Sonia
H0LL1M0N
TWisted sisterhood
Oldest child’s station in life is unenviable
If I have to tell jny sisters to clean
their rooms one more time, I am
really going to have to go off. It
seems that since the day they were
bom, I’ve been running after them to
pick this up,
don’t pick that
up—most of
my phone calls
in high school
were interrupted
by me stopping
to yell, “Shawn!
Stop messing
with the girls!”
or “Sophia and
Shana! Leave your brother alone!”
Being the oldest of four children
certainly gets you ready for responsi
bility.
My mom used to tell me that as
the-first-bom, I was special and her
“little helper.” That seemed like a
cool position until I realized that I
seemed to be a kind of built-in baby
sitter. I’m sure I could have put a
down payment on a car with the
money my parents saved on baby
sitters.
Last weekend, I went home to
take care of my two younger sisters
while my mom went to visit my
brother. I have to admit that I wasn’t
thrilled about baby-sitting them; after
all, Sophia is a sophomore in high
«
Like most people, my teen years were my
most rebellious stage. At the time, I’m
sure my mom thought that something
had overtaken my body, and her daughter
was forever lost.”
school and Shana is in eighth grade.
When I was their age, I was watching
three younger kids, and pulling down
good grades in addition to making
sure I got my household chores done.
It just kind of irritated me.
Anyone who has ever taken care
of younger siblings understands what
I’m saying. I realize that taking care
of them, in addition to participating
in school activities and church
groups, helped to make me a
responsible, independent person.
Tliere are times, however—espe
cially now that I’m older—when I
really feel a little resentful. I was
glad to help out, and at the time, I
was proud that I could be counted on
by my folks. I was the “responsible
one-” Now that I’m older, it seems
like all that role-modeling was for
nothing. When my mom shows me
my sisters’ grades and talks about
“improvement,” 1 really have to bite
my tongue sometimes because, if 1
had brought those grades home, there
would have been a 45-minute sit
down lecture, along with a 10-minute
discussion on what I was going to do
to “get along better with others” and
“respect authority figures.” I hated •
that discussion. I figured, hey, those
were all A’s on that piece of paper —
why did I have to be good on top of
everything?
Like most people, my teen years
were my most rebellious stage. At the
time, I’m sure my mom thought that
something had overtaken my body,
and her daughter was forever lost.
Even then 1 would say to her that my
rebellion was puppy chow compared
to my friends. I can honestly say I
never once sneaked out of the house,
smoked a cigarette or drank. Now
that my brother and sisters are older,
I think she realizes that I really
wasn’t that bad.
I’m not in any way trying to
proclaim myself as the one Hollimon
who was truly heaven-sent. I cer
tainly drove my parents crazy, and I
was no saint in high school either.
But I do think the glue-on-the-toilet
incident was a stroke of genius —
but to just finish my little tantrum,
I’ll sum this up by saying it’s not fair.
Being the oldest is no picnic. Sure
you get to get out of the house first,
but the second you leave, it seems
things start getting good, and the
parents relax. My sisters still only get
three minutes on the phone, but they
do get to talk to boys, which is
something I couldn’t do until I was
16. - - . - , -•
The positive explanation for all
this is that my mom had more time
and attention to give me, and that’s
why I am the way I am. But I still
wouldn’t mind that down payment.
Hollimon is a senior broadcast
ing major and a Daily Nebraskan
columnist
Anthony
NGUYEN
A few weeks ago,jtheJJnited
States threw its weight around in the
United Nations. There’s nothing
wrong with our country attempting to
press its own claims in a world
--- forum, but there
issomething
wrong when the
reasons aren’t
justifiable.
The
United States
vetoed Boutros
Boutros-Ghali
for re-election as
U.N. secretary
general in a 14-1 vote of the Security
Council. What this did was create an
uproar among die entire 185-member
General Assembly as the question of
“equality” within the United Nations
came to the forefront.
With its stance toward Boutros
Ghali, the United States found itself
diplomatically isolated. Not only was
the United States the sole opposition
to Boutros-Ghali, but the threat of a
veto from China toward any U.S.
supported nominee was increasingly
likely.,
The main impetus of the United
• States’ unilateral action rested solely
upon the fact that the U.S. Congress
would not pay the $1.5 billion in
monies owed to the U.N. if Boutros
' Ghali was not replaced.
I think it’s time for the United
States to adopt a “put-up or shut-up”
stance regarding foreign policy. We
need to stop acting like the petulant,
spoiled rich kid of the neighborhood,
mid start becoming the mature, well
behaved one.
