A turning point in our struggle
By Colin Murphy
On Nov. 18, the politics of protest returned to UC Davis. Students, fed up with ever-increasing tuition, excessive use of force by police and leadership that seemed increasingly disconnected from the campuses they govern, linked arms and refused to comply with police demands to vacate the UC Davis Quad.
The police response, which climaxed in the close-range pepper-spraying of seated student protesters, shocked and outraged the entire Davis community.
At this point, the worst of the turbulence is over, we hope, and while several investigations are trying to determine what happened, the more important question is: What happens next? The furor over the incident may have started several important conversations about the future of higher education in California, as well as the how police should interact with protesters.
Probably the most controversial issue still unresolved is what should become of Chancellor Linda Katehi. Calls for her resignation have come from a variety of places. English professor Nathan Brown published such a call in this space not long ago. (I’d like to make a quick clarification here: Brown incorrectly claimed that the chair of the Graduate Student Association called for the chancellor’s resignation. It was actually a past chair who did so.)
Graduate students share the concerns voiced by many others. While we have no reason to doubt the chancellor’s claim that she did not authorize the use of pepper spray, we still find it troubling that somewhere within the chain of command the order was either not received or flatly ignored.
It’s similarly troubling that the lines of communication between police and the administration are so tenuous that the chancellor was releasing statements about the incident based off of information that was, by her account, “hours old.” For these failings, the chancellor deserves the reproach that has been directed at her over the past month, including a resolution of censure from the Graduate Student Association. (For the text of the resolution and a full list of GSA responses, please go to gsa.ucdavis.edu.)
Despite her failings, it is premature to call for her resignation. A full picture of the incident will not emerge until after the investigations are complete, but it appears that the decision to use pepper spray was made by the on-scene officer and in violation of UC policy. While Katehi could, clearly, have done a better job controlling the situation on Nov. 18, other aspects of her tenure have generally been positive.
She inherited a school in financial crisis, and while there has been plenty of pain felt across campus, her cost-cutting actions may have prevented even worse reductions to core programs. She ambitiously started a campaign to raise a billion dollars in donations. While increased funding from donors is a goal of every university chancellor, it looks like she actually will meet her goal; almost three-quarters of it has been raised with half of the target period remaining.
The increased flow of donor money will ensure that UC facilities get a badly needed infusion of capital and that scholarships are available for the students in greatest need. Assuming that the investigations find no smoking guns, we see no reason to force out a generally successful chancellor.
In hindsight, it is clear that UC police procedures are simply not up to the task of dealing with protests in the Twitter era, where the size of a protest can multiply rapidly and participants are more informed and engaged than ever. Reviews of police procedures are being launched at both the UC-wide level, as well as on the UCD campus, to make sure that police departments utilize alternatives to force when engaging protesters and that lines of communication between police and administration are clear and direct.
As we learn more about the incident on Nov. 18, and the factors that caused it to spin out of control, it is critical that we not forget what first brought student protesters into the public eye: the deep cuts to education funding in California. Students occupied the Quad because tuition has gone up by 40 percent over the past three years and has nearly doubled since 2005.
The cause is fairly simple: As California’s population grew, UC has been admitting more students but funding from the state has not increased to keep pace. When the economy turned sour, there was little fat left to cut. This is a political problem and the solution lies in Sacramento, not in Mrak Hall.
The state simply cannot continue to supply an ever-increasing demand for services, including higher education, from a diminishing pool of resources. If Californians are to continue to enjoy the benefits of a world-class educational system — and there are many good reasons why we should — it is incumbent upon us to make our voices heard in the cause of education.
The chancellor has pledged to redouble her efforts to persuade legislators to restore education funding in California to the levels necessary for long-term success. The Graduate Student Association will hold her to this promise as we also increase our advocacy efforts.
While we must move forward from the Nov. 18 incident, we must not forget it. Anything less diminishes the sacrifice of the victims and sets the stage for more such confrontations in the future. Holding the responsible parties to account may be the immediate concern but it will not resolve the fundamental issues. Our job, as students, educators and citizens, is to make sure that Nov. 18 is remembered as the turning point in the struggle over higher education, not the start of a trend.
— Colin Murphy is a Ph.D. candidate in the Transportation Technology and Policy Program at UC Davis and the external chair of the UCD Graduate Student Association. Reach him at gsaexternalchair@ucdavis.edu
Short URL: http://www.davisenterprise.com/?p=119055
View this story on page A6
Posted by Special to The Enterprise
on Dec 26 2011.
Last Login:
Filed under Columns. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback to this entry
There is much wisdom in this essay.
“Anything less diminishes the sacrifice of the victims..”
This is a joke….
okay, let me make sure i understand this…..The students made the questionable decision to stay even though the police asked them to disperse. Then the police made a bad decision to use pepper spray on the students. And the one single solution, the one thing that will insure that this will never happen again is………drum roll please………… More Money!! (of course it is, isn’t it always.)
It’s a core issue that the state has made enormous cuts to its grant to the University of California. To anyone who thinks that higher education is important, it would make sense to restore some of this funding. It’s cheeky to dismiss restored funding as “more” money.
Likewise no one has credibly promised that funding prevents student protests. It’s equally cheeky to talk as if people promise that. What is true is that these particular protests are partly about funding cuts and the tuition increases that resulted from them.
That was not me who made the comment on December 27, 2011 at 10:11 am.
Based on all the information that I have available to me, I do not believe that the decision to use pepper spray rested with Pike alone. It is premature to make such a claim. One must ask the obvious question: Why did he and the other officer bring out the large pepper spray canisters in the first place? Was there no meeting held by the officers before going out? Of course there was. Don’t you think that the topic of pepper spray was discussed at the meeting?
I wonder if the UCD police got authorization to use pepper spray from the FBI or Department of homeland Security as part of a nationwide crackdown on the Occupy movement. The Davis Enterprise’s intrepid reporters should ask the UCD police if they got any orders from the Feds.