top
Santa Cruz IMC
Santa Cruz IMC
Indybay
Indybay
Indybay
Regions
Indybay Regions North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area California United States International Americas Haiti Iraq Palestine Afghanistan
Topics
Newswire
Features
From the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature

Mercury News Continues Misrepresentation of June UCSC Protest

by josh sonnenfeld (sugarloaf [at] riseup.net)
Note: This letter is not about the tragic death of UCSC Chancellor Denice Denton, but rather irresponsible journalism in the wake of her passing. I’d encourage folks to read my much more thought out analysis on Denton and the future of UCSC here: http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2006/07/02/18284784.php
Dear San Jose Mercury News,

I’m writing to voice my frustration with the Mercury News’ misrepresentation of my comments, specifically related to coverage of a June student protest that involved UCSC Chancellor Denice Denton. I don’t intend this statement for print and I don't expect a reply.

In the past few weeks, I have spoken to at least 4 different reporters with the Mercury News, all of whom were primarily interested in what occurred at a June 6 protest of ‘institutional racism and sexism’ on the campus. While I spent a considerate amount of my personal time talking each reporter through the issues and what occurred, the paper consistently misrepresented my comments and misled the public on what actually occurred at the action.

In the days leading up to the protest, both the Mercury News and the Santa Cruz Sentinel were sent a press release describing what exactly the protest was about (http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2006/06/06/18272381.php). The Mercury News chose not to cover the incident, and the Sentinel only sent a photographer for a short period of time, taking one photo and leaving after a few minutes. Eventually, when the Sentinel heard that there was some sort of incident where the Chancellor was unable to move her car for a few minutes, they jumped on the opportunity to sensationalize the event, resulting in an extremely inaccurate article (http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/archive/2006/June/07/local/stories/13local.htm). The Sentinel, as is usual, failed to understand a multi-issued action, and specifically chose not to mention the words ‘institutional,’ ‘racism,’ or ‘sexism’ once, or anything else from the press release sent to them in advance of the protest. What was an action about the lack of institutional support for students, faculty, and workers of color was characterized as just being about custodians’ wages. If you’re really interested in what occurred on that day, please read the coverage on Santa Cruz Indymedia: http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2006/06/07/47592.php

After Denton’s death, the Mercury News immediately attempted to connect the protest to the Chancellor’s rumored depression. When I first spoke with a Mercury News reporter, I did my best to detail the true occurrences of the event, but when the article "UCSC Head Falls to Death" (http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/14899408.htm) came out, my words were drastically misused to effectively condemn the protest. I quote:

“After one recent event in which students surrounded her car and performed a five-minute play in support of workers and minority students, she seemed to grow increasingly fearful, said Josh Sonnenfeld, a student organizer.

``She or the university hired a security guard to be outside her campus home 24/7. She hired a bodyguard-type figure to go around with her everywhere,'' he said.”


I immediately called the reporter back and explained that the statement they attributed to me was factually inaccurate. I noted that there was ‘not a cause and effect relationship’ between the protest and the Chancellor hiring new security as Denton had stricter security for a long time prior to the protest. I further explained that I never said that the Chancellor grew increasingly fearful after the protest, but that statement was attributed to me nonetheless.

While this incident with the Mercury News may seem minor, immediately after that first article was published, bloggers and other newspapers started to correlate the Chancellor’s depression with student protests. Denton was the victim, but they needed a culprit – something that Santa Cruz’s student protesters, with their charged history, could easily be characterized as.

The Mercury News developed other speculations, such as Denton’s thyroid problem, yet still had a particular interest in the story of this June ‘affirmative diversity’ protest. I got a call from a few more of their reporters, all of them asking the same, and more details. Again, I did my best to contextualize and detail everything that has occurred, but, much like before, my quotes were taken out of context and rearranged to fit the particular motive(s) of the article.

