'Occupy and Escalate'x-posted: howtheuniversityworks.com
During last week's massive 10-campus walkout, several dozen students and workers occupied (video) the Graduate Student Commons at the University of California at Santa Cruz (UCSC), issuing statements frankly acknowledging their intention to escalate the conflict: "Occupation is a tactic for escalating struggles," they note at their website, "We must face the fact that the time for pointless negotiations is over."
Their supporters aim to initiate some actual thought about the role of higher education in the economy. "A university diploma is now worth no more than a share in General Motors," observes the author of the compelling Communique From an Absent Future:
We work and we borrow in order to work and to borrow. And the jobs we work toward are the jobs we already have. Close to three-quarters of students work while in school, many full-time; for most, the level of employment we obtain while students is the same that awaits after graduation. Meanwhile, what we acquire isn't education; it's debt. We work to make money we have already spent, and our future labor has already been sold on the worst market around. ... Even leisure is a form of job training. The idiot crew of the frat houses drink themselves into a stupor with all the dedication of lawyers working late at the office. Kids who smoked weed and cut class in high school now pop Adderall and get to work. We power the diploma factory on the treadmills in the gym.
Noting that public employees, the homeless and the unemployed have been demonstrating across the state, supporters argue that "all of our futures are linked" and the struggle over higher education is "one among many, [so] our movement will have to join with these others, breeching the walls of the university compounds and spilling into the streets."
I completed an interview with their spokesperson this morning, on the fourth day of the occupation.
Q. Sounds pretty raucous in there. How long have you been at it?
We've occupied this space for almost four days now! This is one of the longest student occupations in many, many years.
Q. How many of you are there, and who do you represent?There are several dozen or so occupiers, plus countless numbers of supporters on the outside. It's been very impressive. For example, one first-year student, after being on campus for just one week, almost immediately organized food drives with students in the dormitories for us.
We honestly do not seek to represent anyone or any particular groups. Rather, we're emphasizing our message: We want students, faculty, and staff at UC to occupy and escalate to stop the destruction of public education in California, and we call on the people of California who are similarly and unfairly affected by our state's fiscal crisis to escalate in their own communities. The time for piecemeal negotiations with those who have fiscal authority over us to protect our own particular programs, jobs, or bottom lines is over because our demands are only turned against those who face similar cuts, thus making foes of people who should be building a broad coalition to stop and reverse the damaging cuts.
Q. What inspired you to occupy UCSC, as opposed to other tactics, such as demonstrating, etc?9/24 was the first day of classes at UCSC. As you probably know, there was a system-wide Walkout across all of the UC campuses on 9/24. We did demonstrate that day; we walked the picket line with the UPTE and CUE unions; we responded to the UC faculty call for a Walkout; some of us walked in uninvited on the large undergraduate lectures of those professors who failed to honor the picket line to make an emergency announcement about the Walkout.
Let us provide some additional context: The Santa Cruz campus of UC was already hit hard last year by steep budget cuts. The Community Studies program was gutted; minority student programs were cut back; faculty searches for departments desperate for replacements, such as the History of Consciousness, were cancelled; health-care costs for graduate students were forced up; family student housing rents were jacked up -- just to name a few of the attempts to balance the budget on the backs of those least able to afford it and the most vulnerable in the system. Undergraduates, graduate students, and some unions organized to stop those initial rounds of damaging cuts through petitions, demonstrations, and other tactics, to no avail.
A dire situation only worsened over the summer, which prompted the faculty to get more involved at the system level. So many of us at Santa Cruz already realized by the end of last year that the nature and severity of these budget cuts required an escalation beyond tactics of resistance that were attempted yet failed last year. As our press release (https://occupyca.wordpress.com) says, "occupation is a way of escalating struggles." This is what we decided to do to jumpstart a year of endless confrontation with the administration over their destructive logic that subordinates everything and everyone to the budget. This is only the beginning.
Q. What are your demands specifically?
Our primary message is directed at those who should be our allies within the UC, the public education system generally, and indeed throughout the state of California, as opposed to those who have power over us. We would like to see a broad social movement against cuts to education and all other state social programs and services. Thus we appeal to these groups to organize, occupy, and escalate at their schools and colleges and universities, as well as in their local communities. To sum up, demonstrations address specific issues; our actions aim at a much broader struggle. Workers are losing their jobs. Students are unable to enroll in school. We have no choice but to occupy and escalate. We call on the people of California to do the same.
