one of the great opponents of hatred and ignorance.

As I write this column, I feel I can’t begin to express the excitement Wiesel’s words wakened in my heart. Even as I write this, my hands are shaking as I struggle to put the emotions I feel on paper.

But I refuse to let inarticulateness keep me from communicating the joy I felt after I heard this man’s words.

He denounced racism, fanaticism and the root of them both: hatred. He denounced ignorance and indifference. He denounced the qualities in humans that destroy humanity.

According to Wiesel, a fanatic is someone who believes that everything he thinks is right. He loses no sleep because he feels he does no wrong. A fanatic wants power — power over everyone in the world and even God. He lives, breaths and sleeps hatred.

He loses his humanity.

“Fanaticism kills the mind, kills the heart, kills the humanity of the human being,” Wiesel said.

But despite the destruction fanaticism causes, it still manages to survive through the ages. Fifty-five years ago, Nazis were still killing Jews and anti-Semitism was a prominent all over the world. Less than 45 years ago, the Ku Klux Klan was still openly killing blacks and racism thrived in the South. Apartheid ended in South Africa in the early 1990s. It hasn’t been that long since refugees were driven from their homes in Kosovo to escape death. And these are only a few instances that made the front page.

So, when faced with all of this hate, where do we find the hope to go on?

Over the years, I have prayed to God and asked why such horrible things still happen in the world. I never got an answer. I still don’t have an answer. What I do have is a firm belief that these events can be stopped before they ever get started.

Wiesel strengthened that belief.

Educating people that hatred is wrong is the only way its tyranny will end. It seems like such a simple plan, but how many parents take the time to explain to their children that hatred is evil? How many children listen as their parents spew racist remarks at one group and then tell their children that hating people is wrong? How many sons and daughters, mothers and fathers have to be lost at the hands of fanaticism, racism and indifference before we make a conscious effort to teach each and every person in the world that hating a person of another race, ethnicity or religion is wrong?

Teaching tolerance and understanding is never easy. Hate is the greatest enemy we will ever face, and the fight against hate is the hardest battle anyone will ever participate in.

Under the rule of hate, Elie Wiesel lost his mother, father and sister. Hate tried to kill him and his faith. But this man still travels all over the world, looks into the faces of thousands of victims who have been persecuted because of the hatred of others, and resists the urge to sink into the cycle of hatred. He has seen and lived through more pain than we can imagine, yet he still teaches that hatred and indifference are not the way.

If one man can bring about a worldwide understanding of the detriments of hate, imagine what he could accomplish with a united force beside him.

Laura McFarland is a freshman journalism major from Houston.
She can be reached at (l.d.mcfarland@student.tcu.edu).

You know, if there’s one thing America has too much of, it’s diversity.

Or at least, that’s what the conservative group, the Republican Ideas Political Committee, would like people to believe.

The organization has started airing 60-second TV ads in Kansas City, Mo., that urge voters to support the school voucher movement, featuring a woman who says drugs and violence were “fashionable” at her son’s public school and “that was a bit more diversity than he could handle.”

Richard Nadler, founder of the committee and a conservative commentator, has said diversity is a “politically correct” term used to justify what was once unacceptable behavior.

But the snide use of the word “diversity,” really doesn’t fool many people. Who does Nadler really think considers drugs and violence “fashionable?”

“There is no black or Hispanic person doing anything wrong in the ad,” Nadler said. “What’s the problem here?”

Well, the problem is Nadler and like-minded right-wing conservatives do, at best, a mediocre job of disguising their bigotry.

It’s even more disturbing when considering the University of Wisconsin at Madison has recently come under fire for doctoring a photo on an admissions brochure cover by inserting a black student in a crowd of white football fans.

Wisconsin, by the way, has an enrollment of more than 40,000 students of which less than 10 percent are minorities. Rather than actually diversify their student body, school officials apparently figured diversifying the application’s cover was good enough.

“It’s a symptom of a much larger problem,” said the ill-fated Wisconsin student, Diallo Shabazz. “Diversity on this campus is really not being dealt with.”

And it shows that above all, America definitely has too many Nadlers.

I avoided the inevitable as long as possible. I waited years, months and, finally, days until I was overcome by the monster.

Then, I bought a cell phone.

I didn’t buy the cell phone so that I could talk on the phone while I was in line at the grocery store, or call back to my friend’s house from the drive-thru at McDonald’s to make sure the order was right (although it does come in handy at these times). I got my phone for emergencies ONLY.

The first thing I learned was that there is a wide range of emergencies: Movie times, pizza orders and any time on the weekend that I need to talk to someone is an emergency. Calling my girlfriend or my mother ... always an emergency.

It wasn’t until I started using my phone regularly that I noticed how many cell phones there really are out there. Just take a look when you are driving down the freeway. Usually there is a man driving 40 mph in the fast lane on his phone — another example of how men have difficultydoing more than one thing at a time.

Women can talk on their phones and maintain speed, but I am a little concerned about how they can control their cars with one hand putting on make-up and the other dialing her cell phone.

So, I said I would never be an avid cell phone user, and here I am overcome with technology (and an increasing telephone bill each month). But, I say this now, hoping I can stay true to it: I will continue to use that little thing we call etiquette that so many people have forgotten about while using cell phones.

I can’t believe some of the stuff I see out there. Talking while in the grocery store is OK I have decided.

alking while you’re at the check-out is rude.

Answering your phone in a quiet restaurant is rude. It shouldn’t even be turned on.

When to have your cell phone turned on and off is an interesting question. I must admit, sometimes I forget to turn off my phone.

Everyone has been in a classroom when someone’s cell phone goes off. It happens everyday. Usually, the person just made a mistake by leaving it on and they quickly turn it off and apologize. That’s in a small class anyway. If you are in a big class, sometimes the person will ignore the ring thinking that they won’t be identified.

This week, however, I witnessed the worst breach of cell phone etiquette I have yet to encounter. While in class, a cell phone rang. The student answered, asked the caller to wait, left the classroom for a conversation and then returned to class five minutes later.

I missed five minutes of the lecture because I couldn’t believe that someone would actually do something like that.

I thought about this situation for quite a while. It is very possible that this student had some type of emergency going on and he was expecting the phone call. However, almost all phones have a silent ring feature that allows the phone to either light up or vibrate. If something was that important, couldn’t he have relied on these tools or stepped out when the call came and been a little more inconspicuous about it?

I embrace the new communication technology that is available today, but I’m worried about what is happening to our manners. I remember when I thought it was weird that people would talk on a phone while grocery shopping; now I expect it.

By the time I graduate, will it be normal to step into the hall and take a call during class while lecturing continues?

I sure hope not.

James Zwilling is a sophomore news-editorial journalism major from Phoenix, Ariz.
He can be reached at (james_zwilling@usa.net).