In this morning’s front-page article, “A feeling of ‘siege,’” (http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/14952474.htm) the Mercury News blatantly mischaracterized my remarks and spread misinformation to develop their story. I quote:

“Fifteen months later, the week before she requested a leave in June, more than 100 students protesting what they considered Denton's ``rhetoric'' about diversity outreach programs, barricaded her car when she tried to leave the parking lot.

``She said she had to go,'' recalled Josh Sonnenfeld, one of the protesters. But the students insisted she watch their skit. So they surrounded her car and donned paper-plate face masks.

``I can't watch this anymore. I have to go,'' Sonnenfeld recalls the chancellor saying.

It was five minutes, he said, before the students moved aside.

``It's unfortunate what happened,'' Sonnenfeld said. ``But there are a lot of pressures with being head of a large university with a very vibrant political climate.''”


To detail the factual inaccuracies of this account, I’ll lay them out one by one:

1) Students didn’t have a specific problem with words (“rhetoric”) the Chancellor used, but with the actions her administration sometimes took.

2) The protest wasn’t just about “diversity outreach programs,” it was about a whole series of issues connected under the concept of ‘institutional racism and sexism.’

3) Students, for the most part, never “barricaded her car.” Had the Mercury News been at the protest, they would have known this. Again, I’d urge you to look back at the Santa Cruz Indymedia coverage, including photos of the incident, to see the truth.

4) Students never “surrounded her car” – they formed a circle in the driveway, with the skit performers in the middle. The car was off to the side and Denton was standing on the perimeter of the circle watching the performance with the other students. Bradley’s photo in today’s Mercury News even shows this.

5) “Paper-plate face masks”? You’ve got to be kidding me! There were just a couple of students that had two paper plates with smiley faces drawn on them for props in their skit.

6) After the Chancellor said that she really needed to go and couldn’t watch the skit anymore, students moved the crowd out of the way so her car could go. It took 5 minutes to move everyone, mainly due to the size of the group, and then Denton was off to her next appointment.

7) When I say, “it’s unfortunate what happened,” I’m referring to the Chancellor’s tragic death, not the protest.

So, effectively, what we have here is the Mercury News mischaracterizing and decontextualizing almost every use of my words. They build an image of an unruly protest, with students wearing paper-plate masks (to hide their identity?) and refusing to get out of the way, while in actuality, the protest was peaceful and relatively short. The Mercury News would have known this if they had decided to attend.

Ironically, this morning’s article contained an Indymedia photo from the ‘affirmative diversity’ action that shows Chancellor Denton standing amongst a crowd of protesters, watching the skit. The caption mentions nothing about the fact that this is the protest that the Mercury News was writing negatively about, merely saying, “Denton shows up at a student demonstration at UC-Santa Cruz in June supporting maintaining a diverse faculty.” You’ll notice that in this photo, the Chancellor, along with students and workers, is watching the skit. Another one of Bradley’s photos (http://www.indybay.org/uploads/2006/06/07/uncomfortable_6-6-06.jpg) shows this as well. Yet, even with photographic evidence to the contrary, the article still harshly mischaracterizes the tone and motives of the protest.

I hope that in future coverage, the Mercury News will do their research and commit to factually accurate quotations and descriptions, rather than sensationalization and misinformation.

Sincerely,
Josh Sonnenfeld
Add Your Comments

Comments (Hide Comments)
by Linda Rosewood
Thank you, Josh, for posting your side of the event. I could tell that the Sentinel and
the Merc were getting the story wrong--which means that the wires perpectuated the
inaccuracy--but without you and other independent sources, there was no way for
me to see just how skewed the story was.

From the beginning anything connected to Denton has been sensationalized.
It was easy to do--and the indymedia did it as much as the corporate media.

Let's all try to do better--and continue to tell the truth as we see it. I encourage you
to write a smaller version of this to the Sentinal and Merc Letter's page.

