While the generations older than me will roll their eyes at the notion, I do have nearly 20 years on most of the kids in college. I will preface my comments on the strike a bit, saying it was probably not the safest or brightest idea to attempt to block I-80, at the same time, somehow the kids of 1971 managed to do the same thing, and at least from the cursory view of history, succeed at it.
I have read comments from elsewhere that students were unhappy that their bus schedules were thrown off, that their classes were disrupted, I’m sure the students at the library were not happy that their studies were halted, fire alarms were pulled across campus, etc.
The Enterprise quote the outgoing ASUCD president Joe Catham who described the fact that people were frustrated by the disruption to classes caused by the marches and false alarms.
He told the Enterprise:
“I talked to a lot of my friends and a lot people on the street, and they’re saying they’re confused about what the protesters are going for. It would seem the protesters are calling for more funding for education and protesting increased fees, but (disrupting) class seems counterproductive.”
He then applauded the protesters for “doing a good job of getting the state to listen to higher education” but at the same time challenged “the organizers to think of less disruptive ways to do their thing.”
Likewise in-coming President Jack Zwald called on both sides to act rationally. He said they need restraint and “level-headed thinking from all parties. This is in order to ensure student safety and to ensure that these events are not marred by violence.”
One namelesss and random poster on the Sacramento Bee summed it up like this:
“Idiots. All of them. They disrupted my classes at Davis, blocked my route home, and were just generally disrespectful. I was happy to see them getting beaten with batons and shot with pepperballs after they would not comply with authority.”
I do not mean to pick on Mr. Chatham or Mr. Zwald, but at this point, less drastic measures probably are not going to do the trick. A peaceful protest will get a quick mention on the news and then they will move on to their crime stories and human interest stories. Voting is a great thing, but part of the problem in California is that given the two-thirds vote requirement, voting seems to be a limited means to achieve any goal.
Change in society has never occurred without breaking a few eggs. We have seen the revival of the tea parties as a means to protest taxation and other government policies, but we seem to have forgotten that the spirit of the tea party was civil disobedience.
We may think of the act of striking as a peaceful act these days, but in the late 1800s and early 1900s, strikes involved the violent confrontation between striking workers and strike breakers, the militias, the police, and sometimes all three at once. The eight hour working day was literally achieved with blood, sweat, and toil.
Even the civil rights movement, the bastion of passive and non-violent disobedience, would not have succeeded without the protests getting the literal crap beaten out of them with batons, police dogs, and fire hoses.
What would we think of Nelson Mandela had he not spent years in prison for fighting against Apartheid?
One of the great men of the civil rights movement was now Congressman John Lewis, Lewis was beaten on the bridge to Selma within inches of his life. And of course Martin Luther King, Jr., the ultimate man of peace, was himself despised and reviled. We think of men like Martin Luther King, Jr. and Cesar Chavez as teddy bear’s. Both sides of the political aisle attempt to claim the legacy of Dr. King. Quickly we forget that he was a radical in his day.
The level of violence seen by the civil rights movement and the anti-Vietnam War protests did not occur on Thursday however we did see batons, pellets, and even a failed tasering. These moments were captured on video recordings.
The fact of the matter is that public officials, students leaders, and the police have to call for calm out of some sense of responsibility, but the other fact of the matter is that we would not be taking about this subject had calm ensued on Thursday.
Maybe what people really need is to have their daily routines disrupted. I talked to a lot of students out there last week and hope to talk to more this week. The impact of fee cuts is devastating. There are many students who just cannot afford an education anymore. There are many people who are no longer on campus to speak out.
I am tired of reading about students whining that their classes were disrupted or that they could not get home, at least they still have an education. There is a bigger picture out there and if the only thing that some had to sacrifice was a few hours of class or an inconvenience getting home, it is a small thing.
We can try to logic the situation and argue that we have no choice but to cut education, but that is playing by their rules, why should a student concede that?
We need to start thinking about our priorities. We have spent far too much time thinking that we can have everything – good services, good education, low taxes, but something has to give. However, it is not the job of the student protesters to think about these logistics anymore than it was the job of the civil rights movement to think about whatever social disruptions a free and segregated society might cause, or the job of the anti-war protesters to think about how to pull out of Vietnam.
