Student protest movements have historically functioned as an indispensable corrective for America and the West. That is the legacy of 1968 we should be talking about
Divestment is not realistic or particularly effective. It is impossible to unwind etfs or mutual funds. Also, the categories you name are categorically different, like fossil fuels, which are easy to isolate. South Africa is not a good comparison with the Palestinian/Israeli situation. Read they long term history.
Palestinians have had opportunities to have a state but they have rejected it. What is their goal, then? "From the river to the sea"? Good luck with that. Divestment is not an goal to create a new and better situation. Israel will not cease to exist. Someone needs to do some research and think. These kids have done none of that.
And what lesson truly came out of 1968? Rallies, encampments, and violence in Chicago... and it all lead to a Nixon victory because it enflamed the passions of the older American voters and the youth voters sat home, angry with the Democratic Party and Humphrey.
The win by Nixon allowed him to escalate the war effort against Vietnam.
Let Trump win this election and Gaza will be a playground for the rich friends of Donald, his family, and Netanyahu.... and that doesn't even begin to touch the damage that Trump will continue to do against women, LGBTQ+, minorities, immigrants, the environment, and regulations. Trump will embolden Netanyahu to level Gaza.
It is one thing to be disappointed in the tough decisions the Biden admin is faced with, and another to sit at home in November and allow Gaza to disappear forever.
Did we read the same piece? Just in case you didn't make it to the end.
"It is certainly true that the electoral consequences of large-scale protests are uncertain, and it is rather unlikely that the students will achieve all their specific political goals, especially the more radical ones. However, a more holistic assessment of the historical significance of student protests and of the “lessons” 1968 might offer would do well to distinguish the question of immediate, narrowly defined electoral outcomes from the underlying diagnosis and discontent that brought students together. Whatever happened afterwards hardly invalidated the core demand to correct course in a situation in which the gulf between the nation’s professed ideals and its immediate actions had simply become unbearable."
Speaking as someone who was in college in 1968, I feel the need to point out that most of the students demonstrating could not vote in that election as they were not yet 21. In my case, the first time I could vote in a presidential election was 1972. I and many of my similarly aged friends were active in politics then; my husband & I caucused for McGovern and became delegates to a state district convention. Yes, McGovern lost, but the fact that he was nominated reflected the changes that were made in the Democratic party responding to the protests of 1968.
I'd also note that it was a very close election with Nixon winning the popular vote by only .7% though he had a strong victory in the Electoral College. The full story of the 1068 election is a very complicated one, and student protests are only part of the story. See; https://tinyl.io/Almb to blame/credit student protestors for Nixon's victory is an oversimplification.
"enables them to serve as a sensor and a corrective"
I liked this phrasing and wondered if there was perhaps a little wordplay with "sensor" and "censor" there 😁 Not like "this is censored no one can see it," more like the original concept from Rome of a body or office that periodically gave society's mores and norms a regular checkup to make sure they were holding true to the traditions of Roman public morality. Keep society pointed at the right things, like your argument about "live up to promises and ideals" vs "well it's better than it used to be." Thanks for sharing your work!
"The past fifteen years or so have provided ample evidence of how we are actually asked to do the opposite: Tea Party, Trump rallies, Trucker convoys – we are asked to look for the least incriminating interpretation, to endlessly invest in finding an explanation that does not foreground racism and white supremacy, that focuses instead on economic anxiety or on people understandably being frustrated with the arrogant elites who left them behind." Thank you for putting this so succinctly. Your analysis and writing is always so thoughtful (and thought-provoking). I look forward to the day when you're allowed to take paid subscriptions!
I don't think it is tremendously valuable to speak about "student movements" so loosely as to call them an "indispensable corrective". Perhaps an "indispensable conversation" but not always reparative. As someone who went through the anti-war protests at U.C. Berkeley, the women's movement, and the civil rights movement, I can say that there were many different groups that participated who could have been divided quite distinctly between the thoughtfully well-defined and the angrily acting out. But at least there were discussions on topics like the reality of the Domino Theory.