Linda Rosewood
by Catherine M. Wilson
Since Denice Denton's death I have read or heard the following:
a. She was grossly overpaid.
b. She was earning a fraction of the equivalent salary in the corporate world.
a. She hired her "friend/lesbian lover" at an equally outrageous salary.
b. Her longtime partner was given the same accommodation as the spouses of recruited talent who are also academics.
a. She made the university spend $600,000 on her campus residence.
b. The university had already decided to spend $600,000 on deferred maintenance on her campus residence.
a. She spent $30,000 of the university's money on a dog run.
b. The dog run was in lieu of rebuilding a rotting perimeter fence at greater cost, environmental impact was a factor, union wages were another factor, the fence had to be deer-proof and dig-out proof, and the chancellor had offered to pay for the dog run herself.
Spin is nothing new in news reporting. If Denice Denton's opponents feel misquoted and abused, imagine what she must have felt.
I found the personal attacks on Denice Denton way out of bounds, and if they contributed to her depression and suicide, I hope all who played any part in those attacks will do some deep soul-searching. There are ways and ways of bringing about change, and ridicule, name-calling, and scapegoating are both unacceptable and ineffective. From the many people who have written about their own personal knowledge of and interactions with Chancellor Denton, I got the impression of a woman who was trying to do all the right things and was never given the trust or the support she deserved.
Catherine M. Wilson, B.A. 1994 UCSC, M.S. 1996 UCSC
by Paul Sosbee
I get the feeling that Denton was under a lot of stress, and your protest action certainly played a role in that stress, along with unflattering cartoons and slings and arrows from the public about Pay, and Dog run's etc.

For your part though, I would think you should be apologizing for detaining her for your "skit" and protest action. It is quite self centered and chicken hearted to attack someone like Chancellor Denton on issues like the ones you attacked her for.

If you want to save the world go do a skit in the Lobby of a Federal Building or the Chinese Embassy or something and protest against people who can make some changes. Instead you go for a "soft target" like Denton. You knew she would not react strongly, so you attacked her.

I get the feeling that Denton was more a friend of the underpriveleged than you thought she was, and to extract from her the toll of being detained by your skit is really kind sad.

I support your position on institutionalized racism, sexism and classism, but I do not support the type of action you choose to take against basically innocent parties to your dispute.
by Paul Wagner
Catherine M. Wilson wrote:

"Spin is nothing new in news reporting. If Denice Denton's opponents feel misquoted and abused, imagine what she must have felt.

"I found the personal attacks on Denice Denton way out of bounds, and if they contributed to her depression and suicide, I hope all who played any part in those attacks will do some deep soul-searching. There are ways and ways of bringing about change, and ridicule, name-calling, and scapegoating are both unacceptable and ineffective."

Thank you very much, Ms. Wilson.

While I myself have had the unpleasant experience of being misquoted and miscontextualized by the press, and thus sympathize with Josh, it is, after all, at best -- unpleasant.

If we imagine the San Jose Mercury News' staff smashing his windows by throwing metal barricades through them at night, repeatedly surrounding his home, and filling his email account and phone message machine with death threats, we begin to see the orders of magnitude difference between the current complaint and the reality of the daily life Denice Denton was subject to by "activists."

Add to that the oddity of protesting institutional sexism by constantly harassing two couragously out *women,* protesting institutional racism on a campus with a large minority presence while remaining entirley silent at the nearly *total exclusion of people of color* from the surrounding neighborhood by the millionaire homeowners next door, and attacking classism by continually hounding the only *working class* chancellor UCSC has had, and to be blunt, I have to wonder whether there's enough sense of reality present for anything at all to change.

I don't mean to single out Josh in saying this -- his piece has certainly been one of the more well-considered yet published on indymedia. But considering changes of "tactics" doesn't begin to address the reality of the conditions that ripened under Denton: namely, that theory and practice among many anti-racism, anti-sexism and anti-classism activists have become so disconnected that when one looks at the actual *practices,* it is increasingly difficult to distinguish them from the fascistic exercises of power the movements were originally created to deconstruct.

I too hope to see a change of heart. But until I see people who were involved in the endless harassment of Denton stand up firmly against *any* further practice which in any way resembles those, and furthermore, call for a suspension of all practices until they're brought into consistency with theory, I don't, to be blunt, see much hope.

