It’s Not STUPIT

We know it looks crazy to you. We know you probably didn’t even notice the new spat of fliers. But the ferment over university silence—at Columbia, universities nationwide, and a fair number of institutions across the pond—on issues of Palestinian academic freedom is worth your attention. Everyone has already been through the Stages of Student Politics (STUPIT) with regard to our friends downtown:

1. Recognition—”Did you see on Bwog...”
2. Self-Righteous Indignation—”What a bunch of turdblossoms. Good thing I’m not a turdblossom.”
3. Dissemination of Self-Righteous Indignation—”Did you see that there are a bunch of turdblossoms at NYU?”
4. Forgetting—“Whoa, did you hear about that exorcism?”

And this pattern is to some degree understandable. We aren’t all riveted by student politics and the cool kids are more interested in Wwoof-ing and tongue-tripping berry parties. At the same time, it’s useful to point out how radical student actions, like those recently taken at New York University and frequently seen at Columbia, may have great utilitarian value for progressives of all stripes.

Now, our first reaction to news of the NYU occupation was not especially favorable. A number of the demands were spot-on, and we have no doubt that NYU is the unfeeling corporate behemoth that the students claim it to be, but occupying a building seemed both childish and anachronistic. Any effort toward policy change requires organizing and educating the student body—to fail to build a base of support and still insist on radical action demonstrates (1) less respect for “the people” than leftist politics would imply and (2) a self-indulgent desire to relive student protests of yore. Nonetheless, without the protest, the particular issues at NYU involving tuition and investment would never have been shoved under our noses. The momentum from the New School and NYU occupations ensured that growing student resentment over issues of college administration and Palestinian affairs was featured front and center in student discussions and city media, in a way that fliering for the zillionth time would not have.

Successful examples from the past abound. Consider the divestment campaign against apartheid in South Africa, when Columbia stood at the forefront of progressive action. As the New York Times reported on May 7, 1978, the University Senate voted to sell “stocks in corporations with South African holdings if the corporations showed ‘indifference’ to the country’s apartheid politics.” Meanwhile, 300 students “protested loudly outside” the senate proceedings in support of divestment. Together, the student activists, senators, and trustees set the tone for a morally responsible investment. The action taken by Columbia swept the country, and is credited with helping swing the pendulum that eventually ended white supremacist rule in South Africa.

The lessons to extract from the drama currently unfolding are easy to pick out. As the New York Times dutifully reported, both radical students and Senate functionaries contributed to the effort. What the Times did not cover was the hours of meeting, talking, mobilizing, and demonstrating by students in favor of more radical action that created political space in which the senate could act. The students had wanted the school to sell stocks from all companies that would not remove South African holdings, and by pressuring the administration with extreme actions, the students shifted the terms of the debate leftward to the point where senate action seemed moderate.

We can do the same. Instead of belittling the genuine efforts of groups like the Columbia Palestine Forum, we should appreciate the space their actions create for progressive change. Let’s give these groups credit for raising important issues on campus. Before we slip straight into Stage 2—Self-Righteous Indignation—remember that without student groups, we may not have considered these issues at all. Perhaps this is an opportunity for the Advisory Committee on Socially Responsible Investing to recommend that the trustees divest from arms manufacturers. The spirit is aligned with the activists’ demands, but the recommendation might succeed because it avoids taking a political stance on the world’s most controversial conflict.

It bears mentioning that we at Shock and Awe don’t think there is an easy, punchy way to address all the issues at stake here. Radicals may be offended by the implication that their goals are unattainable, and more moderate progressives may resent being asked to consider the merits of extremism. In some sense we are stuck between fundamental sympathy for leftist positions and a hesitancy to approach them from a unilateral cadre. The best we can do is to turn off the gut reactions and seriously consider what motivates our peers.

Sarah Leonard is a Columbia College junior majoring in history. Kate Redburn is a Columbia College junior majoring in history and African studies. Shock and Awe runs alternate Fridays. opinion@columbiaspectator.com.