Sometimes campaigns at the college level are drawn out and take a great deal of time and energy. In the middle of the summer I began working on a resolution to introduce at the first meeting of the Muhlenberg Student Council. The resolution called for a divestment of Muhlenberg funds from the "highest offending" companies working in Sudan to perpetuation the genocide in the Darfur region.
Hard work pays off, over time. It took a few weeks to get it passed through the Student Council (with all but one vote) followed by meetings with administrators, articles in the student newspaper, and meeting with a group of members of the Board Of Trustees.
Over half a year later, the Board of Trustees voted in favor of the following resolution to:
not knowingly make direct investments with Category One highest offender companies engaging in business in the Sudan as defined by the Sudan Divestment Task Force. Furthermore, if Muhlenberg commingled investments are invested in Category One companies, letters will be submitted to managers of these funds requesting that they consider removing such companies from the fund or create a similar actively managed fund with commingled holdings devoid of such companies.
4 out of 5 LGBT students report verbal, sexual or physical harassment at school, according to a GLSEN survey.
Today, April 25th, 2008, marks the 12th Annual Day of Silence, a day where students vow to take a pledge of silence to commemorate anti-LGBT violence and bullying and work to make campuses safe for people of all gender and sexual identities.
A Boise State University student group has angered area Hispanic leaders and others by promoting a speech about immigration with a "food stamp drawing" that requires climbing through a hole in a fence and offering fake identification for a shot at winning dinner at a local Mexican restaurant.
The group in question is the local chapter of the college Republicans. OK, I got to hand it to them, this is a more creative twist on the typical xenophobic "catch an illegal immigrant day" event that we've previously reported.
My question is this: they pull these stunts to get liberals outraged and get media attention--and it works--so is it good for them because they're setting the agenda, or good for progressives because it makes them look crazy?
Ezra Klein responds to my post caliing for progressive student stunts to rival conservative hijinks like "catch an illegal immigrant day." I suggest a bikini wearing day to raise conciousness about global warming, and Ezra says, "I'm not sure that would have quite the consciousness raising effect you're going for, Ben. Indeed, I think I'd happily trade a few degrees fahrenheit to make such a world manifest."
Of course I was being tongue-in-cheek. But I do think, as Ezra goes on to acknowledge, that we have something to learn from the Right's ability to generate media attention. Perhaps we should adjust my suggestion as one his commenters proposes: "if it was changed from global warming bikini day to 'global warming hairy-fat-guy-in-a-thong day,' perhaps the dangers of global warming would finally sink into some of the thicker skulls." I'm all for it. Alas, being neiter fat nor hairy I can't help make this one happen, but if smeone holds a "global warming pasty scrawny guy in a thong day," I'd be totally there.
"Hundreds of weathered combat boots lined the east side of the UA Mall this weekend, attracting passers-by and sparking renewed debate about the war in Iraq.
The traveling exhibit, "Eyes Wide Open: The Human Cost of War," was organized by the American Friends Service Committee, the Presbyterian Campus Ministry and other organizations to show the reality of the lives that have been claimed by the war in Iraq, said Caroline Isaacs, program director for the Arizona chapter of the American Friends Service Committee.
The exhibit included 458 boots, 381 of which represented National Guard deaths in Iraq and 77 for Arizona soldiers.
...
The display also had shoes representing Iraqi civilian casualties, with tags for children as young as 8 months old.
The display was not meant to be political, Isaacs said. "
The article goes on to describe how the display in fact did spark political discussion. Anti-war activists were present at the exhibit, collecting petition signatures asking Congress to end the war by cutting funding. Supporters of the war were also present, apparently, although apparently not in any organized counter-protest. The display is part of a larger national project, including a full-sized version in Chicago.
Please remember that Campus Progress' terms of use do not allow promoting or endorsing any particular political party or candidate for office. Posts or comments that do this will be deleted.
Posts
