Aaron Kreider 1/12/99 Submission for Common Sense, draft Towards a Theory of Student Liberation Notre Dame students are oppressed by an education system that reproduces social inequality and a dictatorial administration that suppresses critical dissent. While the oppression of ND students is not nearly as severe as that suffered by other people in the world, it is essential for students to question the way in which we are being educated both for the value of our education and so that we can develop a liberated space which we can use to promote social justice elsewhere. Education System as Oppressive The education system places students in hierarchical relationships to their teachers who hold the ultimate power over them by awarding grades that determine whether a student will join the social elite or the working masses. The University of Notre Dame, as an elite institution, serves an important role in training people for the upper echelons of the socioeconomic system. From early age grades, exams, bells, and arbitrary rules condition students to follow, and ultimately internalize and accept, authority. Due to this conditioning, former students will often prefer their jobs over the time they were students, and fail to recognize the injustices in the boss to worker relationship at their workplace or question the social responsibility of their company. Also the curriculum is limited to the set of ideas that are acceptable to the ruling elite. Students do not learn successful tactics for challenging the institutionalized sexism, racism, heterosexism, and the oppression of the poor. By not challenging this system, students are failing in their process of education and enabling the perpetuation of injustice on a larger scale. ND Administration as Oppressive The Administration of the University of Notre Dame oppresses students by working to ensure that the will of a very small number of administrators and rich donors prevails over that of a much larger number of students (and faculty). The Administration caters to the values of rich donors so that it can maximize its revenue and thus maintain its elite status (for instance as measured by the US News and World Report rankings). If a Debartolo (who donated $33 million in 1989) opposes including sexual orientation in the nondiscrimination clause, then the Administration will resist doing so. Rich donors and alumni are often very conservative and their support requires the suppression of the more liberal desires of the students (and faculty). Thus it is quite rational for the Administration to suppress free speech and raise barriers to student activism to prevent challenges to its control. Since the University of Notre Dame is a private institution students have no legal right to free speech, but the moral right still exists. In practice, students have no freedom of speech, assembly, association, or petition. Rallies must be registered (in effect approved) by Asst. Vice-President of Residential Life, Bill Kirk. This makes last-minute rallies tough (in the event of a war or a racist / sexist / homophobic campus incident), eliminates the value of surprise, and allows for administrative refusal. Within the past four years Pax Christi, Amnesty International, and the College Democrats have all been threatened with loss of club status for holding unauthorized demonstrations. To pass out leaflets or distribute a newspaper (or any other form of information), you need to get approval from Student Activities. At a recent football game a student got a citation from security for leafleting. Here again, it is implied that permission is the Administration’s to give and can be refused. To sponsor any event, you need to be a recognized organization. Groups like OUTreach ND, and formerly the Progressive Student Alliance (we weren’t recognized from February until Aug. 20), were not allowed to sponsor speakers, teach-ins, rallies, etc. One loophole is that individuals can sponsor rallies. Last year in February I sponsored a rally against the threatened US bombing of Iraq. At 11pm the night before I got a knock on my door. It was Notre Dame security with a hand-delivered a letter from Bill Kirk saying I could not identify myself as a PSA member at the rally neither could anyone else. It was intimidation. Unrecognized student organizations are not allowed to meet on campus. Even in the privacy of your dorm room. Beyond the issue of a major lack of free speech is the fact that students have no vote. Or our vote is completely ineffective. Sure we can vote for a student government, but this government has neither the will nor power to address the major questions on this campus. Student Senate can do very little to include orientation in the non- discrimination clause, get OUTreach ND recognized, make parietals optional, get a multicultural center on campus, insure diversity, or say call for divestment from South Africa (as was an issue in the 80s). For the past 28 years Student Senate has been incredibly apolitical. A couple Administrators can veto the overwhelming majority opinion of students and faculty – and students have little to no recourse. Conservative Students as Oppressive A vocal minority of ND students lambast any student or student organization that attempts to work for social justice. These far-right students challenge not the legitimacy of the activist ideas, but the legitimacy of the activism itself. They demand an end to all critical thought that would challenge the administration and the student body to work for social justice. While their critique might initially cause one to re-examine whether activism is needed, upon further thought it becomes clear that their behavior is highly rational. Many ND students come from privileged families and they seek to maintain their privilege. As such, they are challenged by social justice activism as it seeks to abolish all forms of unearned privilege. They recognize this and counter-attack. Student Liberation! The solution is student liberation. Fortunately students are resisting the rules and we have some free speech on campus. But students should not have to violate duLac to practice free speech. We need new rules. Students must build a campus movement that is strong enough to demand and achieve them. Activist energies should not be spent on registering demonstrations, getting petitions and leaflets approved, or trying to get a group recognized – but rather on working for social justice and fighting the graver forms of oppression found in other corners of the world. We need a base where organizing is accommodated and encouraged by the Administration rather than prevented. We need a safe space where racism, sexism, heterosexism, and oppression of the poor are becoming extinct. Finally, we need to constantly challenge the education we are receiving, and, where present, replace its role of reproducing inequality with a new one of building our minds and hearts to work for justice both at school and for the rest of our lives.