I will not call on people to try to block highways but I will say we need more disruptions, too many people have gotten through this near-depression without having to be inconvenienced and until people are inconvenienced they do not have to think.
The kids are alright, I wish my generation would have been more active saying no rather than going along to get along.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
David, I agree that the kids are alright and certainly the current political and financial crisis is in some part due to previous decades of complacency. I would point out, however, that education has been made a target of the budget slashers due to a dearth of logic. The vast sums of corporate welfare given to energy companies, financial institutions, auto makers and others would more than subsidize public education. At the same time we have been sold the idea that education needs to be stripped to its bare bones. Has it not occurred to anyone else that the reason Johnny can’t read and Sue can’t calculate percentages is that we have cut all the culture and joy out of the system? Music, drama, dance and sports are the practical applications of basic education, thereby giving students a reason to learn.(I would not know how to convert fractions to decimals if not for batting averages.) You are correct about setting our priorities. As long as we worry more about property taxes and land values than the effect our choices have on our posterity the young will always be handed an empty plate and they should be resentful. If, on the other hand, we decide to live our lives based on mutual growth and enrichment, there might be no need for “disruption” and confrontation. A very 60s sentiment brought to you by an aging hippie who raised his children to treasure learning for its own sake and treat everyone with respect for their humanity.
[i]Change in society has never occurred without breaking a few eggs.[/i]
That is certainly not true. One of the biggest changes to our society here in Davis is the bicycle network, but nobody “broke eggs” to get that to happen.
But to the extent that there is any truth to it, sure you might get change, but not necessarily change for the better. The mess that California is in is the result of decades of, “We’re mad as hell as we’re not going to take it any more”, imposed by state propositions. Every solution that comes from a state proposition, comes busting in with sharp elbows and hurts everything else. Two examples of that are Prop 98, an education initiative that brings only bad news to UC and CSU; and Prop 71, a lavish stem cell initiative that UC can’t use to help students.
In the present case, what is the message when protesters are too lazy to go to Sacramento, and instead disrupt classes on campus? The message is that they don’t care about better funding or standards of education; they want lower fees no matter what. They would be just as happy to have UC be a diploma mill, if that made it cheaper.
If that is the kind of university that they want, then probably they won’t get it. They won’t get it because too many other “kids” the same age don’t agree with them. But if by chance they did succeed, then certainly I would go teach students in some other state.
DPD: “I will not call on people to try to block highways but I will say we need more disruptions, too many people have gotten through this near-depression without having to be inconvenienced and until people are inconvenienced they do not have to think.”
Just for context, I was on the U of MD campus during the Viet Nam War riots. Cars were overturned and burned, major roadways were blocked, classes were cancelled, the National Guard was placed on campus with 18 year old militiamen holding rifles. As a student, I was enraged my rights to own a car were endangered, my rights to use the roadway were infringed upon, my right to go to class was stomped on, and my personal safety was put into jeapordy.
Fast forward to the recent I-80 protests. I do not agree that students had the right to disrupt traffic, endanger everyone’s safety, prevent students from going to class or studying, etc. In short, violent and disruptive disobedience is a slippery slope to anarchy. Had the students been out there protesting an unpopular view, such as allowing any and all housing development to increase the tax base to provide more funding for education, how many of you sympathetic to violent or disruptive civil disobedience would have approved?
Once you approve disruptive and violent civil disobedience, you open the door for looting, dangerous behavior that effects everyone’s safety, and you take away the rights of others who may not agree with your cause. Some of us do not necessarily agree with the students position that more funding for higher education should be forthcoming immediately and no matter what with no strings attached, at the cost of other state programs that are just as if not more vital. Funding for higher education is a complicated issue, e.g. Should we be paying bonuses to administrators right now?; Should new construction on the UC campuses continue as usual?; Do we need to streamline higher education more?, etc.
We have a system in place for addressing grievances. The problem is that 1) people don’t use it; 2) it takes more work to toil within the system to effect change; 3) and often people think they can have it all and not pay for it.
People don’t vote, they don’t write letters to their legislators, they don’t tend to recall legislators that are really not acting in the best interests of citizens – in short they don’t hold legislators accountable. Very rarely are petition drives used, not enough students back candidates that would support higher education and more responsible fiscal policies. It takes a lot of work to head up petition drives and join campaigns for good legislators – it is much easier to throw tantrums on I-80 for a day.
