With all due respect to the people involved, we can see little reason for the formation of an activist coalition. While we cannot object to people getting involved in whatever causes they see fit, on the anniversary of one of the most successful actions ever taken by Wesleyan students (the takeover of Fisk), we feel that it is more worthwhile for the politically-minded to spend their time dealing with how to engage the world rather than networking.

Anyone who has tried to participate in any form of activism on our campus knows how inefficient and frustrating meetings can be. Even within small groups, meetings drag on and on, and decision-making is a slow, arduous process. Time spent in meetings planning action overwhelms time spent on action itself. Eventually, meetings are held to determine how to run meetings more efficiently. Since most people here are tremendously busy, the endless meetings are unsustainable and groups often fall apart. Sharing ideas is all well and good, but in our meeting-clogged culture, sharing ideas often takes precedence over real action. It isn’t necessary to precisely define “action”—staging a protest, composting, or lobbying for a change in administrative policy all fit the bill—but we do know that holding another meeting often results in more delayed time before anything tangible occurs.

Moreover, it is important to recognize that activism isn’t a lifestyle choice or a resume-building after-school activity. Activism is just a tool to enact a political program. “Activists” don’t necessarily have anything to offer each other. Every group has its own issues, and its own agenda. What ideas are EON and FemNet supposed to collaborate in implementing? What resources are WesDems and WesReps supposed to share?

This isn’t to say people shouldn’t be involved in multiple causes. Bu if you want to work on environmental issues, join EON; if you want to work on prison reform, get involved with WesPREP. There’s no need for more self-referential meetings.