Governor Schwarzenegger should wash his mouth out with soap. Seriously.
When I was a kid I was over at a friend's house when he said a bad word and his mother washed his mouth out with soap. It was impressive. I don't think my friend said that word again for a long time. Now California's action-figure governor is acting childishly, and he too needs to take some measure to ensure that he never again speaks as he did this week. He owes it to the university students of his state, and indeed to everyone in this country that welcomed his immigration here.
Here is what he did: he called two students of mine terrorists. Specifically, he called their protest against the recent 32% tuition increase at the University of California a "type of terrorism." Really. I'm not kidding.
Shame on him.
Allow me to introduce the "terrorists," Julia Litman-Cleper and Laura Thatcher. Both of them have been students of mine at the University of California at Davis. They are wonderful students: thoughtful, inquisitive, respectful, and supportive of their peers. They are not loud, strident voices. In fact, they are both noticeably quiet as students go. They are active in their departments and in the civics of their campus.
On Monday of last week a group of students from campuses around the University of California "occupied" Wheeler Hall at UC Berkeley and announced their intention to host a week of lectures on things like the history of public education in the state, the finances of the University of California, and so on. They also planned for music, study time, and lots of opportunity for students to sit and talk and work through their thoughts about what is happening to public education in California and what they might do about it.
What they were doing was technically illegal, as the university police informed them, but the students made clear that they would not obstruct any of the university activities that were ongoing in the building. A tacit agreement developed between the police and the students, to the point that one night police entered the building and told a group of students that they in the wrong room and ordered them to move to one of several other rooms they indicated were designated for the protest.
During the course of the week, several UC faculty members came to Wheeler and gave lectures hosted by the protesters. In the eyes of students, faculty are the real authority on campus. Students rarely deal with campus police or administrators, but they deal with faculty every day. Faculty give them grades, by which their careers as students stand or fall. If the police aren't bothering them and faculty are showing up to give them lectures, students have every reason to believe that the activities they are engaging in are legitimate.
So the students stayed there for a week, doing their student thing, even using some rooms as study halls for finals the following week, until 4:30am Friday morning. That is when the police burst in, locked the building's doors so that no one could leave, arrested everyone in their sleep, and dragged them off to jail.
That made the students very angry, and justifiably so. Those of you who are a bit older might want to think back to your first encounters with the arbitrary authority of middle aged people with weapons and uniforms. Remember how absolutely livid you were? That night a group of very angry students, those who happened not to be in the building during the police raid, marched through campus.
It is hard to piece together exactly what happened when the march went past the chancellor's residence. The police claim the students attacked the chancellor's home, and arrested eight protesters including Julia and Laura. The students say that all that occurred was minor vandalism by a small splinter group, and that the cops arrested the wrong people. But with eight of their number facing multiple felony charges and the governor of the state calling them terrorists, the students' lawyers advised them not to discuss the events.
While this may have some merit as a legal strategy, it left the police version of what happened largely unchallenged and the powers-that-be had a field day. University of California President Mark Yudof announced the students had gone "far beyond the boundaries of public dissent." UC Berkeley Chancellor Robert Birgeneau claimed his life had been placed in danger. Not to be outdone, Governor Schwarzenegger declared that "California will not tolerate any type of terrorism."
Laura, Julia, and the others were charged with rioting, threatening an education official, attempted burglary, attempted arson of an occupied building, felony vandalism, and assault with a deadly weapon on a police officer. Bail was set at $132,000 per student.
Then yesterday all charges against the students were dropped. Oops. Never mind.
Where the police saw multiple felonies, the chancellor saw a threat to his life, and the governor saw terrorism, the district attorney saw no case. This leaves Birgeneau, Yudof, and Schwarzenegger with some serious explaining to do. Particularly Mr. Schwarzenegger.
Consider what it means in the United States in 2009 to call someone a terrorist. Terrorists kill people. They fly planes into skyscrapers and explode car bombs in crowded market places. Terrorists are our icon of evil. This country has been waging a bloody and costly war on terrorists for years. To call someone a terrorist is to place them on the other side of that war.