And too often the voters believe they can have everything for nothing. A good example is the vote to pay for high speed rail, at a time when we can’t even pay for higher education. Another example is the money that was put towards renovating the DHS stadium, then the whining that came after that we have no funding to renovate Emerson Junior High. We cannot necessarily fund everything – difficult choices have to be made, especially in the current economic climate.
In point of fact, the UC system cannot continue business as usual, building football stadiums, wine institutes, music auditoriums, renovating coffee houses and game rooms, in an economic downturn, and then complain UC doesn’t have enough money to pay for basics. Why aren’t students protesting the waste that is occurring within the UC system itself, but do so peacefully? Go to legislators, and enlist their assistance to root out waste in the UC system – students are probably aware of where a lot of it is?
The name of the game of those in charge of the money is do away with basics, and keep the frills. That way budget cuts hurt enough to make the little people protest for full reinstatement of funding, but deters any demand for more responsible budgeting. Students need to understand this basic concept, because it is the underlying problem.
E Roberts Musser-I know for a fact that the Montgomery bus boycott inconvenienced and angered many people. The Freedom riders who followed were threatened, beaten, and killed. These protests were certainly illegal in the Jim Crow south. I cannot help but wonder where the issue of equal rights would be today if no one had broken the law and interrupted the normal flow of commerce. How long before the “system in place for addressing grievances” would have worked? The reality is that you can’t secretly fund endless wars on stateless terrorists on the one hand and claim that there is nothing left for welfare and education on the other. That choice is as phony as the pretext for attacking Iraq. If I am forced to make such a choice then I will opt for welfare and education,know that a well educated healthy populace reaps returns while war only returns the dead and wounded.
From today’s Enterprise ([url]http://www.davisenterprise.com/story.php?id=101.15[/url]): “UC Davis Medical Center will open a new $62 million Institute for Regenerative Cures facility in Sacramento on Wednesday.”
For students upset about fees and classes, this Institute for Regenerative Cures is yet another side project that won’t help them very much. But the thing is, this institute is the result of California’s Proposition 71, which provides an enormous amount of money for stem cell research in California.
The reason that public policy in California is going to hell in a handbasket is certainly not public apathy. Despite what many people think, it is also not because the politicians are all crooks. Politicians are “bad” everywhere; the ones in California aren’t particularly worse than those in other states.
No, what makes California different is that is so much easier for “the people” to “send ’em a message”. Different popular movements, including stem cell research and college education and of course tax relief, are all fighting against each other. The only winners are people who hate goverment so much that they want to see it fail.
To suggest a moral equivalence between civil rights and the Vietnam war protests on one hand, and protests against fee increases on the other hand, is quite a stretch. Hundreds of young Americans. and Vietnamese civilians, were dying each month in Vietnam. Civil rights protests involved basic human rights.
Attending a UC campus, by contrast, is not even an entitlement, much less any kind of civil right. There are other options. Funding is available for those at lower income levels.
A big peaceful rally to express frustration would have been fine. Trying to intentionally disrupt the lives of people who are not even in any position to effect the desired results (reduced fees, I guess) is either pointless or counterproductive. It suggests lack of perspective about the bigger picture and a level of naive self-absorption.
Greg, the initiative process abuse is the cause of almost all of our fiscal problems in CA, but unless you disconnect the lever, the rats will keep choosing cocaine over food.
[i]To suggest a moral equivalence between civil rights and the Vietnam war protests on one hand, and protests against fee increases on the other hand, is quite a stretch.[/i]
I agree. In both the civil rights movement and the Vietnam war, people protested a great injustice that was foisted upon them. In the civil rights movement, it was racial segregation; in the Vietnam War, it was the draft. At UC Davis, students are protesting the cost of a lucky privilege.
[i]Greg, the initiative process abuse is the cause of almost all of our fiscal problems in CA, but unless you disconnect the lever, the rats will keep choosing cocaine over food.[/i]
Not the most polite metaphor, but okay. But the thing is, the only real way for UC to disconnect the lever is so-called “privatization”, i.e., finding alternative funding. As long as the protesters stay on campus, they are just hammering on the drug lever themselves.