The thing that strikes me about these protests is how incoherent they are. Does anyone in these supposedly high-end schools read history? It's not enough to be excited and dramatic or simply overtaken by the awful images of war. One needs to make a meaningful statement. And such a statement has to evenly evaluate what is going on with some intellectual understanding. I don't see that. And that is alarming.
You must be willfully blind to have totally avoided understanding what they're asking for. Every single college I know of has a coherent and actionable list of demands. Many of them have that list displayed in big letters at their encampments. The list varies for each school, but they all include having their school divest from Israel, which is not an idea they invented yesterday. It is in line with the BDS movement which has been pushed forward by Palestinian civil society for the past couple of decades.
You're are extremely uninformed. Are you even aware of the calls from Palestinian civil society to support BDS and the reasons why they believe it is important and meaningful? No thought, no research on your part! When I said actionable, I meant they are making specific demands that are WITHIN THE POWER of university administration and trustees to grant. A demand to a university for a two-state solution is vague and meaningless, and also not within the power of the university to implement. Divestment is a very realistic goal. As a result of student demands, various colleges have divested from South Africa, from fossils fuels, private prisons, tobacco companies, the list goes on. They can very easily divest from Israel, and some are already doing it.
Thanks for this and your earlier excellent piece on the student protests. I'm interesting in two things about the reaction to the protests, though not sure the significance. 1) As someone who was a college student in 1968, it strikes me that the commentators you talk about were either very young children (e.g., David Frum) or not even born (Max Boot) in 1968. I can't help but wonder how that affects their perception of 1968. 2) As someone who has closely observed demonstrations in DC since 2017, I've seen what demonstrations have had real effects (e.g., the 2017 pro-ACA demonstrations, the annual March for Life) and what demonstrations have moved the participants but do not visibly accomplish much (e.g., most demonstrations in DC). It is interesting to see which demonstrations capture the imagination & attention of media, and to see how often media attention is not in meaningful proportion to the actual demonstration.
As someone who was there in the middle of it all 56 years ago in 1968 (the group of us who ran the Oleo Strut Coffeehouse outside Ft Hood, where we worked with the anti-war vets returning from Vietnam, were responsible for "neutralizing" the 5,000 troops the Army sent to Chicago, leaving the CPD with no backup and the riot was the result), what worries me with 56 years' experience since, is that too many of the student demonstrators of 2024 may do what too many of us did in 1968: we didn't vote, since the Democrats were "unworthy" of our support.
Hubert Humphrey lost to Nixon by a bit more than 50,000 votes in the popular vote. That was us. And the result was that over the next six years, till Nixon was forced from office in 1974, we got exactly what we didn't want. Not voting for Humphrey was a vote for Nixon, a vote for the four years of the Second American War in Southeast Asia, a vote for the majority of the 59,000 Americans who died there to die there during Nixon's time in office, a vote for the destruction of all the countries of Indochina as Nixon and the war criminal Henry Kissinger tried every way not to have to accept the deal they accepted in December 1972 to end the war, the same deal LBJ's negotiators said yes to in November 1968, that Humphrey would have implemented.
More than that, by "voting" Nixon into office, we voted for the Republicans' 56 year long effort to destroy the New Deal that continues today, for Reagan, for both Bushes and ultimately for Trump to take over the GOP.
Not voting in this election will be far more meaningful to the history of this country than our stupid decision was back then.
Everything Democrats are doing to discredit the students in 2024 is a act that can drive enough of them to "get their backs up" and not vote in November. The republic cannot afford that if we want to keep it.
"The university has acted not so much as a hotbed of extremism, but as an environment that allowed young people to formulate an unsparing critique of America’s shortcomings and the injustices at home and abroad it ignored or actively perpetuated." I agree. This is such as well thought-out, well researched and well written piece that logically flows from beginning to end. It is so helpful to put these protests into a larger picture that combines so many elements into a narrative that moves the issue forward.
Thank you for this thoughtful and important corrective to centrist hand-wringing. It hurts my soul that I cannot support your work financially. I find it so very valuable.
Divestment is not realistic or particularly effective. It is impossible to unwind etfs or mutual funds. Also, the categories you name are categorically different, like fossil fuels, which are easy to isolate. South Africa is not a good comparison with the Palestinian/Israeli situation. Read they long term history.