-Paul Wagner-


by another alum
Turnabout has it right. It will be a long time before anyone with any kind of talent and sincere interest in the improving UCSC will consider taking on the chancellor's job. And I believe that while the right wing did its share of the damage, it is the left that should really be ashamed. Who do you think is going to become chancellor? Che? Hugo Chavez? For pity sake, Denise Denton was an out lesbian, a defender of women's rights, opposed to racism, and genuinely devoted to a multicultural perspective. But that wasn't enough -- she had to endure childish "skits", name calling, denigration of her work, etc. The idea that Mr. Sonnenfeld is complaining about "irresponsible" journalism would be funny if it weren't so outrageously infuriating.
by _
the chancellor is the head of the university. the chacellor is paid to represent the university, not themself. denton was paid to represent UCSC.

the confused BS being posted here is understandable, since people are upset that denton killed herself (and we dont know why, frankly). but her JOB was to represent the university. and an activists job, if they are trying to change the university, means that at times, they need to be targetting the chancellor, and pushing her buttons. nothing wrong with that - its good activism.
by Robert Norse
Thanks for the letter, Josh, and trying to set us straight (im- possible, when it comes to the Sentinel and Mercury-News, of course).

But don't be diverted from the real issues--which do involve attacking powerful politicians, however incrementally better they are than their predecessors. Yes, through demonstrations that might distress them. Uncouth? Perhaps the mourners prefer letters to the Sentinel and the Mercury-News?

In an earlier thread (“Denton’s Death”), I asked Denton mourners to cite her achievements. (See http://indybay.org/newsitems /2006/06/28/ 18283380.php?show_comments=1#18284949)

Denton’s achievements? Josh cites “financial support of student initiated outreach and retention programs” (more details, please) and an emergency meeting of faculty and grad students of color linked presumably with discussion of a department focused of the critical study of race and ethnicity and recent concerns that 40% of senior faculty of color had or were considering leaving UCSC due to hostile working conditions, a lack of institutional support, and spousal hire problems.” (“A Complex Tragedy: Denise Denton and UCSC” at http://indybay. org/ newsitems/2006/07/02/ 18284785.php). Frankly, that's a pretty thin pedestal.

Josh Sonnenfeld spends a lot of words trying to be “even-handed” about Denton In trying to conciliate the feelings of Denton’s supporters. It’s important we continue to remember the more important point he made--unanswered by mourners and critics:

“In accepting the huge salaries and perks, Denton and Kalonji, possibly unintentionally, sent a message to the UC community: we’re with the corrupt class of administrators lining our pockets on the backs of students, workers, and every Californian.”

These are issues that Denton never made substantial efforts to redress--as far as I know.

Instead, of returning to these issues, her post-mortem supporters attack activists.

Suicide is a chilling thing, but how many out there would be in mourning if there were a mass suicide of Bush-ites (and their Democratic party look-alikes) in Washington?

Has anybody surveyed the suicide situation among workers and students up at UCSC who didn’t have Denton’s power and privileges?

The plumage of the well-paid and the powerful get the media coverage and the mourners.

Let's return to the real issues.
Recall the final words of Joe Hill (who'd probably turn over in his if he heard they were being used to apply to the likes of Denton): “Don’t mourn, organize”.
by Dee Nelson
> Has anybody surveyed the suicide situation among workers and students up at UCSC who didn’t have Denton’s power and privileges?

Gee, I dunno. How many workers and students have had barricades crash through windows in their homes, had death-threat emails, and been personally detained and harassed by chanting zealots?