These students were protesting a 32% tuition hike at a public university, brought on by an economic crisis that exploded out of the most powerful private financial institutions in the country. At UC Davis where I teach, students do not generally come from privileged backgrounds. I have students who are seriously wondering if they should stay in school at all given the higher tuition rate. They look at the bleak job market, and they can't see how a college degree will earn back the money it will cost their family for them to complete their college education. I have one student whose mother just took a job as a translator for a private military contractor in Afghanistan because it was the only way she could make ends meet.
Imagine what it is like for the parents of these students to have to come up with $132,000 on short notice to make their daughters' bail. To wake up to the governor calling their children terrorists? Type the names Laura Thatcher or Julia Litman-Cleper into Google and what comes up are links to pages and pages of media reports in which the governor of their state calls them terrorists. Imagine the stress that has placed on their families.
And then: never mind. No charges. Bye.
UC President Mark Yudof is absolutely right that there was "behavior" here that "went far beyond the boundaries" of what should be "tolerated," but it is behavior of the governor, not the students.
http://sanfrancisco.modernluxury.com/style/profile-uc-berkeley-president-mark-yudof
so precious
and then there are these stories
# UC regents OK millions in incentive pay to top execs (2010)
# List of Salaries of UC Highest Paid Employees (2009)
# Schwarzenegger vetoes whistleblower protections for UC workers (2009)
# UC regents award huge pay increases to execs while furloughing staff (2009)
# Senator Grassley Raises Concerns About Integrity of Finances at University of California System (2009)
# UC Admits Misleading Public About Buyout Taker (2009)
# Audit finds excessive expenses by CSU and UC employee (2009)
# POGO praises Senator Grassley for raising concerns about integrity of finances at UC (2009)
# Yakuza and UCLA Med Center on CBS "60 Minutes" by Lara Logan (2009)
# UC San Diego Data Security Hotline Swamped (2009)
# UC San Francisco belatedly announces September data breach (2009)
# Journalism Students Data Breached (2009)
# UC Irvine to fire whistleblower nurse? (2009)
# UC Davis Chancellor's Actions Cause Concern (2009)
# New UC Davis Chancellor Linked to "Clout" Admissions Probe (2009)
# A Tangled Web At Berkeley by Professor John Ellis (2009)
# Senator Grassley Supports UCSF Whistleblower (2009)
# Deadly UCLA lab fire leaves haunting questions (2009)
# UC Berkeley computers hacked, 160,000 at risk (2009)
source: http://cloudminder.blogspot.com/
What does it all mean? Maybe we need to re-evaluate what it means to go to college, why people go to college, what kind of stuff does and does not get tolerated on a college campus, and how much of a political and economic liability colleges represent to taxpayers and US citizens, both current, and future. The hallowed halls of academia really aren't all that special, if a person with no money really wants to learn something, they can buy a book at the bookstore, or check one out at the public library, so what if they don't get a sheepskin. I say 'take down the bird feeder'.
Also, you are correct that people should try to educate themselves, but you are minimizing the role of the teacher. A good teacher can make such a huge difference.
Here's the thing: if you are an adult, you need to take into account the consequences of your actions. You know it's going to break the law? Then EXPECT the result. Don't get all shocked when things don't go your way. Don't whine, like Mr. Ostertag, about students getting arrested because they are protesting. Some protesters even want to be arrested, to bring attention to the cause. Ever heard of Martin Luther King Jr? Arrested. Accepted it. Whined about it? Don't think so.
Any act of vandalism or violence should not be tolerated. It doesn't bring light to the cause, and it simply makes the students look like a wild mob instead of intelligent human beings who are upset about something. Do you think it helps the cause? Our friend, Martin Luther King Jr? Condoned PEACEFUL protests, and condemned violence. I don't care how stressed you are about it, stress is not an excuse. Children make excuses. Adults need to accept responsibility for their actions.
I support the cause, but not the means to the end.
"A riot is the language of the unheard. " -Martin Luther King Jr.
by the Govenator's definition, ALL BANKSTERS ARE TERRORISTS!!
why aren't the police arresting those who have defrauded this country?
It's not the governor's job to personally accuse student protesters, anyway. The DA is the one who will decide what, if anything, to charge them with, and I would bet money that the charges won't include terrorism.
The police are criticized for peacefully arresting demonstrators after several days of occupation of a public building but it's OK to throw objects and burning torches through the window of a residence?
