Several negative comments in The Koala about students who commute to school suggest that its mission is to create campus solidarity. If more people lived on campus, it seems to say, there wouldn’t be such a “boring ghostly atmosphere” at CSUSM. “No longer will school spirit deteriorate,” not as long as The Koala is around, right?

The Koala touts itself as “the shot in the arm” that is necessary to effect a sense of community on campus. However, the paper’s language is racist, sexist, and homophobic, and this language is not something that brings people together. Rather, it is something that strengthens and perpetuates the divides between people—such rhetoric of intolerance benefits no one. (It is, however, a hallmark of fascism, as is The Koala’s militaristic imagery. I’m just saying.)

Although I disagree with The Koala, I respect the creators’ right to produce it. But, who are the creators? The paper is credited to such mysterious entities as “General George” and “Captain Clutch,” and the articles aren’t credited to anyone at all. When it comes to producing something as potentially controversial as The Koala, I would argue that you’re duty-bound to put your real name on it. Freedom of speech is as much a responsibility as it is a right. John Hancock didn’t use a cute pseudonym when he signed the Declaration of Independence—he signed his name in huge letters, as if to say, “This is my right as a human, so come and get me, England.” I challenge the producers of The Koala to do the same: if you’re so proud of it, put your names on it, and insist that your contributors do the same. Otherwise, your freedom to print The Koala is as stale and base as your paper’s content.

Sincerely,

James Jones