Face it: we had a chancellor who was sympathetic to reason, and you guys saw fit to use tactics appropriate only to hard-core enemies like Bush and his minions and their corporate keepers. Your political blundering will never get the goals you seek, and will actively hurt your cause, as well as hurting friends who have some power to actually change things for the better. Wise up. Use this time to really examine what you want and how you are going to get it, and try to factor in reality this time. Until you do, prepare for an eternity of being marginalized. But maybe that's where you prefer to be?
by _
every serious activist i know has been beaten up by police or "citizens", and recieved plenty of death threats. and we dont get paid 100+K a year, we volunteer for it. you going to play your little violin for us too?
by _
its time for you "bush is a monster" people like dee to wake up. read a little lakoff, about how problematic your framing is. the problem is systemic. bush is not a fantastic criminal, who, once rid of, the world will be a great place. you have no sense of history, you are playing bush's game if you are casting the one bad guy vs many good people frame.

were all part of a system that were trying to change, that includes denton, and being gay, or coming from a working class background (you arent working class if you make dentons salary, btw) or being "reasonable", or being of color doesnt mean a person is above criticism. there is no magic pass, no thought or opinion that suddenly converts you to a "good" person who isnt worthy of attention, scrutiny, confrontational opposition.
by Dee Nelson
Well, "_" (whoever you are), if your idea of tactics is to dial the activism and harassment to 11 for anyone regardless of the audience you're trying to influence, I'm not sure how to begin. Activism is a dialogue between the activists and the target(s) of the action. You should focus on doing what will actually get you the results you want. I can only conclude with your current strategy that you enjoy making noise and feeling the adrenaline as you imagine that you're making a difference, and that you don't actually mind being irrelevant.

Ask yourself honestly: are you really making a difference? What are your successes? Are they what you set out to do? and if not, why not? Until you really examine what you are doing and how you are doing it, you'll continue to have fun making signs and marching around and drawing snarky little cartoons, but you won't accomplish a dang thing.

All I ask is that you take a step back, have a meta-look at what you're doing. That's all.
by _
Actually, Dee, whoever *you* are, you were not asking for a strategy (as if it should be one persons job to dictate a coherent agenda or strategy for social change). If you read what you wrote, your issue was the pursuit of a particular person, Denise Denton, by activists in santa cruz. You condemned that focus and all of the aggressive and activist tactics used in pursuit of her because according to you, she was somehow one of the "good" or "reasonable" people (whatever that means). But Denton happened to be a legitimate target, as I mentioned earlier, since as a matter of JOB TITLE she happens to be the representative of the university of santa cruz.

Now, you go on to claim, that activism is a "dialogue". This is also wrong, although not surprising coming from someone that obviously has pretty contorted understanding of politics. "Dialogue" is "debate". Activism is not "debate". It usually precedes, and sometimes bypasses, debate. Activism is _action_ meant to bring an issue to the fore, to force a showdown or push a controversial stance which then *might* lead to debate or reform or radical change within society. As a result, most activists throughout history face a kneejerk reaction from people within society, people like you, who criticize them for not being "civil" enough, not debating in "appropriate" manners, etc. A perfect example is Martin Luther King, who was roundly criticized by his supposed "allies" in the civil rights "movement". Why dont you sit down with his "Letter from a Birmingham Jail" and then think about the parallels between to the kind of rhetoric and argumentation you are advancing here regarding the chancellor, and the kinds of attacks that were levied against King and his ilk in the civil rights movement.

Happy 4th.
by Catherine M. Wilson
"_" says:
"But Denton happened to be a legitimate target ... since as a matter of JOB TITLE she happens to be the representative of the university of santa cruz."

Heaven help your friends, if any of them should ever attain a position of power, because by definition they would then become your enemies.
by _
depends what position they took, but yes, thats how life works. if my friends and family take a "position of power" as you put it, and that puts us at odds, and if they understand and respect me and my politics, then they will expect me to be confrontational and yes, it could get nasty.

this liberal nicey-nice sentiment is totally ridiculous. its as if some of you believe than conflict is a matter of choice, that it can just magically be avoided, if we just *choose* to avoid it? yes, the world might be entirely dictated by the whims and desires of the liberal, if only there wasnt a few nasty bad old meany monsters like bush and cheney who CHOOSE to create evil and hate. please. its like rodney king, with the precious last bit of sense beaten out of his head, wondering "why cant we all just get along?" as if what had happened to him and countless others was no more real than getting voted off the survivor island.
by Rebeeca
I dont think accuracy was sacrificed by highlighting the Chancellor's car being blocked. You blocked her car to provoke interest in your cause and that's what happened. You can say that the media missed your point of 'institutional racism', but the burden rests on the protestors, not the media to make that point clear. Institutional racism is fucking complicated and it often gets articulated like a professor spewing abstract theory.