Q. This is a movement that you hope will spread to other campuses, isn't it? Any developments we should watch for?Not only the other UC campuses, but actually throughout the entire state of California and even beyond. We've already been on the radio shows of several UC campuses to talk to those UC communities about the need to organize and escalate and occupy, so, yes, you should watch for developments there! The one-day Walkout and our occupation are only first-steps, the genesis of a year-long or multi-year effort to take back the UC, to rewrite its priorities in the interest of public education and not privatization. The same thing needs to happen to protect K-12 education in California; did you know that one school district closed all 28 of its school libraries due to budget cuts? Whose vision of a quality K-12 education would not include access to libraries? Our purpose is not to blame local school administrators but to show how the cuts affecting the UC are also impacting everyone else in the public sector of the state. The process which has led to this point is simply unacceptable.
Q. I take it you've followed the recent occupations at NYU and the New School, and perhaps earlier ones at Urbana-Champaign. Any lessons you've taken from those experiences?We've received statements of solidarity from student groups across the country, including several schools along the east coast, which can be read at https://occupyca.wordpress.com. We want to express our thanks for the support across the nation. Why stop at the borders of California? Let's take this effort to escalate to the nation as well! Public universities are being run like corporations all across the U.S. This must be brought to an end.
Q. Are you in touch with supporters outside?
Absolutely. The occupation on the inside is only one aspect of the escalation. This requires a lot of outside support, including many students who've been sleeping outside the doors to the occupation zone, volunteers to pick up trash and keep the space clean, students going around campus to spread the word about the occupation, and more. Then there are those who are working on logistics and press coverage.
Q. What will it take for the state government and administration to
move in a different direction?This is a big question! Unfortunately, it may not be enough simply to focus on amending the state of California constitution, which makes it notoriously difficult to construct a reasonable budget, or simply to focus on the next round of state elections in order to put into power friendlier decision makers. These things might certainly help or be steps along the way.
On the one hand, our occupation is informed by a deep critique of the political economy of the system that underscores the unacceptable way in which things are accorded value by nothing more than the bottom line, by nothing more than the potential to make profit (and this is what is driving the budget cuts and restructuring at the UC); on the other hand, we don't suppose to have the answer in detail to this question, though we are convinced that attempts to negotiate to protect our own singular interests or programs or jobs -- which is tantamount to arguing for their value against, and not in conjunction with or in a complementary relationship to other programs -- are only making matters even worse for everyone. Deleveraging in order to rectify problems in one's balance sheet -- whether at the state, university, or local level -- does not cleanly map onto a process of social devaluation, and yet this congruence is a demand of the standard operating procedures of how our institutions are currently being run, including our universities. Protests are a manifestation of that gap between the two processes of balancing a budget and people feeling their own devaluation by the system.
Anyone who slavishly submits to a social logic that reduces social things to a line item in the budget might find it hard to comprehend how protests are part and parcel to the system, not roadblocks to its smoother operation. Protests on the level of the UC Walkout and now our occupation signify that this imperative to rectify accounts is determined by a grossly unfair set of priorities that must be rejected.
We're tired of hearing UC President Mark Yudof talk about making the UC more "efficient," more "competitive," about "human capital," not because we are against some notion of what it means to be efficient, to not be wasteful, but because his speech demonstrates he needs a more complex analytic of the dynamics overtaking the UC system in this crisis. A broad-based social movement that has the capacity to articulate an alternative collective vision to the narrow, corporatist special-interests that control our budgets and strategic planning will be necessary. Nobody is sure what this will look like yet.
For now, we believe one of the first steps to building such a movement is to show that escalation and occupation is necessary and possible. We hope that groups of students, faculty, and everyday Californians can begin to see themselves, too, as people who can organize, occupy, and escalate to fight back.
Follow their websites, OccupyCa, We Want Everything and (microblog) occupyucsc and coverage in the UCSC newspaper.
"A child's learning is the function more of the characteristics of his classmates than those of the teacher." James Coleman, 1972
Showing posts with label UC strike. Show all posts
Showing posts with label UC strike. Show all posts
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Seeking Solidarity Among K-12 and University Educators: "Occupy and Escalate"
From CHE:
Friday, September 11, 2009
Twelve Thousand UC Profs to Strike September 24
I didn't know how long it would take for the university knowledge workers of America to get their heads out of their Derridas long enough to notice that the corporationists have targeted the American university system for its relentless institution crusher. Looks like something is finally happening. With the support of AAUP, 12,000 UC professors will walk out on September 24. HT to Monty Neill:
Under the cover of the summer months, UC administration has pushed through a program of tuition hikes, enrollment cuts, layoffs, furloughs, and increased class sizes that harms students and jeopardizes the livelihoods of the most vulnerable university employees. These decisions fundamentally compromise the mission of the University of California. They are complicit with the privatization of public education, and they have been made in a manner that flouts the principle of shared governance at the core of the UC faculty's capacity to guide the future of the University in accordance with its mission.When will the NEA and AFT call for their 4 million members to strike to save public education from the takeover by the Oligarchs?
