Skip to Content, Navigation, or Footer.
We inform. You decide.
Friday, March 29, 2024
NEWS  |  CAMPUS

Columnist shows elitism when addressing classroom, religion

I confess that in the course of my very busy days here at UF, I rarely am afforded the opportunity to read the Alligator, let alone write in to opine. However, after reading Luke Bailey's column "Rituals still have value in the age of reason" referencing the "Writing on the Wall" exhibit, I felt compelled to refute some of his statements.

Bailey states, "Sure, there are some backward holdovers — the right-wing fundamentalists, the street preachers and the Luddites — but they represent a small niche on campus, and we all attend class in an environment where Robespierre would feel right at home."

What was the author's purpose in making a statement like that, even when discussing a worthy expression of campus unity? Is the author somehow now the anointed arbiter of "reason" to the extent that he feels comfortable framing his arguments in such a publicly condescending manner?

What about left-wing fundamentalists? Are they somehow more reasonable? Occupiers — are they somehow more sincere than street preachers? Militant atheists — do they speak for the majority? All are ideological minorities to be sure, but probably far too fashionable to draw the Anointed Elite's ire as less than "reasonable," I suspect.

As to the comment concerning a classroom environment which would make Robespierre feel at home, I found this both profoundly ludicrous and rather instructive as to the author's worldview in making such extravagantly preposterous statements.

If a sophisticated Frenchman needed to illustrate the learning environment we enjoy here at UF, I would think one might select someone like Louis Pasteur, Jules Verne or Alexis de Tocqueville rather than a butcher like Robespierre, who read a little Rousseau at school, argued against the death penalty and declared himself a "moderate" in his famous phrase "ni monarchiste ni républicain" (neither monarchist nor republican). He later decided to become the arbiter of "reason" by bathing in the blood of thousands of his countrymen during the Reign of Terror. I don't know how things are done in the author's history department, but they luckily aren't nearly that "reasonable" anywhere else that I can see.

Later, Bailey goes on to say, "We no longer light incense or pray to the Virgin Mary — we're much too clever for that."

Au contraire. Just across University Avenue is a rather large Catholic church and student center — St. Augustine's. We've all noticed it. There are also Jewish, Lutheran, Islamic and Protestant houses of worship along the same street. But according to the author, presumably only the Great Unwashed still believe in such "quaint and illogical" beliefs. To this I would counter that my fellow students, probably in a significant majority, adhere to diverse religious practices which, though the "elite" among us may not approve of them, are neither unreasonable nor illogical.

The only illogical thing here is the ill-conceived pontification of the self-anointed "guardians of reason" who find their beliefs preferable to those of everyone else, using dismissive narratives to buttress their own vain assumptions. This is a capital mistake. Be they Catholic or Protestant, Muslim or Jewish, agnostic or devout, rest assured that they all prefer their views to those of others; otherwise they wouldn't hold them.

The major difference is, they don't take to the presses to smugly condescend to everyone else around them for not being as brilliant as they.

I found it ironic that Abdul Zalikha's article on the opposing page from Bailey's was about not being dismissive of the thoughts of others, even when they may appear potentially disagreeable, as in the case of 9/11 "Truthers." Because he is a history major, I know that a valuable lesson the author might take away from his training is the danger of dismissing ideas, particularly when, historically, the loudest mockers often end up being the ones dismissed themselves over the course of time. The rights to self-determination, especially religious liberty, and the struggle to attain and retain the same is a basic tenet of all mankind, no matter one's nationality. But only in America is such a rich inheritance the birthright of every one of us to jealously guard against all trespasses — no matter how "unreasonable" this may seem to those who think they must know better than we.

I would respectfully suggest that some still have a great deal to learn about a great deal of things. My hope is that they are taught as quickly as possible because the responsibility for defending personal liberty against those who purport to know "better" than we how to live, think and pray, and who are invariably only acting for "our own good," has already fallen to each and every young American. Beware, the smug Anointed Elite, wherever you find them, because for each one of these you depose, there will always be another coming along to take its place, possibly even from the history department.

Enjoy what you're reading? Get content from The Alligator delivered to your inbox

Joshua Fonzi is a microbiology and cell science and entomology and nematology senior at UF.

(Editor's Note: The phrase in the print version "We just hunted them down and killed them" should not have appeared as a part of this column. We hope you did not take this out of context.)

Support your local paper
Donate Today
The Independent Florida Alligator has been independent of the university since 1971, your donation today could help #SaveStudentNewsrooms. Please consider giving today.

Powered by SNworks Solutions by The State News
All Content © 2024 The Independent Florida Alligator and Campus Communications, Inc.