From the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Shame on UC
UC Berkeley seems to be moving further and further from its ideals of a public institution accessible to all and home of the Free Speech Movement. Its reckless and dangerous actions to attempt to remove tree sitters yesterday is just one of many steps in this direction.
UC Berkeley seems to be moving further and further from its ideals of a public institution accessible to all and home of the Free Speech Movement. Its reckless and dangerous actions to attempt to remove tree sitters yesterday is just one of many steps in this direction.
UC Berkeley has refused to negotiate with the community or work to develop an intelligent alternative to building dressing rooms in an Oak grove that is beloved by the community and considered sacred to many. Instead it has used its massive propaganda machine and spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to fence tree-sitters in and police them.
UC Berkeley, which touts itself as the home of the free speech movement could have responded differently. It could have used the tree sit as an opportunity to demonstrate what free speech and genuine public dialog means. It could have supported the tree-sitters as a way for its student body to actively engage in struggle and dialog around issues that are passionate to them, to learn that education is about actively participating in creating a new world, not just receiving a society in crisis. It could have used the hundreds of thousands of dollars it spent policing the tree sit to host community forums to develop a better solution than cutting the Oak Grove. More fundamentally, it could have used these forums to discus what the role of a public university should be and why, in a state that spends far more on prisons than it does on higher eduction, that Berkeley is more and more unable to fill this role.
Berkeley did not seize the opportunity, but responded just as the university did to the People's Park demonstrations in the 1960's. It responded with force. Perhaps this does not surprise us as community members. Berkeley more and more does not represent the ideals of a public institution. It has an atrociously low percentage of Black, Latino and Native American students and faculty in a state where people of color are a majority. Its tuition has made it far from the publically accessible university it was created to be. It has been working to negotiate one of the largest corporate-university buyouts in history with British Petroleum I mean Beyond Petroleum; It provides a safe-haven for Professor John Yoo, who provided legal cover for the Bush Administration's torture regime; it continues to research and help in the development of nuclear weapons; it refused to offer timely tenor to Professor Ruthie Gilmore, a renowned African American scholar, forcing her decision to leave Berkeley, and the list goes on.
It is time that we as a state speak out for a new type of education system. An education system with adequate funding, that does not need to pimp itself to corporate takeovers; and an education system that encourages dialog and thought, not fed ideas and forced deforestation. The university's actions against the tree sit should be an awakening to us; a call to action for a new way of learning in a country that is falling behind. It is time for us to build a new UC Berkeley and a new United States. It is time for a fundamental change.
By Jonah Zern
Berkeley Resident
UC Berkeley has refused to negotiate with the community or work to develop an intelligent alternative to building dressing rooms in an Oak grove that is beloved by the community and considered sacred to many. Instead it has used its massive propaganda machine and spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to fence tree-sitters in and police them.
UC Berkeley, which touts itself as the home of the free speech movement could have responded differently. It could have used the tree sit as an opportunity to demonstrate what free speech and genuine public dialog means. It could have supported the tree-sitters as a way for its student body to actively engage in struggle and dialog around issues that are passionate to them, to learn that education is about actively participating in creating a new world, not just receiving a society in crisis. It could have used the hundreds of thousands of dollars it spent policing the tree sit to host community forums to develop a better solution than cutting the Oak Grove. More fundamentally, it could have used these forums to discus what the role of a public university should be and why, in a state that spends far more on prisons than it does on higher eduction, that Berkeley is more and more unable to fill this role.
Berkeley did not seize the opportunity, but responded just as the university did to the People's Park demonstrations in the 1960's. It responded with force. Perhaps this does not surprise us as community members. Berkeley more and more does not represent the ideals of a public institution. It has an atrociously low percentage of Black, Latino and Native American students and faculty in a state where people of color are a majority. Its tuition has made it far from the publically accessible university it was created to be. It has been working to negotiate one of the largest corporate-university buyouts in history with British Petroleum I mean Beyond Petroleum; It provides a safe-haven for Professor John Yoo, who provided legal cover for the Bush Administration's torture regime; it continues to research and help in the development of nuclear weapons; it refused to offer timely tenor to Professor Ruthie Gilmore, a renowned African American scholar, forcing her decision to leave Berkeley, and the list goes on.
It is time that we as a state speak out for a new type of education system. An education system with adequate funding, that does not need to pimp itself to corporate takeovers; and an education system that encourages dialog and thought, not fed ideas and forced deforestation. The university's actions against the tree sit should be an awakening to us; a call to action for a new way of learning in a country that is falling behind. It is time for us to build a new UC Berkeley and a new United States. It is time for a fundamental change.
By Jonah Zern
Berkeley Resident
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
UC has negiotated in good faith with COB and other interested parties, but there has been zero movement from the other side. UC allowed the protest to go on for well over a year now without interrupting, showing tremendous patience and a respect for free speech that would occur at exactly zero other institutions in this country.
Shame on you for not doing your homework before posting blatantly wrong information like this.
Shame on you for not doing your homework before posting blatantly wrong information like this.
Sadly, your article is reflective of how oppressive and intolerant the so called "free speech" movement is in Berkeley. I grew up here and went to Berkeley High where I experienced similar intolerance for views that were in opposition to those of the dominant socialist machine. Indeed, the great irony of your argument is that you pretend to extoll the virtues of free speech by asserting that the only way UC (and the great majority of mankind) can support free speech is by co-opting your viewpoints and adopting them as their own. The UC and reasonable people are free to disagree with the tree people and the UC has no obligation to aid and abett a their protest on its own land. The only way UC can actually support free speech is by spending time and money presenting its views and dispelling the mythology being propogated by a bunch of directionless individuals with no perspective on the real world problems we face.
The protesters have plenty of open space to spew their anit-progress message and I would gladly buy each of them a milk crate so they join the "berate, annoy, and harrass" contingent on Telegraph...
The tree sitters have now spent 18 months and millions of dollars of badly needed public funds protesting the construction of a much needed gym. Why? Well, no one really knows. To save trees? Well why don't they lobby the Brazillian government to slow the deforestation of the Amazon? Or the Canadian government to halt clear cutting in BC? I guess the reason is that such a protest would take real time, thought, and work; something these trustafarians are not amenable to.
The protesters have plenty of open space to spew their anit-progress message and I would gladly buy each of them a milk crate so they join the "berate, annoy, and harrass" contingent on Telegraph...
The tree sitters have now spent 18 months and millions of dollars of badly needed public funds protesting the construction of a much needed gym. Why? Well, no one really knows. To save trees? Well why don't they lobby the Brazillian government to slow the deforestation of the Amazon? Or the Canadian government to halt clear cutting in BC? I guess the reason is that such a protest would take real time, thought, and work; something these trustafarians are not amenable to.
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
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.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network