Mr. Ostertag, consider this: terrorism is defined as, "the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion" ... which to me sounds exactly like what the rioters were doing. Was the chancellor terrorized? Check. Trying to change something? Check. I mean, really? Going after the Governor for word usage because of what you think it means? That should have little, if anything, to do with what the issue is.
We're talking about FEE HIKES people. Just reminding you. What does violence like this do? It takes the pressure off of the UC Board and onto the students who protest them. I am a student at UC Davis who is in thousands of dollars in debt because of school loans right now. You think I was happy to hear about a 32% fee hike? Don't you think I was a little upset?
In a broad sense the use of violence against civilian targets to achieve a political objective. That's what we were taught it was in the 80's anyways. Of course by that definition the attack on the USS cole isn't terrorism it's and act of war arguably the embassies as well as they are branchs of the executive branch even if staffed by civilians.
In my mind someone did conduct a criminal act, the office of the highest level government representative on campus is not a civilian target the act was not terrorism. It was a riot.
If they started attacking other students passers by in a political protest you get towards terrorism but I'ld certainly hope we considered terrorism a deliberate planned act of violence designed to achieve a political objective targetting civilians. And had lesser offenses for those that simply got out of hand.
Also important is there needs to be a threat of additional violence that makes the civilian population feel unsafe so they provide the political pressure for the government to capitulate to the demands of the agressors.
Hard thing is defining civilians in a democracy although the charges filed even recognize him as an education official. Not a civilian..
A protest gone awry after poor handling on both sides did lead to some serious but not terrorist criminal offenses.
All crimes terrorize people.
For example, what you just did is analogous to the following:
If it is raining, there are clouds in the sky.
There are clouds in the sky, therefore it is raining
if he really thinks they are ter.rorists, why doesn't he ask to have them sent to guantanamo bay or tried in a secret military court???
How would you feel if a mob of seventy people marched onto your house in the evening when you and your significant other were asleep and starting hurling objects at your window and destroying your property? And then started throwing stuff at the police? Maybe not terrorism by your definition, but you'd be damn pissed and scared. And you would call the police.
I am a UC grad and part time instructor in the UC system. My pay has been cut and I think the fee increases stink. College students are my favorite demographic of people, but there is no way to justify violence and property damage.
The huge difference between breaking the law by occupying, a trespassing misdemeanor that includes teach-ins and other peaceful, educational events, and the acts committed by the administration is that while the occupations were done to reclaim property, to make people listen, to act in solidarity with other activists involved within the movement, the administration's actions were done to dehumanize, demoralize and put away (how long does a terrorist get in prison?) one or many individuals. Is this what respect looks like? Is this what I should be looking forward to if I ever disagree with something they're doing?
Respect, I feel, is the key element missing form the administrations dealings with activists, many of which are their own students, faculty members and staff.
I would also like to note that the accounts of what happened at the chancellors mansion were completely ridiculous; they are the accounts from the police/chancellor who were obviously trying to get media attention on their side. If media actually spoke to the individuals there, if the administration asked THEM what had happened (aren't you supposed to hear both sides of the story?) we would have two separate accounts instead of one very obviously 'titled' one. "My wife and I felt our lives were threatened?" I'm going to go ahead and call BS on that one.
So, Schwarzenegger's use of the t-term didn't surprise me. What did surprise me, however, was his splitting of leaders to one side and everyone else to the side of the other. His quote: "California will not tolerate any type of terrorism against any leaders including educators."
Following this, terrorism against the side of the other, the non-leaders is tolerable...aok. Nice to have that clarified.
New growth industry: flags, emblems, patches, and buttons denoting LEADER. Safety first.
Julia is a friend of mine and I'm so glad to see her out of harms way. However, if I were her I would sue the hell out of the city of Berkeley. Imagine trying to apply for a job when a basic google search of your name returns vitriol such as TERRORIST, CRIMINAL, THREATENS LIFE, etc. These are huge damages to her digital reputation, that stuff never goes away. It could effect employment for YEARS. The city should be forced to pay damages for this digital handicap.
The person who ordered the raid, the governor, the chancellor and anyone else at an executive level should not only apologize to the imprisoned students, they should resign as they are obviously incapable of handling the responsibility their positions require.