Student Blog on Civic Engagement

EMAIL YOUR BLOG ENTRY TO

timothy.rodriguez@cortland.edu

TO CONTRIBUTE TO THE STUDENT BLOG          

__________________________________________________________________

 

Though I haven't read Mr. Dillion's article I agree with all of your reactions to his piece, again based only on the excerpts presented in your email, Tim. What's interesting though is that it seems that Mr. Dillion's points represent the basic uninformed and perhaps apathetic perspective that is all too prevalent at this school. In fact, this is even more evidence of how important community action like the strike, which I regretfully missed, is needed to inform and activate the student body. I don't know if Mr.Dillion plans to pursue a career in journalism in the future, but if he does he ought to do more research before putting his name on his public work.     

J Weinstock, May 2009

 

Response to "Is Striking the Answer?"

By:  Timothy Rodriguez

                In April 23^rd's Opinion section of The Dragon Chronicle, Eric Dillon, a staff writer, wrote his perspective of the student strike/protest on April 2^nd.  I, being one of the organizers, am excited to talk about the subject.

                First, he states that students "went on strike to protest the increase in tuition."  This is true, but was only one of the collective issues addressed, the other being in opposition to the New York State Budget (e.g., supporting a Fair Share Tax Reform, opposing cuts to social services like health and education, opposing the secretive formation of the budget, and opposing the inequitable distribution of money in the budget).  It should be noted that some of these demands ended up in the budget (e.g., the Fair Share Tax Reform).  Also, a unique feature of the strike/protest was that people could address any other local, state, national, or international issue(s) they wanted.

                Second, he states that "only 10% of the $300 increase will actually be going to the school," and it is a "measly $300."  To clarify, it is a $620 tuition increase for the academic year, and "measly" is relative.  As all of those who participated in the strike know, this "measly" tuition hike will end some students' college careers at SUNY Cortland.

                Dillon says that by striking, students will "only be hurting themselves" and "their education".  It needs to be clarified that not all the students chose to strike for the day, yet some attended class and participated in the protest.  I am unaware of anyone "hurting themselves" because they went on strike, though.  He doesn't explain what he means by this.  If he refers to missing one day of class, it is a rather shallow argument.  In fact, one class was held at the event, and others were canceled in support of the strike.  Plus, the strike was based around sharing ideas, stories, knowledge, and experience on the various issues addressed, which made for a rather educational event.

                He states that "there were hardly any students at all."  This is again relative, and needs to be put into the situational context.  With only three days of organizing, around two hundred students participated in the protest.  When comparing this to any other event on campus, it is a huge turnout. 

                He then says that he would prefer working "inside the system," using NYPIRG as an example.  It is ironic he uses NYPIRG as an example, since many people involved in the club attended the protest, but this is beside the point.  Although the protest encouraged people to take part, it was also in solidarity with all efforts to create a world that is more just and free, which could include working "inside the system." 

                Dillon continues by saying that "a handful of students striking will not realistically achieve anything."  I'm not sure of his definition of "achieve anything", but we must be clear on the goals set out for the strike.  The strike was not under the false presumption that this action alone would stop the tuition hike (although because of student and worker direct actions within the last 6 months, a more progressive budget was passed).  Its goals were made very clear.  In the Student X Newsletter, Chelsea Cook, an organizer of the strike, stated "it was a day of organizing, learning, and sharing ideas with each other."  At the strike we also explained that it was to raise awareness and try to create a more democratic culture on campus where students are actively engaged on issues.  (Some of us also chose to protest to show our solidarity with student uprisings and protests around New York State and the world).  If there is a more organized, active, and educated student body, then we will be better prepared to represent our interests and work toward social justice.

                For one last point, Dillon says that we should "voice our concerns, while still staying civil and accomplishing our educational goals."  Was the strike not "civil"?  I am unaware of anything less than "civil."  Also, education should not be limited to the classroom, and I believe the strike was educational.  In fact, for some of us it was a great experience of putting theory from the classroom into action on campus.

                I will say that a public demonstration is not the end-all-be-all to political, economic, and social change.  It is like the fruiting body of a fungus, where the majority of the work takes place throughout the grass-roots.

 

~Tim Rodriguez, April 2009