Do you think the Chancellor understood what you were there for when you're yelling 'hypocrit!' ("that is what hypocracy looks like") at the top of your lungs. That approach needs rethinking.

by Dee Nelson
> Why dont you sit down with his "Letter from a Birmingham Jail" and then think about the parallels between to the kind of rhetoric and argumentation you are advancing here regarding the chancellor, and the kinds of attacks that were levied against King and his ilk in the civil rights movement.

Wow. You're comparing your paper-plate skit people with King and his movement?

Okaaay. Buh-bye.
by _
Dee: So you have no substantive points to make. OK.

Just FYI, the people in Santa Cruz are part of what is arguably still the civil rights movement, as well as the labor movement, in this country. Its typical of people like you to put King, the man, on the pedestal and make him untouchable, and then insist that nothing anyone is doing could be subject to his analysis, which was totally exceptional. Sounds like you should also read Bernardine Dohrns, "Letter to Young Activists: Beware 60s Nostalgia" as well as King's "Letter from Brimingham Jail". Although I doubt you are interested in learning anything, or reading/remembering anything activists such as King or Dohrn have to say, since you seem like you are really focused on trashing college kids at UCSC - a softer target. But in case you or anyone else does care, those two letters contain a lot of insight that y'all seem like you could use.
by man, what a tool
No, what Dee is saying is that the things King did (with many others) during the Civil Rights struggle of the early 60s was needed, necessary, and morally correct. A bunch of college kids putting on a skit while blocking in the chancellor is about as far from what those folks in the early 60s were trying to accomplish. I know you want to pat yourself on the back and feel as if you are some important figure, but the truth is the left at UCSC is now only interested in its own self-righteousness.

Most of you do more harm than good nowadays. Please spare us your childish rhetoric.
by _
OK, so what you are saying is that what students are doing today is not "needed, necessary, or morally correct." I beg to differ.

I assume you didnt read Dohrn's letter as referenced above. I also assume you somehow isolate the students from the larger issues they are working on, which, ironically enough, are civil rights and the labor issues. Interesting, if you think "everything is fixed" in the US with respect to these issues, then its not surprising that you dont think anyone should protest. Thats your opinion, but then why are you reading indymedia, and your anger at the present day activists does not justify your attacking them as having caused Dentons suicide.
by Paul Wagner
What I see in this discussion -- specifically, in the reaction to Dee, one of the few people to name herself and speak about looking past one's own stance to the issue of method -- is exactly the same complete disconnect between theory and practice that occurred in the Denton-related incidents.

To even *remotely* imagine that one can reduce sexism by harassing women, enhance diversity by sneering at lesbians, secure equality through acts of domination, increase accountability through anonymity, steer the culture toward peace through acts of terror, increase workers' wages by driving up the costs of administrators' security, and produce a more compassionate society by spitting at those who express it is, to state it as mildly and courteously as I can, ludicrous.

I would strongly suggest -- as Dee has, in different language -- taking a hard look at the difference between activism, which is about bringing theory into the world as a reality -- and narcissim, which is about satisfying oneself.

And as for reading, I'd recommend Lenin's "Critique of the Ultra-Left," which addresses exactly this kind of self-satisfied "radicalism."

-Paul Wagner-


I can't believe I was young once. I was a college student like you. I was radical, very radical. I participated in real demonstrations about real issues of civil rights. But never as a young radical did I make the mistake of villifying an individual rather than attacking ideas. In fact at a woman's conference in 1972 I had to make the tough decision that I believed the pain in the eyes of Laotian, Vietnamese, and Cambodian over the lies that I was taught by my Church and my government. But you were not alive then.

