SWA: Let's play hardball!

UPDATED 19 APRIL 2005:

So it's gotten quite a bit more complex.... propaganda from Wrighton, new Stud Life headlines further colouring the issue...

Basically, I stand in strong support of the issue at hand. However, the tactics of the protesters become increasingly questionable and I come to question the quality of their leadership and ability to transform into a planning and implementations team--one cannot simply protest and complain, but rather, one needs a plan to affect change for the better. The plan to enact a living wage is perhaps to simple--they need to have more details and be ready to act. However, the Chancellor needs to simultaneously extend a true offer and do so in writing. This recalls Che Gueverra, lifelong revolutionary who was shot and left to die in the jungles of Bolivia--triumphant in Cuba, he did not know when to stop and settle down and help BUILD. One cannot continuously tear down walls and demand my way or the highway.... compromise is an art, and the time eventually comes in all matters when it is the proper moment to build back the structures of society along new paradigms. Perhaps that time is now, perhaps it has passed. I grow increasingly dubious that the SWA is drunk with the headlines of the press as its story reaches around the globe....it is a noble, just, a dire issue that must change, but both sides must truly work to change it, and both sides at the moment are rife with falsehood.

From the SWA website:

Saturday, April 16, 2005 (morning) Over 160 people came to support us in our 1PM rally. Local clergy, union leaders, and parents spoke in support for us and the cause. In addition, over 65 community members and Wash-U professors, have committed themselves to solidarity fasting with us to support workers' rights. Various members of the labor movement lent their support to our cause.

We received an e-mail from the Chancellor, his third correspondence, letting us know that the university would be implementing their latest proposal without our endorsement. He offered, once more, to include us in this process. However, as before, he did not specify what this process would be or how we would be included in it. Nor did he mention our request for worker's unionization rights, a code compliance board, or how the half million dollars would be increased to a living wage over time.

Missouri state Representative, Maria Chappelle-Nadal, is sitting-in with us as well as fasting for 24 hours. Much love to her and all of our supporters.



News is in the air that something happened tonight (Sunday) but at least on Saturday things sound like there's some critical mass gathering. Personally, I find SWA's tactics brilliant and adaptable as the situation evolves. Not only is the hunger strike designed to maximise the press and the possible length because a) it's designed to demonstrate some of the pain of the workers b) it brings people MORE together through the revolving process where someone on the brink of exhaustion and biological harm can be replaced for 24 hours, showing and fostering a community/brotherhood of support c) politicians, faculty, and clergy are showing their support for this most humanitarian cause and d) more than anything, this is hitting the university where it hurts and exposing superficialities at Wash U.

More on d) ...
Wash U is excellent if you're looking for a career school. If you want to go into the sciences, engineering, architecture--it's the place for you, where it can truly give you the skill set you need. What it doesn't teach you is how to think or how to feel. Some elements of the university WILL provide these--interactions with students, different campus groups, the larger community, etc--but the university and the straightforward undergraduate education do a poor job with it. And yet, for most--isn't that exactly what a college is suppose to provide (that and, from a realist standpoint--connections). Ok so moving on--this protest hits at Wash U's superficiality of immaculate lawns and smiling faces and #1 food and pretty buildings and exposes some of the raw lining. I'm not saying there's a lot of muck to be raked up--Wash U may not encourage selfless saints or deep philosophers, but it basically does do a good job of providing the promised package. It's just like Disney--if you want something shallow and entertaining, Disney will give you want you want and do it with style and service. Wash U is in the same boat. But neither are perfect, and this is a prime social justice issue ready for change. So how do you hit Wash U hard and move them past the empty promises of $500,000 and "committee discussions?" By organising a traditional full on protest in the OFFICE OF ADMISSIONS where Wash U is most vulnerable. The result? PFs think the campus is cool, parents see the issue and either think "silly students" or show their support, the media dives in through the parents and other avenues, and the administration HAS TO REACT. What happens? One word emails telling the kids to "starve." Pretty unprofessional, blunt, and arrogant. Makes the university look WORSE. SWA 1, Wash U 0. Wash U *could* move the police in or take other drastic actions--but that would be more bad press, and the university would NEVER take that road... so let's see--empty stomachs, a bit of heckling, and a disorganised, full admissions office. National media coverage, political and religious support, the ignition of campus dialogue and debate and activism....and slow movements towards a real solution to the problem. The university has allowed itself to be backed into a corner and they will have to either acquiesce or have quite a lot of bad press. Check.... and... mate.