It seems the public school system, for all its supposed value as a driver of economic progress, has nevertheless failed in instilling students with the ability to make practical, ethical, or legal judgments. Over three dozen students took over Wheeler Hall, while many others protested outside, obstructed foot traffic, and pulled fire alarms. Their demands included the reinstatement of union workers fired in the aftermath of the budget  cuts, “good faith negotiations for the Bear’s Lair Food Court,” the renewal of the Rochdale co-op’s lease, and amnesty for themselves.

The entire protest movement is rife with contradictions. Shouting “Who’s University, Our University,” they prohibit other students from using the university facilities. Claiming a “right” to education – meaning a right to force someone to pay for their education – they infringe upon other students’ true right to education – the right to undertake a course of study with the consent of both the student and educator. In the course of their protest, they disrupted over 100 classes, affecting nearly 4,000 students. While they decry the university and legislature depriving students of their imagined rights, they seek amnesty for violating the real rights of thousands of students. And when it comes time to actually assert their demands, the issue of fees is nowhere to be found; instead, the university is pelted with demands not to allow Panda Express near campus. The protesters are right — a question of priorities, indeed.

The actions of the occupiers was a trespass, pure and simple. Each one is guilty of intentionally interfering with the operation of the university, obstructing and intimidating innocent civilians, and refusing to leave when asked. The university’s response has been rather predictable: negotiate with the protesters and attempt to come to a peaceful solution. This has proven far less than satisfactory. They employed negotiators such as Professor George Lakoff, who told the protesters that they could “come out, no handcuffs, no arrests, just a misdemeanor equivalent to jaywalking.” Lakoff, a leftist linguistics professor who has developed a reputation for “framing” (euphemizing) issues, once more showed his talent for lying to achieve his ends – the penalty for trespassing is up to six months of prison and a $1,000 fine. The fact that the university would employ him in this, or any, capacity, reveals their terrible intellectual dishonesty and shortsightedness (more on this anon).

The conflict did finally end when the police pushed through the crowd, arrested the offenders, and cited each of them with trespassing. But this is what they ought to have done from the outset – the protesters had every right to protest outside the building, but none to occupy it, and none to obstruct foot traffic (One protester said “Students are no different from police – you respect the police barricade, you respect the student barricade”, showing an inability to differentiate from a barricade meant to restore order and protect rights and one intended to sow chaos and infringe on rights). The right to free speech and assembly does not entail the right to deprive others of their rights. There are those who will point to videos of “police brutality,” which include striking protesters with batons and shooting particular protesters with rubber bullets. Such reports mischaracterize police brutality, which refers to capricious, unwarranted, and excessive use of force by the police. This was not the case in this situation: protesters were ordered to stand aside to allow the police into Wheeler to make their lawful arrests; failure to comply with such an order is a felony with a penalty of up to four years in prison. Police officers’ use of force was provoked by protesters’ obstruction of legitimate arrests, and cannot be considered excessive given the offense, especially within the context of existing law.

Yet the university, rather than defended the legitimate police action, apologized for it. Chancellor Birgenau wrote in an open letter to the campus community, “Many of you have written to us expressing concerns that police action at Friday’s demonstration in front of Wheeler Hall showed brutality toward individuals who did not appear to be presenting any imminent threat… We truly regret the incidents that brought physical and emotional injury to members of our community.” The university seems to believe that the proper role of the police is to nurture protesters’ emotions rather than advance justice and protect rights. Taking it even further, the university dropped the charges against Wheeler’s occupants, letting them walk away from an incredibly damaging and disruptive affair without penalty.

The university imagines it is somehow smoothing ruffled feathers and calming a tense situation. Their actions are worse than a trade of justice for order. The Monday following the occupation, protesters rallied around Wheeler, with organizers shouting that the resolution of the conflict had nothing to do with good-faith university negotiations, but merely that the police realized that if they did not let the protesters off, “shit would go down.” “It showed that we have power, as a force!” cried the same organizer. The tone and content of these statements indicates that these protesters are more interested in being rabble than advocating their agenda with civility, and that in the long term, the university is working to encourage rather than minimize the disruptions.

If the protesters really wanted to have their concerns addressed, they would do better to approach the issue civilly and rationally. If the university wished to educate students effectively in an orderly environment, they would do better to serve justice and rights rather than the malicious caprice of intellectually arrested students.

Popularity: 1%