I am still a radical, a progressive. I understand that if there is no dialogue, there is no activism. As a professor, a lesbian, a labor organizer, and civil rights activist, I know the pain of discrimination and the fear that comes from being threatened, derided made the brunt of the joke. And when it is done by your students, whom you have given your life to create fearless leaders of the next generation, there are fewer things that cut so deeply as when students turn on you.

Politics is about ideas, not people. I hope you will stop your rhetorical bantering long enough to reflect upon your ad hominum attack not on "institutional racism, but on the character of one of the most effective warriors for acceptance and social justice that we have today. Accept your role in breaking her heart and let it change you forever so that you never again lose sight of the person behind the role. May her face haunt you so that you never again launch such attacks on persons. The only difference between what happened at Columbine and UCSC, in my opinion is that at Columbine the boys who were bullied turned their fire on there persecutors, Dr. Denton turned the fire on herself rather than fire at her tormentors. Be thankful that she was such a woman of honor.
by Robert Norse
My compliments to Paul for writing openly. Of course, if I were a student worried about potential repercussions, police spying, and punitive retaliation for my participation in demonstrations, I might write anonymously too.

Paul, Dee, and others seem to suggest that holding powerful big wigs accountable is a no-no. Demonstrating in an angry or theatrical fashion in a fashion that "calls out" those who are superintending the racist, classist, war-making institutions is now suddenly "childish" or counterproductive?

Please--keep those demonstrations coming. It's the silence that's deadening and deafening.

War criminals come in all genders and colors and need to be loudly and clearly identified as such.

Whether it's against Condoleezza Rice, or Henry Kissenger--or "good liberals" like UCB's Clark Kerr in 1964, raising the alarm is vital to mobilize people to move in a new direction.

Any new specifics on antiwar demonstrations coming up on campus (or downtown)? Or has everyone gone away for the summer?


by Oscar G.
Norse is right that ones gender or sexual background should have no bearing on whether the person is right or wrong on a subject. I hope no one is saying that Denton should have received a pass simply because of that.

But I do think that many of us are a bit disgusted with the way she was singled out for a number of mindless attacks and childish antics. Student activists at UCSC need to get off their high horse for a moment and think about the complexity of the university. To blame the chancellor for all the things they claimed she was responsible or complacent in is wrong and stupid.
by _
Please, people, a little bit of thought and reflection would be nice. You keep revisiting the same thing and it stems from a failure to understand what activism is. Activism _is_ antics, it _is_ throwing a fit. It _is_ acting out to force society/community to address the issue you are working on. It is not "putting theory into practice" (that is praxis). It is not "being the change you want to see" (that's lifestylism or direct action). It is not making nicey-nice with political opponents (thats "dialogue"). It is not a discussion or a debate.

If that community is a college campus, the chancellor _is_ a great target, no matter who they are. This is not to say that you shouldnt work with them if they indicate a willingness to compromise or work with you. But if you are an activist, you are going to push their limits.

Clearly people think that activists put undue pressure on Denton. They havent produced any concrete reasons why this pressure was "undue", other than that she was a lesbian and a woman, and that she killed herself. The implicit assumption is that her suicide is the fault of student activists, which is ridiculous.
by _
activism requires a target. you don't go out and say, "the world is a complex place, lets be mad at all the complexities that we can only partially comprehend". you pick a target that you can reach, and something concrete that you can address and you start there. does that simplify reality? yes. but thats how we get things done, in politics, in philosophy, in the arts, in engineering, in science, in just about every sphere of human endeavor.
by Dr. J.
I am more than irritated by your anonymity and cowardice. Who ever you are you are misguided. Activism is the doctrine (that's the ism part) that Action (that's the act part) is the important outcome of education, whether it is grass roots education or education at the college level. It is NEVER ABOUT ATTACKING A PERSON. Yeah, she should stand up and take it like a man. Right? Well, she's not a man. No, I'm sure that the students were not her only problem. Especially when she also had home land security spying on the campus. As I said in my previous piece. You have no idea the damage students like you do when you, who are more closely allied with an activist leader's vision and values, refuse to see what the leader is trying to do within the system and turn on her in a way that is beyond reason that is sheer prejudice, meaning to pre-judge.