Elaine: While I understand where you are coming from there, sometimes I think you need to really inconvenience people to get their attention. I think the Vietnam protests were crucial to changing public opinion on that war.
That leads us to Don’s comment, and Don, I just disagree with you, I think the right to education is a fundamental right and when you price it out of reach for people, it is a danger. Yeah, probably wouldn’t place it up there with the civil rights movement and Vietnam war if we were rank ordering them, but at the same time, I think we need to start thinking about the consequences of our policies.
There is no right to a college education, at a four-year university.
It is certainly a desirable goal that all people have access to one. It was a major value of my parents’ generation that they be able to provide that for their children. And we do provide it to people who have served their country.
It is a regrettable consequence of the current recession that UC will become an even more elite institution. But there are many regrettable consequences of the current recession and California’s ongoing structural fiscal problems. Is a fee increase at UC more urgent than DJUSD finances, the city’s budget problems, and the loss of state funding to counties? The increase in UC fees is actually less onerous in some ways, since scholarships exist and community colleges remain affordable.
Throughout all of this I have been unable to discern exactly what the protesters want to DO about the problem. Raise taxes? Redirect resources from local government? You and I know that cutting administrative budgets won’t do it. So if they just wanted to vent about their frustration about current economic realities, then I say welcome to the club.
“…sometimes I think you need to really inconvenience people to get their attention…” What good does it do to “get their attention?” Is the driver on I-80 able to effect any change? Do the Davis drivers who can’t get through the intersection at Russell and Anderson have any impact on the current situation? Most of them are probably represented by Lois Wolk and Mariko Yamada. Do you think they need to call Wolk and Yamada about the UC funding?
There is a discussion going on at Davis Wiki about this: here and here.
Don:
There is nothing inherently wrong with what you are saying, but at the same time, to some extent, protesters should not necessarily have to come up with the solutions to the problems so much as draw attention to them.
Don, The entire California state government, the regents, administrators, and many thousands of parents and students need to engage in this discussion now. In many voices, wisdom may be found. If this action brings about that discussion, it’s to the good. As for a right to a higher education, well, the trend in American democracy has been to expand and extend the definition of rights and I believe that education at all levels will be included. The challenges of the future are likely to be highly technical and universally felt. We would be foolish to allow the competitor nations, China and India, to dominate the world’s high tech industries because we under-valued higher education.
We would be foolish to allow the competitor nations, China and India, to dominate the world’s high tech industries because we under-valued higher education.
We are also watching significantly degraded K-12 education. Someone who graduated from HS last year probably had a higher quality grade school education than someone who will graduate from HS in five years at the rate we’re going.
Some U.S. politician made a comment about wanting to bomb Afghanistan back into the stone age back in 2001 after 9/11. Here we are doing it to ourselves, but peacefully (without the bombs) by underfunding the very resource that provides social and economic mobility that we take for granted — education.
I don’t think that it makes sense to skew the discussion with a scare scenario of China and India “dominating” the world’s high tech industries. First, these two countries have 40% of the world’s people, but only about half of the spending resources of the United States. It isn’t fair to expect the average American to maintain the spending privileges of 16 Asians. Second, they are poor countries despite their gains, and it will take a very long time for them to truly “dominate” the world economy, even if that were in any sense an unnatural outcome.
What is true is that California is giving away some of its edge in science and technology to other states and to Canada. That’s not just because a bad economy fell on California. It’s certainly not because California’s politicians or university executives are the world’s worst politicians or university executives. The coup-de-grace is that California’s voters have given the politicians hell one too many times. California is even giving away talent to Michigan, even though Michigan has a worse economy.
David,
What you are seem to be saying is that not only do you feel everyone has a right to a college education, they also seem to have a right to attend the college they want to, and to pay what they feel is an appropriate amount for this college education.
My feelings can be best summed up by saying simply that “when it rains everyone gets wet”. Students didn’t plan on big tuition hikes but when it rains everyone gets wet. One third of older Americans who planned on retiring didn’t plan on having to defer retirement but when it rains everyone gets wet. Many older americans did not plan on having to move in with their children because their nest egg vanished but when it rains everyone gets wet. Millions didn’t plan on losing the home they purchased in the last five years because it is now worth than the purchase price, but when it rains everyone gets wet.