Palestinians have had opportunities to have a state but they have rejected it. What is their goal, then? "From the river to the sea"? Good luck with that. Divestment is not an goal to create a new and better situation. Israel will not cease to exist. Someone needs to do some research and think. These kids have done none of that.
The professors are the enemy. The professors are the enemy. The professors are the enemy.
And what lesson truly came out of 1968? Rallies, encampments, and violence in Chicago... and it all lead to a Nixon victory because it enflamed the passions of the older American voters and the youth voters sat home, angry with the Democratic Party and Humphrey.
The win by Nixon allowed him to escalate the war effort against Vietnam.
Let Trump win this election and Gaza will be a playground for the rich friends of Donald, his family, and Netanyahu.... and that doesn't even begin to touch the damage that Trump will continue to do against women, LGBTQ+, minorities, immigrants, the environment, and regulations. Trump will embolden Netanyahu to level Gaza.
It is one thing to be disappointed in the tough decisions the Biden admin is faced with, and another to sit at home in November and allow Gaza to disappear forever.
Did we read the same piece? Just in case you didn't make it to the end.
"It is certainly true that the electoral consequences of large-scale protests are uncertain, and it is rather unlikely that the students will achieve all their specific political goals, especially the more radical ones. However, a more holistic assessment of the historical significance of student protests and of the “lessons” 1968 might offer would do well to distinguish the question of immediate, narrowly defined electoral outcomes from the underlying diagnosis and discontent that brought students together. Whatever happened afterwards hardly invalidated the core demand to correct course in a situation in which the gulf between the nation’s professed ideals and its immediate actions had simply become unbearable."
Speaking as someone who was in college in 1968, I feel the need to point out that most of the students demonstrating could not vote in that election as they were not yet 21. In my case, the first time I could vote in a presidential election was 1972. I and many of my similarly aged friends were active in politics then; my husband & I caucused for McGovern and became delegates to a state district convention. Yes, McGovern lost, but the fact that he was nominated reflected the changes that were made in the Democratic party responding to the protests of 1968.
I'd also note that it was a very close election with Nixon winning the popular vote by only .7% though he had a strong victory in the Electoral College. The full story of the 1068 election is a very complicated one, and student protests are only part of the story. See; https://tinyl.io/Almb to blame/credit student protestors for Nixon's victory is an oversimplification.
"enables them to serve as a sensor and a corrective"
I liked this phrasing and wondered if there was perhaps a little wordplay with "sensor" and "censor" there 😁 Not like "this is censored no one can see it," more like the original concept from Rome of a body or office that periodically gave society's mores and norms a regular checkup to make sure they were holding true to the traditions of Roman public morality. Keep society pointed at the right things, like your argument about "live up to promises and ideals" vs "well it's better than it used to be." Thanks for sharing your work!
"The past fifteen years or so have provided ample evidence of how we are actually asked to do the opposite: Tea Party, Trump rallies, Trucker convoys – we are asked to look for the least incriminating interpretation, to endlessly invest in finding an explanation that does not foreground racism and white supremacy, that focuses instead on economic anxiety or on people understandably being frustrated with the arrogant elites who left them behind." Thank you for putting this so succinctly. Your analysis and writing is always so thoughtful (and thought-provoking). I look forward to the day when you're allowed to take paid subscriptions!
🙏
You need to touch grass bro🙄
You need to take the "progessive" out of your bio, sis.
🤡
Convincing argument.
I don't think it is tremendously valuable to speak about "student movements" so loosely as to call them an "indispensable corrective". Perhaps an "indispensable conversation" but not always reparative. As someone who went through the anti-war protests at U.C. Berkeley, the women's movement, and the civil rights movement, I can say that there were many different groups that participated who could have been divided quite distinctly between the thoughtfully well-defined and the angrily acting out. But at least there were discussions on topics like the reality of the Domino Theory.
The thing that strikes me about these protests is how incoherent they are. Does anyone in these supposedly high-end schools read history? It's not enough to be excited and dramatic or simply overtaken by the awful images of war. One needs to make a meaningful statement. And such a statement has to evenly evaluate what is going on with some intellectual understanding. I don't see that. And that is alarming.