That means either we choose to be
the “world’s policeman” or we accept
a less vocal, but still important, role
in the world. The former involves
risks—risks we aren’t willing to
take anymore. Which leaves us with
the latte. A less vocal role can be .
our congressional representatives*
- **• -**<*": v'-, j s « . .
«--—
• •* V!.
; We need to stop acting like the petulant,
spoiled rich kid of the neighborhood, and
start becoming the mature, well-behaved
one.”
egos, but it can be done. Unfortu
nately it doesn’t look that way.
I’d dare say that some members of
Congress probably think their
opinions matter all over the world,
and that when they speak in front of
Congress, people all over the world
l isten. That ’s why our country
sometimes gets such a bad rep in
world politics. The Boutros-Ghali
situation is showing our obnoxious
and overbearing side to the others in
the United Nations.
Remember, the United Nations is
an organization of sovereign nations,
not a world government. The United
Nations provides the machinery to
help fihd solutions to disputes and
problems among its member nations
—as well as any matter pertaining to
concerns of the world. The United
Nations doesn’t legislate; but it does
provide a means for rich and poor,
large and small nations alike, to have
a voice in shaping policies of the
larger, international community.
The General Assembly of the
United Nations, composed of 185
member states each with one vote,
makes recommendations on all
matters within the scope of the U.N.
Charter. The Assembly cannot force
any member state to acquiesce—but
it does carry the weight of world :
opinion. And it is this world opinion
that the United States has scorned in
its attempt to remove Boutros-Ghali.
The United States shouldn’t base
its policies solely on world opinion.
If one day the world decided slavery
was OK, we shouldn’t be like
lemmings and follow. But in the
Boutros-Ghali situation, we don’t
have just cause. The American
Congress doesn’t approve of the
manner in which Boutros-Ghali is
handling U.N. affairs, and the threat
of not paying any of its debts leaves
the United Nations in jeopardy. Just
as we did not support the League of
Nations during the post-World War I
period, today we are not supporting
the United Nations.
And support of the United Nations
doesn’t require us to bend over
backward to appease all the nations
of the world. But it does require us to
act maturely and responsibly. The ‘
United Nations does a lot of good
worldwide that we don’t see, and
frankly, that we don’t care about
anymore. That’s a tragedy. If we
were a Third-World country, perhaps
we’d appreciate some of the aid the
United Nations provides. If we had
bitter fighting on our shores, we /
might feel angry at foreign interven
tion —but then again it’s world
intervention, not a single nation.
World opinion should carry more
weight, and I think it does, but only
when it meets with American
Congressional approval. Is that fair?
It’s planet Earth, people. Not the
United States and everybody else
goes to hell. We’re not the majority.
We do carry a lot of clout—but
clout should only be used to foster
good will and relations, not
obstinance over policies. It’s like
this: If I haven’t paid my rent in a
couple of years, do I have the right to
bitch to my landlord aboftt the
neighbors upstairs who fight over the
pool? Do I have the right to complain
about the neighbor who doesn’t use
his water properly, but I waste mine
on a daily basis? I don’t think so.
L If I lived in such an apartment
complex, I certainly wouldn ’t' <
intervene in a squabble between
neighbors unless 1 knew what was
going on and if I could really help. ^
Analogously, the United States sets
deadlines for troop movements to
settle problems. If we’re going into a
foreign country, then we need to
accept the risk. I’m sympathetic to
families of our soldiers, but I don’t
agree that foreign policy should be
based solely on deadlines. It’s clear
and defined goals.
So, in that apartment complex we
might have a bigger place, or a nicer
view, but it doesn’t imply we’re
better. We’d certainly lead most of
the tenant meetings, but in no way
would we be the “landlord.” But with
Boutros-Ghali, instead of acting as
tenants of the United Nations, we are
trying to be the landlord who doesn’t
want the landscaper to be Fred, when
everyone else thinks Fred’s doing a ^ y f
good job—all because Fred didn’t
work on our view first.
The United Nations provides the
United States an opportunity to
spread its message of democracy
without alienating others around the
globe. We can live in the complex ,
and be seen as a next-door neighbor
who has some good ideas, or we can
be seen as the obnoxious, overbear
ing neighbor who everyone hates. I’d
rather be the nice (me.
Nguyen Is a senior biochemistry
and philosophy major and a Daily
Nebraskan columnist