Education is no more a sacred cow than prisons, public health, transportation, public safety, health care, welfare, or any number of other programs. A college education in Califoria is more affordable than almost anywhere else in the country.
Wesley: I don’t think that sums up my view. My view, is that cuts have consequences, and when things do not affect us personally, those consequences may seem distant. In a time like this, as you say, everyone gets wet when it rains, but I think everyone also ought to reminding us that we need to fix the dam.
[i]Education is no more a sacred cow than prisons, public health, transportation, public safety, health care, welfare, or any number of other programs.[/i]
Wesley, in the California state budget, prisons are a sacred cow and universities are a dirty dog. California spends more on prisons than on universities. Community colleges are protected by Prop 98, but the universities, UC and CSU, are protected only by fees and outside funding.
[i]A college education in California is more affordable than almost anywhere else in the country.[/i]
Not any more! It has rocketed from one of the cheapest to one of the most expensive.
DPD: “Elaine: While I understand where you are coming from there, sometimes I think you need to really inconvenience people to get their attention. I think the Vietnam protests were crucial to changing public opinion on that war.”
We will have to agree to disagree on this one. Burning cars, disrupting classes, endangering personal safety as protest methods WERE NOT justified during the Viet Nam War as they are not now. Remember Kent State, where four students were shot and killed? The end does not justify the means. I’ll ask again, what if the students on I-80 were protesting an issue you were not sympathetic too, such as demanding more residential development to increase the tax base to better fund education? Would you be applauding their efforts to protest, no matter how much danger it put everyone in on I-80?
Don Shor: “There is no right to a college education, at a four-year university.
It is certainly a desirable goal that all people have access to one. It was a major value of my parents’ generation that they be able to provide that for their children. And we do provide it to people who have served their country.
It is a regrettable consequence of the current recession that UC will become an even more elite institution. But there are many regrettable consequences of the current recession and California’s ongoing structural fiscal problems. Is a fee increase at UC more urgent than DJUSD finances, the city’s budget problems, and the loss of state funding to counties? The increase in UC fees is actually less onerous in some ways, since scholarships exist and community colleges remain affordable.
Throughout all of this I have been unable to discern exactly what the protesters want to DO about the problem. Raise taxes? Redirect resources from local government? You and I know that cutting administrative budgets won’t do it. So if they just wanted to vent about their frustration about current economic realities, then I say welcome to the club.
“…sometimes I think you need to really inconvenience people to get their attention…” What good does it do to “get their attention?” Is the driver on I-80 able to effect any change? Do the Davis drivers who can’t get through the intersection at Russell and Anderson have any impact on the current situation? Most of them are probably represented by Lois Wolk and Mariko Yamada. Do you think they need to call Wolk and Yamada about the UC funding?”
Well said Don!
The increase in UC fees is actually less onerous in some ways, since scholarships exist and community colleges remain affordable.
Although the CSU, UC, and K-12 situations are better known in public news discussion, community colleges are also maxed out in their own ways.
CSU/UC fee increases and enrollment caps, plus the high California unemployment in addition to the usual expected enrollments have led to a situation where enrollments peaked and they can’t take any more. Normally it would be desirable for a community college to open up new sections of classes in these times, but there isn’t funding available for that. If you can’t enroll early for your classes, then what’s left is extremely slim.
And community colleges are now under their own pressures to make cuts.
“I’ll ask again, what if the students on I-80 were protesting an issue you were not sympathetic too, such as demanding more residential development to increase the tax base to better fund education? Would you be applauding their efforts to protest, no matter how much danger it put everyone in on I-80?”
There are two separate points embedded in here. First, is whether or not I agree with the protesters, I’m obviously not going to applaud protesters I don’t agree with. However, second is whether I would condemn their protest measures, and I don’t believe I would. I think people I disagree with have as much right to protest as people I agree with.
“…community colleges are also maxed out in their own ways.”
Community colleges have experienced about a 1% drop in enrollment (http://www.timesheraldonline.com/news/ci_14518101), in spite of an 8% cut in funding. So classes are tight and some are being dropped. Nevertheless, the system has nearly 3 million students and the cost is low.