You must be willfully blind to have totally avoided understanding what they're asking for. Every single college I know of has a coherent and actionable list of demands. Many of them have that list displayed in big letters at their encampments. The list varies for each school, but they all include having their school divest from Israel, which is not an idea they invented yesterday. It is in line with the BDS movement which has been pushed forward by Palestinian civil society for the past couple of decades.
Not a meaningful or realistic goal. Why not a two state solution with a civil leadership other than Hamas? No thought. No research.
You're are extremely uninformed. Are you even aware of the calls from Palestinian civil society to support BDS and the reasons why they believe it is important and meaningful? No thought, no research on your part! When I said actionable, I meant they are making specific demands that are WITHIN THE POWER of university administration and trustees to grant. A demand to a university for a two-state solution is vague and meaningless, and also not within the power of the university to implement. Divestment is a very realistic goal. As a result of student demands, various colleges have divested from South Africa, from fossils fuels, private prisons, tobacco companies, the list goes on. They can very easily divest from Israel, and some are already doing it.
Their demands have been pretty clear: divestment from Israel.
Divestment will do nothing.
It's interesting how often those critical of the protestors seem to miss their demands.
Thanks for this and your earlier excellent piece on the student protests. I'm interesting in two things about the reaction to the protests, though not sure the significance. 1) As someone who was a college student in 1968, it strikes me that the commentators you talk about were either very young children (e.g., David Frum) or not even born (Max Boot) in 1968. I can't help but wonder how that affects their perception of 1968. 2) As someone who has closely observed demonstrations in DC since 2017, I've seen what demonstrations have had real effects (e.g., the 2017 pro-ACA demonstrations, the annual March for Life) and what demonstrations have moved the participants but do not visibly accomplish much (e.g., most demonstrations in DC). It is interesting to see which demonstrations capture the imagination & attention of media, and to see how often media attention is not in meaningful proportion to the actual demonstration.
As someone who was there in the middle of it all 56 years ago in 1968 (the group of us who ran the Oleo Strut Coffeehouse outside Ft Hood, where we worked with the anti-war vets returning from Vietnam, were responsible for "neutralizing" the 5,000 troops the Army sent to Chicago, leaving the CPD with no backup and the riot was the result), what worries me with 56 years' experience since, is that too many of the student demonstrators of 2024 may do what too many of us did in 1968: we didn't vote, since the Democrats were "unworthy" of our support.
Hubert Humphrey lost to Nixon by a bit more than 50,000 votes in the popular vote. That was us. And the result was that over the next six years, till Nixon was forced from office in 1974, we got exactly what we didn't want. Not voting for Humphrey was a vote for Nixon, a vote for the four years of the Second American War in Southeast Asia, a vote for the majority of the 59,000 Americans who died there to die there during Nixon's time in office, a vote for the destruction of all the countries of Indochina as Nixon and the war criminal Henry Kissinger tried every way not to have to accept the deal they accepted in December 1972 to end the war, the same deal LBJ's negotiators said yes to in November 1968, that Humphrey would have implemented.
More than that, by "voting" Nixon into office, we voted for the Republicans' 56 year long effort to destroy the New Deal that continues today, for Reagan, for both Bushes and ultimately for Trump to take over the GOP.
Not voting in this election will be far more meaningful to the history of this country than our stupid decision was back then.
Everything Democrats are doing to discredit the students in 2024 is a act that can drive enough of them to "get their backs up" and not vote in November. The republic cannot afford that if we want to keep it.
"The university has acted not so much as a hotbed of extremism, but as an environment that allowed young people to formulate an unsparing critique of America’s shortcomings and the injustices at home and abroad it ignored or actively perpetuated." I agree. This is such as well thought-out, well researched and well written piece that logically flows from beginning to end. It is so helpful to put these protests into a larger picture that combines so many elements into a narrative that moves the issue forward.
Thank you for this thoughtful and important corrective to centrist hand-wringing. It hurts my soul that I cannot support your work financially. I find it so very valuable.
Totally agree 💯
The collective amnesia is astounding.