Contrasting events
Early Thursday morning a combine police force in riot gear cleared the encampment on Wayne State University’s campus. As with almost every campus occupation across the country, the police used tactics of violence and intimidation against a peaceful gathering of students and their supporters. At one point US Congressperson Rashida Tlaib confronted police for assaulting a young woman and ripping off her hijab.
After the removal of the encampment students gathered to continue protests. Later in the day they regrouped at the Detroit Detention Center for the release of the 12 people arrested. It was reported that one student had to go to the hospital because of how she was treated by police.
University officials claimed the encampment was a health and safety hazard and “created an environment of exclusion — one in which some members of our campus community felt unwelcome and unable to fully participate in campus life." Student organizers dismissed these claims and continued to press their demands for a cease fire and for the university to divest from Israeli companies and weapons manufactures.
In reading the statements of the university administration, it is clear that they were not seriously attempting to negotiate with students. Rather, they were attempting to control and isolate the encampment. President Kimberly Andrews Espy offered to meet two students in her office but refused to attend the encampment. The university closed the campus to students and faculty while inviting Detroit Police and private security forces in. Many members of the Detroit community responded to calls from students to join them as rumors of the police raid spread. University officials were quick to label these efforts at solidarity as outside agitation.
The use of violence to remove peaceful encampments is in contrast to how such events evolved during the anti-apartheid movements in the 1980s. At Columbia University, for example, the occupation of Hamilton Hall lasted several weeks. In spite of hunger strikes and limited facilities, no one claimed “health and safety” issues were at stake. At other universities, including the U of M, groups built shanti towns that served as places for education, conversation, and cultural support for weeks and months.
In 1985, 50 universities had encampments, and there were over 150 engaged in demonstrations calling for “Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions” against the South African Government.
These efforts contributed to the passage of the Anti-Apartheid Act in 1986. Ronald Reagan vetoed it, but the weight of public pressure forced Congress to override his veto.
It is this power to influence public opinion that really frightens those who support US military power.
A contemporary contrast can be found across the river in Canada. As Wayne State and other US administrators are turning to police, a judge in Toronto refused to act on a request by the University to have police clear the campus. The judge set a date for a public hearing on the question for June 19 and 20th. In the ruling the judge noted that these dates do not accommodate the university’s interest in clearing the encampment before graduation ceremonies begin in early June, but he said a fair opportunity must be given to the protesters to make their case.
Students set up the encampment on May 2 and it is strongly supported by faculty, labor unions and community people.
Instead of sending police to Israel to be trained in violent repression, we should be sending our university presidents and boards of governors to Canada to learn what free speech means. Certainly, we should consider requiring court intervention before university officials are allowed to use force against those who call us to consciousness. These encampments have been critical in shifting bringing to light the responsibility we all have to stop the militarism that is threatening all life.