Here’s the report Ian, Melissa, and I wrote about the “study in” at the Science and Engineering Library at UCSC back in November. First published at socialistworker.org on November 18, 2009.
A THREE-day strike and protest by students, staff and faculty will begin today at campuses in the University of California system against a proposed 32 percent fee hike for students and continuing attacks on campus unions.
Members of the University Professional and Technical Employees union at UC schools are timing their second strike of the semester–this time, a two-day walkout–to stand with the broader movement against cuts and fee hikes, and to demand a fair contract for members.
Meanwhile, students, staff and faculty across the state will be taking action in solidarity with a mass protest planned against the UC Regents meeting at UCLA–the demonstrators hope to prevent the meeting from imposing the outrageous increases.
These actions were planned at the 800-strong October 24 conference at UC Berkeley, where activists from UC campuses, the California State University system, community colleges, and pre-K through 12th grade public education voted for a statewide strike and day of action on March 4 to defend public education.
Although this week’s strike is centered in the UC system, activists from San Francisco State and the City College of San Francisco, as well as other campuses, have planned solidarity events. The California Faculty Association is also planning an action at CSU-Long Beach to oppose cuts.
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
ON THE eve of these protests, around 250 students took over the Science and Engineering Library at UC Santa Cruz on the evening of Friday, November 13. The 24-hour “study-in” to protest restricted library hours was the largest building occupation yet in the growing movement to defend public education.
Due to the ongoing budget crisis, the library on campus was scheduled to close at 5 p.m. on Friday and remain closed all day Saturday, denying students the opportunity to study in the run-up to finals. In protest, activists organized an inspiring example of mass action and democratic decision-making, and successfully kept the library open until Saturday evening.
The library sit-in emerged from a period of feverish student activism against the budget cuts. On September 24, the first day of classes at UC Santa Cruz, hundreds of students and workers took part in a statewide strike and walkout against the furloughs and pay cuts imposed on faculty and staff.
That same day, a group of about 20 students occupied the Graduate Student Commons on campus and remained barricaded inside for a week. A couple weeks later, another group of activists organized a second building occupation, although this action lasted just a few hours. Hundreds of students, faculty and staff have taken part in General Assembly meetings in recent weeks to discuss the way forward for the movement.
Last Friday’s library occupation at Santa Cruz was inspired by an action at UC Berkeley in October, in which over 100 students took over a campus library to protest reduced opening hours.
The Berkeley action took place at a time when the two building occupations at Santa Cruz had raised some important questions for activists: Should our actions have specific demands? Are “militant” tactics such as occupations and sit-ins the only way to build the movement? How can we reach beyond the committed core of activists and bring new people into action? Should we organize in secret, or be as open as possible?
The study-in seems to have answered many of these questions. Students had been planning and publicizing the event for several weeks, and had managed to create a buzz on campus. By November 13, almost 900 people had responded to the event’s Facebook page, and thousands more had seen flyers posted on campus.
Plus, by choosing the Science and Engineering Library, the organizers attempted to reach out to a section of the campus population–science students–who had previously not been very active in the movement. Finally, organizers gave the event a clear and achievable goal–keeping the library open so that students could use it to study.
Throughout the action, students were democratic and inclusive. By contrast, campus authorities tried everything in their power to prevent the event from happening–including lies, broken promises, threats and intimidation.
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
ON THE day of the study-in, dozens of students began to gather at the library entrance some two hours before its scheduled closing time. To their surprise, university authorities demanded that everyone entering the building after 3 p.m. would have to hand over their ID. This raised concerns about potential administrative repression, given that some student activists are already facing disciplinary procedures related to previous actions on campus. The group as a whole decided to reject this condition for entering the library.
After more than an hour of tense discussions between activists and administrators, an agreement emerged. People entering the library would show their IDs and sign a list of names to be maintained in the joint custody of a librarian and a student activist. The list would be handed over to students and destroyed once they left the library.
As closing time approached, dozens of students crowded into the library entrance, waiting for the administration to sign a statement formalizing the agreement. At the last minute, campus authorities went back on their word and stated that a copy of the list would remain with the head librarian, thus threatening student activists with future reprisals.
When the growing crowd of students heard about the administration’s behavior, the response was unanimous. The whole body of 150 students marched into the library, chanting “Whose university? Our university!” and “Whose books? Our books!” More students poured in behind them, bringing the total number in the library to over 200. The campus authorities looked on helplessly.
A second confrontation began a couple hours later. The administration locked the library doors, preventing students who had left to get food from re-entering the building. Students on the inside immediately called an emergency assembly, and over 100 signaled their willingness to engage in direct action to open the doors. A heated exchange followed in which the administration refused to open the doors unless all students left at midnight–even though it had already acknowledged the action would continue until 5 p.m. the next day.
Faced with a demonstration of student resolve, however, the administration gave in and accepted a proposal in which the students as a whole would decide whether or not to stay overnight. Amid cheers, chants and an infectious feeling of triumph, the doors were unlocked and another wave of 50 students poured in. Soon, 300 students were occupying the library, and the administration was forced to concede defeat. The study-in continued through to the next day, as originally planned.
Crucially, many of those who participated were working-class students who genuinely wanted to use the library to study for coursework and finals. These people represent new forces being drawn into the movement for the first time.
The action was successful not only in achieving its stated objectives, but more importantly in mobilizing and radicalizing a broad new layer of students. It brought together the more radical wing of the movement and a large group of students who were new to activism, and represented a meaningful escalation of the political consciousness of the student body.
By meeting students where they were willing to go, both in action and politics, and then involving them in confrontations with the administration from which they emerged morally and practically victorious, the occupation pointed the way forward for future actions at UC Santa Cruz.