Have you looked at the credentials of the person who was receiving spousal accomodation? She was more than qualified to do the work she was hired to do at the salary she was hired to do it. If you don't like the salaries that administrators are getting, why don't you look at the male administrators who are getting higher salaries than their female counterparts. If she was able to to negotiate pay equity, then more power to her.

Your actions are those of a child who believes that he or she is powerless. It is a tantrum of sorts accomplishing none of the things you want to accomplish. Believe it! You are far from powerless. When we believe we are powerless we use power irresponsibly because we don't believe it is real. That's what you did. By attacking the PERSON of Dr. Denton. You did NOT stick to the issues. Activism is not about getting "attention" someones attention as you assert. It is about figuring out what you want the outcome to be and doing what you need to do to make it happen.

Children, students, have the power to do amazing things and they have the power to do great harm. You chose to do harm. If you knew anything about suicide you would know that it is not a choice. It is an attempt to free ones self from the worst kind of psychic pain, it is a permanent solution to a temporary problem at the moment of experience, it seems that there is no end to it.

At least admit that you don't know everything, about radical politics. Read Paolo Freire, read Reverend Martin Luther King. Accept the fact that you have the power to do good and to do immeasureable harm. Believe it! And STOP protesting and start creating the world you think you want.

Unstable! What do you know about instability. Using the masters tools to tear down the masters house is an impossible task, (Audre Lord) One would think that if it could be done anywhere, it would be done at a university with a progressive and committed student body. Was she wrong! The very ones who she came to support turned on her like a pack of wolves.

Am I sick about it, you bet I am! Its students like you who drive good faculty out of teaching. And I am one.
by _
you sound pretty loopy, my friend.

you dont have the first clue what activism is, and apparently you dont have
access to a dictionary either. if only you would start by looking words up
in a dictionary.

apparently, you also have no clue about the breakdown
of who was pursuing what with regard to denton. for example: students
did not break or pursue the compensation issue you
read so much about in the chronicle. that was almost purely a
media and state legislature endeavor, and the pressure brought to bear
on denton personally through that process was almost surely greater than
that brought on by on campus student activism.
by _
Heres what certain commenters _think_ activism is:

Dee Nelson: "Activism is a dialogue between the activists and the target(s) of the action. "
-
Paul Wagner: "Activism... is about bringing theory into the world as a reality."
-
Dr. (or Prof?) J. "Activism is the doctrine (that's the ism part) that Action (that's the act part) is the important outcome of education, whether it is grass roots education or education at the college level."

here's a few dictionary definitions of the word:

WordReference: The use of direct, often confrontational action, such as a demonstration or strike, in opposition to or support of a cause.
-
Dictionary.Die.net: A policy of taking direct and militant action to achieve a political or social goal.
-
Merriam-Webster: A doctrine or practice that emphasizes direct vigorous action especially in support of or opposition to one side of a controversial issue.

Certain commenters here ought to reconsider why your definitions are so far off, although it seems to me that the real reason they are posting here is not to seek a dialogue with student activists....

Which brings me back to my original point, which "anonymity" has nothing to do with:

I dont think if we could ask Denton why she killed herself, I dont think she would have said, "to make the students feel bad for protesting". Student activists have nothing to be ashamed of. Keeping Denton happy was never your responsibility. Her death was about her, not you, and these commenters are being self indulgent in coming on indymedia and trying to throw a guilt trip your way. They are trying to make themselves feel better for whatever reason - maybe they knew Denton personally (in which case her personal/social well-being, her mental state, was actually somewhat THEIR responsibility). Seems like student activists are a convenient scapegoat for a guilty conscience.
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!

Donate

$110.00 donated
in the past month

Get Involved

If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.

Publish

Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.

IMC Network