Sure, you can protest, but.... by Peter - Wednesday, 22 August 2012, 05:58 PM

"This Directive addresses potential protest action relating, but not limited to, the restructure of the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences.

Students have a right to protest matters of concern to them through peaceful assembly. However, it is unacceptable for protests to threaten the success of Open Day or disrupt other University activities.

Open Day is the University’s primary opportunity to invite prospective students and their families onto our campuses and encourage them to choose La Trobe for their tertiary study. Open Day builds the University’s reputation in the community, and gives students and staff the opportunity to celebrate and promote the University’s strengths. The success of Open Day has a direct impact on the viability of individual faculties and the University as a whole, by improving enrolments in the following years.

The University will take reasonable steps to ensure public safety and good order on its campuses and on Open Day. To that end, I direct that any planned protest be notified in writing to Mr David Ensor, Vice-President (Operations) via email to ovcnotices@latrobe.edu.au at least 24 hours prior to the commencement of any protest. A specific area of the campus will be designated for any protests, ensuring that protesters are able to make their point in a meaningful way without undue risk to the safety or enjoyment of any person visiting, studying or working on the campus.

I further direct that any protest be carried out in a way that:

• Avoids disruption to legitimate University activities, including those associated with the 2012 Open Day;

• Does not present a risk to the safety or wellbeing of any person;

• Does not threaten or intimidate any person; and

• Does not present a risk to or damage any University property or facilities.

A failure by a student to comply with the requirements of this direction will be treated as General Misconduct under the University’s General Misconduct Statute 2009. Any protesters who are not students or staff of La Trobe will be dealt with as trespassers under the law.

This directive applies until 31 August 2012.

Professor John Dewar"

Hmm so the powers that be are flexing their muscle ahead of the approaching open day. Anyone who wishes to protest must inform the uni firstly in writing, as, 'the university will take reasonable steps to ensure public safety and good order'- that is,they need to plan how many extra security to roster on that day. A 'specific area' for protesters? If you follow our guidelines and are not disruptive to anyone else (not seen or heard) you will entitled to make your 'point in a meangingful way' which may be difficult if the location is far from open day traffic. I agree that its important to attract more students, if there were higher enrolments in HUSS there would be less cuts, but to be told the manner in which you can protest so as not to be disruptive seems rather patronising, not to mention the threat of the 'General Misconduct Statute 2009'. What do you guys think? Giovanna, i wonder if the students in BA received a similar directive last year?

Alberto, I am afraid that in same cases this quote is true, people are sometimes very trustful when it comes to 'the elite', because they figure they know more than they do.

Peter, what happened in Buenos Aires last year was big. To be able to understand what happened you need to know that education at higher level (University) is public (you don’t have to pay). And at the same time is quite good (specially in Law, medicine, engineering, math, among others)– if you go to the world ranking you will find The University of Buenos Aires (UBA) ranked between the best 500 universities of the world. That is not bad for a public university of a “developing” country.

What happened? Secondary and UBA students protested and in some cases they locked down the building, and for several months there were no classes in Buenos Aires (some students slept at the schools). The protest where quite big and they had a big repercussion. But the reasons of why the students protested were different, mainly because our needs were different. Principles of this institutions were accused of being corrupt, the infrastructure of the building were not good (some of the roofs were falling down) – to give you to extreme reasons. We can talk more about this through a coffee if you want. But if you have time watch this two video, it will give you a picture of the different protest methods. The first one is the Faculty of arts (it is in Spanish) but what you can see in the images is that they are using ‘art’ to make a point. The second one is secondary students cutting the street (they are complaining because the school does not have gas for example).

1) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OV04IW13uuU

2) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UxacBh6y3uM

There were others that were more violent and the police was involved. But I don’t want to show you that jeje Is this is the right thing to do strategically? I don’t have the answer… After reading about Gandhi and his objectives and strategic goals I am more confused…

Student leaders are dealing with two opposing arguments, students and the University authority. Students needs their very demands fulfilled which are of counter interest to the uni. authority. At one point, it is hard to believe that the Uni. authority is intentionally doing the cuts with the mere intention of just shrinking the HUSS. Uni. authority has their own managerial and political reasons which are inevitable as they point out. What students demand is equally important in a different perspective.

I therefore believe that the student leaders' duty should be to get two opposing stands into a compromise at some point. Where the compromise is made depends on the bargaining power of the student leaders. Their bargainig power depends on how strong the student mass is holdig it. For the student mass to be strong, they should be kept at the extream end of their belief (that Uni. is intentionally doing the cuts).

In doing so, students leaders need to play two different roles, one as "negotiators" (dealing with reality) and as "student leaders" (dealing with the force building for bargain). If the student mass is convinced to buy the real situation, they may become less interested (and may also tend not to support student union). So, student union leaders need to organise frequent protests with student mass to keep them warmed up. And also they should be able to convince the mass of any steps taken back without losing the mass! They are also responsible for any misconduct of the mass (since the youth is generally aggressive).

In this context, I believe that student leaders have a bigger and a responsible role to play. Whatever they do, ultimate outcome should be an acceptable one for both parties and especially students should be satisfied with it. If the leaders make a mistake, the whole student mass is going to suffer. They should be aware of any bounded laws as Peter pointed out. They should not betray the campaign nor stand on the extreme demands. It is not an easy job and needs leadership qualities.

I'd be happy to learn more of the protests and outcome of what transpired in Buenos Aires last year, it seems the issues were diverse and multilayered like you said, which i guess would make the coordination of the various protesting groups more difficult as they had differing goals. I like the video of protest through art/expression as the message resonates to a wide audience (including those without any spanish haha) and in line with what we've read recently doesnt alienate anyone: the risks of backlash from the establishment are minimised. Having said that, I'm also confused after having read about Ghandi. From my recent 3 hour exposure (still catching up on the 1st week of readings) I gathered that Ghandi preached the peaceful way with protests etc, but it is only worth following that method when the oppressor is aware of your strength, otherwise the point cannot be made effectively (correct me if im wrong). Therefore is it not plausable to engage in some show of violent action/dissent to make the establishment aware of the capabilities of the masses, particulary if this can be somehow combined with non violent action? I asked Tom after the class about where Mandela would have been placed on the graph (where we had reformist/revolutionary on the horizontal axis and principled nonviolent/pragmatic on the vertical) and it was a tough question to answer since Mandela started out peacefully, lobbying the apartheid regime exhaustively through all the legal chanels before being left with little alternative other than violent action. Tom disagreed with me that the terrorist activities of the ANC helped bring about change, but i cant help but think violence(to a point) can have a place when mixed with other forms of protest. I think that given the situation and if you're willing to sacrifice, the ends justify the means especially when dealing with brutal regimes. hmm..

I think the strength is made after years of protesting in a non violent way. That is why people sometime leave non-violent methods aside, because they not generate immediate results. It takes time, effort, and a lot suffering to generate change… Therefore, when immediate action has to be taken as in the case of brutal regimes, like Peter suggest, I am not sure if it is the most effective option… What do you think?

Did you watch the news today?

This is what the news showed:

"Open day at Victoria's La Trobe University's Bundoora campus has taken a dramatic turn, with Vice Chancellor John Dewar ambushed by student protestors.

Angry students barricaded the campus chief in a room, forcing him to escape through an underground tunnel.

The students are angry over cuts to humanity courses and staff.

Professor Dewar was pursued through the corridors until security ushered him into a classroom, out of harms way, before helping him escape out of an underground tunnel.

Despite his dramatic ambush he says the open day was a huge success.

Some students may face expulsion for their participation in the protest."

ABC news report here

Sky News report here