Feature

Interview

When ideologies clash and eggs are thrown, the Commentator will be here to tell you about it. An exclusive interview with the Johnson Hall egg-tossing trio.

It all has to start somewhere, it always comes to an end, and in between are the antics. A cause being fought that affects a majority should expect verbal confrontation as well as some non-vocal assaults. Eggings? Yes, they happened, but the credit is in the wrong place. For the perpetrators, on that one spontaneous intoxicated evening, the result of their actions could not have been more pleasing - the fact that there was a reaction at all.

Full sheeted experiments like this don't usually expect to create much of a reaction, except for the camaraderie shortly afterword and the guilt in the morning. But this time, a few ill-informed, scapegoat-seeking individuals decided to point the blame at a potentially obvious source. This is not surprising considering the common mob mentality that bears down our fair on campus. Autumn DePoe, former student senator and activist, credulously attributed the assault to C.J. Gabbe, Matthew Swanson and their fraternity. It seems they were playing capture the flag, hence a lot of running around in camouflage, the same night of the eggings. The so-called conspiracy behind the event went as far as pointing out a potential mastermind behind it all as well, once thought to be Scott Austin. Well, guess what kids: this incident had nothing to do with WRC politics, fraternities, or protests. It was simply a reaction from a group of students who actually had the balls to represent the "real" majority on campus.

The following is a face-to-face interview with Oregon Commentator correspondent Ted Whitaker and the anti-WRC protesers.

OC: So how many of you were there?

A: Well there were three people, but one we didn't know, he was just a disgruntled person we met at Circle K while picking up our beverages to go home with. It was not a premeditated event, the idea came from a discussion we had while standing in line.

B: I guess you could say that it was premeditated in the sense that we just wanted to have a little indiscriminate, ignorant fun. You know, messing with the hippies. As we kept thinking about it, the protesters were not representing anybody but a very small group and they were very ill-informed. While sitting there, and of course having some drinks and discussing politically in the back of the tavern like in the old days, we kept coming up with products we saw being used that they were protesting: Nike, North Face, Mountain Smith. It was inconceivable for us to see these people protesting and not going full bore at it.

OC: So would you guys like to establish a theme for your actions, maybe a group name?

A: Why do you keep asking us that, it isn't important! Are you going to take this and turn it into a bunch of sensationalism? If you want to put a name on us you could say that we are the "concerned citizens." I want to state now that I am not an anarchist, I don't have a name, I'm a concerned citizen, so that will be my name since you insist.

OC: What was the philosophy behind your actions?

A: My whole gig is that by taking away jobs from people that work in the Nike factories would do more harm than good. There is a different standard of living there, we can't expect to put American living standards into those countries. Throughout the evening, the people who we talked to were agreeing to these points and others with us.

OC: What kind of people?

B: Random groups of people we knew and did not know were all saying the same thing.

OC: So pretty much what you are saying is that you got feedback the same way that statistical information is traditionally gathered for any type of measurement.

A: Yes, we were inspired by what we were hearing, and what you hear on the street is what is happening not what you hear in the news paper.

B: News paper, television, or the group that is being interviewed by television. It's the same damn group that is going to go and protest the Snowy Egret next week that is endangered in New Zealand. Chances are they will have only half the information again.

OC: Did any kind of preparation go into this?

A: There was no preparation, it was spontaneous. The only preparation was....

B: [Laughing] Drinking! Standing in line at Circle K.

OC: So how do you feel about the finger pointing that went on afterward?

B: Again, It shows a lack of information. It's like calling the kettle black. It was similar to what happened during the McCarthy era. They needed a scapegoat.

A: The only finger-pointing that should be apologized for is the finger-pointing at Mr. Phil Knight.

OC: What about these emails* that were traded back and fourth.

B: Brian Wise had his facts straight, , and wasn't making fun of anybody. This guy Scott Austin on the other hand simply ripped on people, there are no facts, he doesn't state an argument, he doesn't support his comments, there is absolutely nothing in here that says he is educated.

OC: What was the deal with you being questioned by the authorities?

B: Yes, I was questioned about the situation but luckily for me I was wearing camoflague so I guess they had a hard time seeing me.

OC: Do you feel that OPS did their job?

B: What job?

OC: Wasn't there supposed to be some raw meat involved instead of just eggs?

A: Yes, but it is too expensive, we would have thrown Malaysians but we didn't know where to buy any.

Not everything that happens on campus is the result of a big-headed student organization. This proves that somebody out there is paying attention: like ants in your house, if you see a few, there is bound to be a nest nearby. If only they all had the guts to come out at once. So the war of ideas continues, and as sure as future protests are being contemplated, so too are the gears turning in the minds of the reactionaries.