The democratic process is America’s most revered and long-standing tradition, going back as… The democratic process is America’s most revered and long-standing tradition, going back as far as I can remember, which is, like, 1980. Voting is the direct expression of the people, the sacred right of the citizenry to shape governments, corporations and homecoming courts.

That right is now imperiled in Pittsburgh, by a collection of academic fifth columnists debating if the current homecoming elections are worthy of their sponsorship.

We must not allow this tradition to come to an end. Homecoming elections belong to the people: The Homecoming court represents the student body, and we should get to choose it.

If you think having attractive people represent your university is unimportant, listen to Brian Kelly, president of Resident Student Association: “More students show up to vote for the Homecoming than the presidential election.” We know this is true because he said it out loud – the Homecoming court is more important to Pitt students than choosing the next leader of the free world.

But the Homecoming experience is more than the act of voting. It’s also papering the dorms with posters and littering the streets with campaign pamphlets. It’s handing out lollipops to raise awareness of the candidates and their likenesses. And it’s getting those lollipops.

It’s an experience totally unique to Pitt, uniting the University in holding its collective breath as the king and queen are announced. I don’t think anyone could possibly ever forget where they were a few years ago when blah blah and yadda yadda were crowned. [Note to editors: could you insert the names of the winners here? I don’t remember who they were.]

There are those who criticize such tradition, calling it irrelevant and shallow. They carp and whine, crying that Homecoming is nothing more than a “popularity contest.”

Denouncing the democratic process as a “popularity contest” is only a rhetorical sleight-of-hand, a way to paint the people as clueless rubes and feel intelligent in comparison.

Indeed, our current president – who lost the so-called “popular” vote – might have something to say about such a negative characterization. George W. Bush understands there’s more to democracy than popularity or even who gets the most votes. To say otherwise is to do a grave disservice to American ideals.

And with what would these critics replace our free and fair elections? Well, it’s hard to say – like Communism, their ideas are inchoate and ill-formed. There’s been talk of demanding different qualities from our Homecoming royalty, of a stronger focus on leadership and academic excellence, but with a distinct lack of concrete proposals thus far.

To this I say: Don’t these people get enough recognition on campus? Every day we’re bombarded with praise of our resident eggheads and future politicians. But when are we going to give someone else a chance at glory? When are we finally going to pay attention to the attractive people?

If we simply hand the Homecoming crown over to “leaders” – as I imagine they do in third world countries such as England – then what will be left for the pretty people? And, by extension, what will be left for us, the students?

During the last year our nation has faced challenges to our freedom from sources both foreign and domestic. In response we have acquiesced to the elimination of certain freedoms, understanding that sometimes you have to dismantle democracy in order to save it.

But a line must be drawn, and it must be drawn here. If we sacrifice homecoming – if we give up our most fundamental right to elect beautiful strangers to positions of nominal importance – then haven’t the terrorists already won?

Thanks to Jeremy for driving while I wrote and for letting ideas bounce around the car. Jesse Hicks enjoys satire and long walks on the beach. He can be complained to at [email protected].