|
|
|
|||||
|
There is a time when remaining silent is simply wrong. There is a time when the only decent thing to do is to voice one's outrage. Today is such a time. The decision of the University's administration to arrest and jail seventeen students is appalling, but not surprising. The University has behaved like any other institution of our society; it has shown again that it is in the business of enforcing order and conformity. It has refused to join the living wage campaign and its goal of achieving human decency, moral fairness, and social justice. Instead of criminalizing the behavior of the seventeen, the administration should have endorsed and celebrated it. These are not spoiled individuals in search of a narcissistic experience. In reality, they are part of an effort that has been underway for nearly ten years. Their actions last week were a culmination of a long and dedicated advocacy for a living wage for those who need it most. The seventeen decided that they would no longer put up with the repeated rejections of an administration, which is reported to have declared that "UVA was not in the business of social justice." Both this claim, and the administration's authoritarian response to their civil disobedience, reflect the growing chasm that separates Madison Hall from students, staff, faculty, and the larger Charlottesville community. When the administration uses the collective "WE" to defend its behavior, those of us who are assembled here, want no part of it. In fact, last week UVATop News Daily, the University's Web page that claims to provide the latest news about the University, posted absolutely no news about the events in Madison Hall. UVATop News simply ignored the students' protests and wished them away. This silence is shameful; it does little to enhance our sense of community, albeit fragile, diverse, and conflictive. It is as if UVA had no place for the seventeen, when in reality, these seventeen are the very best we have. I simply want to say that the administration was wrong when it arrested one of our faculty, Wendy Marshall; it was wrong when it stopped the flow of food into Madison Hall; and it was wrong when it sent the seventeen to jail. Most of all, the administration was wrong not to accept the students' challenge to give a living wage to our lowest-paid employees. Like any corporate business, the University has refused to meet the legitimate demands of its workers. Let us not presume that a living wage at UVA is illegal, especially when legal experts are deeply divided on the matter. Let the University enact the living wage policy, just as the City of Charlottesville has done. Then, if it must, let the University defend it in a court of law. More than twenty years ago, when a group of students and faculty demanded that the University divest from South Africa's Apartheid, we heard the same refrain. From 1981 to 1986 we heard the same line and I quote: "immediate and complete divestment would be neither practical nor responsible, and would impinge upon the Board's fiduciary responsibilities for the funds subject to its control." In 1987 the Board of Visitors went so far as to state that: "the question of divestment will not be considered further …" Well, the issue of divestment did not go away and in spite of waiting too long, the University did finally divest in 1990. So, in the same way, be sure, that sooner or later, the living wage will become a reality at UVA. But this will require more work and the continued effort to bridge the gap between students, workers, and the larger community of Charlottesville. Finally, the administration has lost its moral compass by apparently allowing legal procedures to advance to the point where the University can no longer recognize its mistake and drop whatever charges it has filed against our colleague Wende Marshall, and against the seventeen. A University with a soul should not punish and discipline its very best; it should not unleash the police against them. It should find inspiration in their intelligence, compassion, and courage. But again, the University has chosen to behave like any other corporate institution and in the process it has rejected the very ideals of a critical education. An education whose moral imperative is to confront the status-quo and the unrestrained privileges of class, race, and gender. Thank you. Robert Fatton Jr. (electronic mail, April 19, 2006)
|
