Where Was Activism When We Needed It? by Vincent Jones   When a group of students attempted to censor The Phoenix, why didn't the Swarthmore Civil Liberties Society (SCLS) step up to defend the paper? When the College held an all-campus quasi-collection intended to critique the ways it mistreats staff members and rectify existing problems in its policies which impact the staff experience, where were all the professors who lecture about social justice, economic empowerment, and equality? Or when the college opted to ignore the established processes to achieve some goal (i.e. sequestering students in a secret meeting to resolve a Student Council issue or when deciding to offer PC support), why didn't campus progressives protest the college's undemocratic actions in the same way many of us advocate for a free [enter any third-world country living under an anti-democratic regime]? In short, why do liberals seem to forget their political ideals and values when the problem is right in their own backyard? Are people too busy to devote any energy to these issues? Do people feel that they won't have an impact? Or what? After spending four years at Swarthmore and engaging myself in a wide variety of political activities, I can only come to one conclusion--liberals on campus feel more comfortable telling other communities how to live or trying to change other societies than resolving the many problems which fester under their own noses. Earlier this semester, The Phoenix took a lot of flak for printing a controversial letter to the editor from an idiot who denies that the Holocaust happened. Some angered students went so far as to try have the paper reprimanded, fined, and/or punished for printing an unpopular and ill-informed opinion. As a card-carrying member of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), I'm opposed to any form of censorship. As an off-shoot of the ACLU and a group chartered to protect civil liberities and civil rights on campus, the SCLS should have been the first group to make sure that an unfettered press continues to exist at Swarthmore. Ironically, the group planned field trips into the Philadelphia branch of the ACLU to meet people defending the very rights being threatened back on the campus they left. The inaction of SCLS was matched by the faculty with regard to staff issues. Few faculty members found time in their busy schedules to attend the quasi-collection on the staff experience held a few weeks ago after two rather lively open College Planning Committee (CPC) meetings on the same topic. Attendees of the quasi-collection chose one of five discussion groups to attend. Each group talked about issues ranging from staff grievance procedures to compensation. At the end, the convener of each discussion group reported three or four major issues along with possible solutions to those problems. The administration is now figuring ways to implement many of the recommendations. It should be applauded for finally recognizing that staff members are equal members of this community and deserve better treatment than they currently receive.. Several members of the faculty, on the other hand, should feel like hypocrites. Considering the number of faculty who teach courses dealing with political empowerment or critiquing the capitalist social order, I do not understand why so few faculty members were present at this incredible event. First, I thought prior commitments made it impossible for them to attend. But then I looked around the room and realized that staff members, who don't have the luxury of setting their own office hours and choosing when to hold class sessions, found time to attend the meeting. After that, I thought maybe few faculty members had known about the meeting. Finally, I wondered how so many staff members could know about the meeting without more than a handful of faculty members finding out. The only explanation that made any sense to me is that many faculty members either don't care about or are fearful of the possible implications of improving the staff experience. Along similar lines, the all-out war against the administration that I expected this semester never materialized. Several times, the College decided to ignore established democratic processes and considerations. It bypassed the committee structure when deciding to offer PC support. Also, the Deans decided to sequester a group of students in a secret meeting without stating its purpose or who else would be in attendance at the behest of two non-College employees. As one of the people sequestered to this meeting, I can tell you that I felt like a political prisoner under some dictatorial regime. This event, coupled with the handling of the decision to offer PC support, conjures images of undemocratic regimes, not Swarthmore College. Yet, Students for a Free Tibet, Amnesty International, and similar groups did (and have done) nothing to address the undemocratic practices of our beloved institution. Granted, Al Bloom and members of the senior staff were not conducting secret military raids or human rights abuses. However, the administration did begin to stray away from our democratic values with those and other actions. Most progressives and liberals on campus did not react as the freedom of the campus press was challenged, an opportunity to expand workers' rights arose, and Swarthmore's commitment to inclusion of each facet of the community in the decision-making process came into question. Given what was at stake in these and other issues, I'm appalled that more progressives do not act with the same vigor when an issue impacts their own community as they do when it affects people in a town down the road or a country across the globe. This doesn't mean that I feel such efforts are any less valid but it's time that liberals realized that people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. In other words, who are we to talk about sweat shops in Southeast Asia when the people who clean our bathrooms, prepare our food and issue our grades are compensated at levels incomensurate with the level of excellence expected from them and, at times, the prevailing market wage (especially considering the extent of the college's financial resources)? True, staff members live in much better circumstances than most people living in less developed countries but everything is relative. In a society, and a school of such abundance, the way staff members are treated and paid is unacceptable. For these and other things to change, campus progressives must play an active role in the campus community. Doing so might help people understand the challenges and obstacles poor tenants face when dealing with slumlords or that people living under autocratic regimes encounter when fighting for democracy. Maybe people will begin to understand the economic, political, and social impact of social and economic justice movements. Far too often, liberals forget that lofty goals have lofty costs. Many progressive activists ignore this realization by focusing on issues which do not directly affect us, our day-to-day lives, or our bank accounts. This is a major problem at Swarthmore College and it's time that we do something about it.

Home | Archives | L-Word by Email | About The L-Word | Staff | Feedback