David: “it was probably not the safest or brightest idea to attempt to block I-80, at the same time, somehow the kids of 1971 managed to do the same thing, and at least from the cursory view of history, succeed at it.“
You seem to be endorsing this. It was a foolish and dangerous idea in 1971, and it is a foolish and dangerous idea now.
Blocking freeways, pulling fire alarms, blockading intersections. Is there any protest or any tactic you disapprove of?
David, what should be pointed out to all is that if you break the law you must be prepared to face the consequences, as civil rights and vietnam era protesters frequently did.
Community colleges have experienced about a 1% drop in enrollment, in spite of an 8% cut in funding. So classes are tight and some are being dropped. Nevertheless, the system has nearly 3 million students and the cost is low.
Just to clarify from the text of the article you cite, that drop in enrollment is not a drop in demand. It’s due to reduced supply/resources. Students aren’t able to get their classes and are giving up.
biddlin: very true, but by the same token, some of the key turning points were when protester’s were beaten on national TV and hoses and dogs were turned on them.
Prisons are getting a big piece of the pie in part because in 1994 Californians voted for Proposition 184, also known as the the 3 strikes law, by a margin of 72% to 28%. This mandates very long sentences for repeat offenders. This was part of a earlier and larger nationwide trend to get tough on crime.
The prisons are bursting at the seams, with most at 200% of design capacity. The federal courts have ruled that to be deliberately indifferent to the health care needs of inmates is cruel and unusual punishment, which is a violation of the 8th amendment. The same courts have ruled that prison overcrowding is a primary cause of the problems with the delivery of medical care in the prisons. They have ordered the state to reduce the inmate population by 40,000. A typical prison is built to house about 3,500 inmates. Given the public resistance for early release or lighter sentencing for such heinous crimes like cheese thievery, the only solution is to build more prisons. In 2007 the legislature passed AB 900 which authorizes the state sell bonds so the state can spend about 7.7 billion more to expand and upgrade the prison system capacity. You can blame the prison guards union for being very effective in advocating for their members, but you also have to blame your local judges, district attorneys, and yourselves if you voted for these get tough on crime laws.
If the 750,000 staff and students at UC-CSU were even marginally as effective as the public safety advocacy group, they could have a much bigger piece of the pie. Marching around campus, shutting down freeways, and occupying and vandalizing university admin buildings will do nothing.
[i]You can blame the prison guards union for being very effective in advocating for their members, but you also have to blame your local judges, district attorneys, and yourselves if you voted for these get tough on crime laws.[/i]
I certainly didn’t vote for them. I would have been one of the other 28% for sure. First off, getting tough on prisoners is not the same as getting tough on crime. Once the prisons fill up, then one way or another there will be a lot of reduced charges.
[i]If the 750,000 staff and students at UC-CSU were even marginally as effective as the public safety advocacy group, they could have a much bigger piece of the pie.[/i]
As effective at what? Scaring the public with child molesters? No university system in any state can make that kind of an argument.
The federal courts have ruled that to be deliberately indifferent to the health care needs of inmates is cruel and unusual punishment, which is a violation of the 8th amendment.
Outside the prison system, however, indifference to the health care needs of the U.S. citizenry is not deemed cruel and unusual punishment.
Outside the prison system, however, indifference to the health care needs of the U.S. citizenry is not deemed cruel and unusual punishment.
This brings to mind the scene from the movie, Sicko, when Michael Moore was seeking and was refused health care from Guantanamo for some chronically ill U.S. citizens.
The California Teachers Assoc did not get Prop 98 passed with scare tactics of “give us a bigger piece of the pie or all the children will become murderers and rapists.” They knew how to organize, how to package the message, and they got it done. The UC-CSU could learn from their tactics.
It is indeed a very sad statement that if you lost your job, can’t afford health insurance and get cancer or something, all your treatment is considered elective and you die. However if you happen to be in prison, you would get the latest diagnostic tests, consultations from leading oncologists from UCSF, and spare no expense treatment. Unfortunately if you are a ward of the state, the state pays for everything. All of the rest of us are at the mercy of the insurance companies, or have to beg and plead for charity care.