On September 24, in solidarity with UC staff and students, faculty throughout the University of California system will walk out in defense of public education.
Please indicate your support using the signature form at the top of this page.
Organizational questions: ucfacultywalkout@gmail.com
Join the Facebook group.
Follow updates on our blog.
Open Letter To UC Faculty
A CORRECTION: FROM SHARED GOVERNANCE TO COLLECTIVE ACTION
August 31, 2009
Dear Colleagues,
We are grateful for Provost Pitts' letter of 21 August—sent at the opening of a late summer weekend, with unimpeachably cowardly timing—for clarifying certain matters. Foremost among them is the farce of shared governance, in distinction to emergency powers. It is now finally inarguable that the polling of the faculty on significant matters is a fig leaf for the will of the Chancellors and the Office of the President. We stand corrected: shared governance is merely the polite name for emergency powers.
The implementation of the Regents' furlough plan—approved on the same day as the President's emergency powers—was presented to faculty as a process to be worked out at the discretion of each campus. On July 29, the Academic Council, representing the Academic Senates of all ten campuses, voted unanimously for systemwide implementation of at least six instruction—day furloughs over the academic year, with permission for campuses to have up to ten such days.
This recommendation—based on the expressly stated will of the faculty—was summarily rejected by the Chancellors and the Office of the President.
The reason for this unilateral decision is clear: the administration seeks to evade public accountability for the manner in which it has managed the budget crisis. It was the "optics"� of the Senate Council's recommendation that were judged untenable. The Office of the President has failed to arrive at a plan that would protect the interests of both students and workers. It wishes to disguise the harm this failure has done to the University's mission. Or better: it seeks to shift the blame for this failure to the faculty, should we be so bold as to hold the President accountable to the consequences of his own plan. Toward this evasion, UCOP has flagrantly erased the difference between a furlough and a paycut, presenting the latter in the guise of the former.
The ten Academic Senates unanimously mandated furloughs taken on instructional days for good reasons. These reasons exceed the particular interests of the faculty; they pertain to the collective interests of all workers and students. Instructional furloughs pressure the state to cease defunding the UC system, and they pressure the Office of the President to confront the fact that its overall approach to budget reform is unsustainable and unjust. UCOP seeks to alleviate that pressure by feigning the minimal impact of cuts upon the operations of the University and the education of its students. By doing so it makes clear its real interest: not to engage in a serious reevaluation of budgetary priorities, but to occlude the necessity of doing so.
The University's "paramount teaching mission," we are told, justifies the imposition of furloughs on non—instructional days. But the President does not hesitate to fund the budget shortfall through ballooning tuition payments and increased class sizes. The decision on furloughs does not serve to mitigate the effects of these policies; it serves to perpetuate them while dissimulating their effects. We cannot allow either the California legislature or the Office of the President to proceed as though cuts to public education do not have debilitating consequences.
We are told that the management of the cuts is a collective process. In fact it operates by autocratic fiat. We are told that the cuts are temporary measures. But we know we are in the midst of a long-term crisis. Each day that we continue to accept our role as bystanders to the administration's plan for remaking the University only helps to guarantee that the sequence of pay and enrollment cuts, layoffs, tuition and workload increases will continue. Thus far we have attempted to intervene by choosing among the options offered to us by the administration. The Office of the President has made it obvious that even such modest interventions will not be respected. We call for a decisive response.
If we find the President's disdain for collective decision making unacceptable, we must make it clear, collectively, that we will not accept it. If we hope to intervene in the process of decision making that will determine the future of the UC system, we must interrupt our exclusion from that process—now.
It has been made evident that we cannot intervene as governors; we are compelled to intervene as workers.
We call for a systemwide walkout of all UC faculty on September 24, 2009.
We call for the suspension of faculty teaching on this date pending three demands, which we understand as absolutely minimal:
1. No furloughs or paycuts on salaries below $40,000.
2. The immediate institution of the Academic Senate Council's July 29 recommendation regarding the implementation of furloughs.
3. Full disclosure of the budget.
These demands are addressed immediately to the Regents' furlough plan and the Office of the President's edict concerning its implementation. However, despite their local character, these demands are made in solidarity with those of all UC workers and students. They cannot be used as a pretext for further layoffs or fee increases.
We ask all faculty who support this collective action to sign their names using the form at the top of this page.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)