(Kate Oberg | Student Life)

Whenever the topic of my future comes up at a family gathering and I admit that I want to pursue a career in politics, inevitably one of my relatives will shake their head and tell me, their voice deep with concern, that politics is a nasty business that I would be better off avoiding.

Yet with all due respect to my beloved family and to Forum Editor Alissa Rotblatt, who included the same advice in her column this Monday, I think that politicians have gotten an unfairly bad reputation. True, there are many politicians who live up to their nefarious image and give the entire business a bad name, but I do not believe that we should give up on politics entirely.

David Brooks of The New York Times put it well this week when he wrote in a Times blog post, “Government should sometimes be shrouded for the same reason middle-aged people should wear clothes.” Politics is full of difficult compromises, brutal partisan attacks and general unpleasantness. It always has been. (Trust me, you should check out the campaign between John Adams and Thomas Jefferson. It wasn’t pretty.)

But I think it is worth our time anyways. Yes, it is possible to achieve social change through other means. The truth is, however, that the way we run our government is absolutely crucial to the condition of our society. You cannot really change society without at least being conscious of politics, and I strongly believe that one of the best ways of going about such change is to work within the political realm.

I am not asking each of you to run for office. What I am asking is that you do not dismiss the sometimes-unsavory business of politics without giving it a fair chance. If you do keep an open mind, if you can get beyond the banal talking heads on the 24-hour news networks and the scandals and the partisan drama and all the other theatrics, I think you might find some genuinely inspiring stories.

You do not need to dig up Profiles in Courage to find the good in politics. You can see it in the thousands of people who volunteered long hours in support of President Obama’s campaign because they wanted to make a difference for our country. You can see it in the underdog campaigns of politicians who probably won’t win but are still spending countless hours on the stump due to the strength of their convictions. You can even see it in the case of Ted Olson, because even though Rotblatt described him earlier this week as the antithesis of a politician thanks to his dramatic break with the Republican Party line, he has still spent most of his career engaged in politics.

Finally, as long as idealistic, compassionate young people who truly believe in the integrity of their causes continue to shun politics, all that will be left will be the corrupt clowns whom we all despise. Our country needs better than that.

Eve is a junior in Arts and Sciences. She can be reached via email at elsambor@wustl.edu.

When Washington University senior Jacob Siegel first began studying aikido last October while abroad in Paris, he recognized in its pacifist philosophy a potential for social change.

“In aikido, there is never that goal of injuring someone else or hurting my body in order to achieve a certain goal,” Siegel said. “And I thought, ‘Wouldn’t it be cool to take aikido to teach kids about nonviolence?’”

What started as a mere idea became a six-week-long summer program called Inner City, Inner Peace at the Mathews-Dickey Boys’ and Girls’ Club in St. Louis involving two professional aikido instructors, 25 children from the city and Siegel himself.

“It was a concept to use nonviolent art to talk about nonviolence,” Siegel said.

Siegel stressed the importance of teaching and promoting nonviolence to younger age groups, because “when you’re older and you’re in a violent situation, it’s almost too late.”

To help bring his plan into action, Siegel needed funding. He applied for the Stern Social Change Grant offered through the Community Service Office (CSO).

Siegel drafted a proposal and connected with local organizations and individuals he believed would be interested in collaborating on the project. His hard work paid off. After a competitive selection process, Siegel received the $6,000 from the grant, which he used to pay the expenses for starting up the project and for the summer’s room and board in St. Louis.

“One of the biggest purchases was gym mats. You’d be surprised how much nice gym mats cost,” he said.

Although Siegel paid the two other aikido instructors, the amount was so small that “it was much more like volunteer work.”

Siegel himself made no salary from the summer, and he paid some of the program expenses from his own pocket. Despite the disadvantage of not being paid, Siegel said he had an invaluable experience that gave him a new perspective.

“I gained experience in the non-profit field, searched for a grant and did some serious networking,” he said. “I also gained a perspective on how much more work is left to be done.”

This is precisely what the Social Change Grant program organizers hope students will take from the overall experience, said Stephanie Kurtzman, director of the CSO.

Kurtzman also emphasized that Siegel’s grant was hard-won money.

“It’s a competitive process and requires rigorous preparation. Applicants need to have already done the footwork, having identified their mentors and made contacts in the community,” Kurtzman said. “It’s really saying, ‘The only thing that stands between me and this project is the funding.’”

A selection committee of University faculty and staff members determine the winning proposals in a paper review process that first singles out the students the committee is interested in speaking with further. Given the number of available grants, only a handful of these prospectives go on to become finalists.

The finalists are then required to give a presentation during which they also answer questions from the selection committee. Kurtzman calls this time “engaging in a conversation” about the project’s viability, sustainability and how it will have an important community impact.

Each year, the CSO typically receives around 25 proposals.

“And those are people who stayed with the process,” Kurtzman said.

Siegel’s proposal and presentation was one that especially impressed the committee, according to Kurtzman.

“His preparation was stellar. He had a really thoughtful concept, and it was complete in the sense that he had incorporated many different layers into the project,” she said. “He was also extremely polished in presentation and had a solid community partnership.”

Although the majority of applicants are turned down, Kurtzman said the application process is still beneficial because it educates and prepares students for writing proposals and organizing social change projects in the future. The CSO provides applicants with workshops and individual mentors and also guides them toward other helpful resources on campus.

“This is a friendlier process than the way it works in the real world,” Kurtzman said. “You’re nurtured along the way.”

“It is inspiring to see these people with big dreams for changing the world and the capacity for making it happen.”