Elections

The Northeastern University International Relations Council had our biannual elections last week for the Executive Board that will take the stand in the fall semester. Elections in a politically oriented club of students who are used to debating can take hours. First, candidates give a speech. Then there is a question and answer session with all candidates at the front of the room. After that, we have the option to hold a caucus to discuss the candidates while they leave the room so that we are better able to, as a unified group, make a decision. This has been helpful in the past as members of the club who have never sat on the Executive Board before benefit from the knowledge and expertise of those who have. There is a lot that the Board does that people do not often realize. As this is a particularly unpleasant rule in the elections process, one club member this year who has run for the E-Board for many years without success requested to remain in the room during this caucus.

This was not only an unpleasant experience for all involved, but it may have actually changed the course of elections. This person is somewhat peripheral to the social network of the club, and has failed at certain tasks when given the chance in the past. In order to bring up instances where an individual has proven themselves unfit for the position to newer members, it had to be brought up with the individual present. There were a few brave souls who spoke up with an apology as a precursor to their speech, but it seemed as if several people were speaking a favor of a candidate just because they were present to hear about it.

Humans want to be liked by as many as possible. To be in constant favor and to try to please everyone, they may make speeches such as these to garner favor from an individual. The way we behave in large group settings is more carefully managed than the way we behave for smaller groups. It was striking to see this phenomenon in action at this very tense election night.