COLUMN: U. activism is alive and well

From Mike Silver's, "Master of My Domain," Fall '98 From Mike Silver's, "Master of My Domain," Fall '98As Bob Dylan would muse in his raspy voice, at Penn, "The Times are a Changin'." The administration is pursuing its most grandiose construction and renovation projects in the last 20 years. Officials have made improvement of service and efficiency a top priority, a decision which led to the recent outsourcing of facilities management to Trammell Crow Co. The University is using strong-armed negotiating tactics in its dealings with street vendors and local retailers. And a new college house system -- which administrators hope will transform residential living -- will go into effect next fall. Unfortunately, the latter explanation may suffice. At Penn, "activism" is often considered an archaic term -- one synonymous with Berkeley, the counterculture and radicalism. For years, our campus has been labeled conservative, apathetic and conformist. Organized protest and student activism seem to be in short supply for an institution as large, urban and full of intellectual ferment as ours. Annual Undergraduate Assembly elections receive a voter turnout of around only 20 percent. The UA is often criticized for being ineffective and out-of-touch with students. And the fruitlessness of reviving '60s-style student activism may have been demonstrated best in the 1995 debate over the Book Store makeup counter. But has this always been the case? Any current discussion of student activism likely will be framed in reference to the 1960s. In 1964, thousands of Berkeley students peacefully protested their administration's prohibitions on free speech. During the Vietnam War, students across the nation brazenly burned their draft cards and supported Eugene McCarthy's anti-war campaign for president in 1968. As a result, the decade has been effusively labeled by many as a "golden age" of student activism. Did Penn in fact epitomize these radical college campuses in the 1960s? Not really. Looking back on the decade, History Professor Murray Murphey noted that "the time period did not affect the university as much as compared to other campuses?. Penn in the 1950s was a very conservative, WASPy, Philadelphia institution, and during the 1960s it was not a hot campus." But the University was not totally immune to the contentiousness of the 1960s. Indeed, several rallies occurred on campus, most notably a 1969 College Hall sit-in protesting University construction. Sometimes, these sit-ins resulted in the cancellation of classes -- especially in the early 1970s, when the Black Power and feminist movements also gained steam at Penn. Yet these protests were generally modest in size, remained eerily peaceful in nature and attracted little in the way of publicity. Combined with a much-maligned student government (until the women's and men's branches merged in 1965), student activism seemed lacking in both organizational structure and sheer explosiveness. Rather than labeling Penn students in the 1960s as apathetic, it may be more appropriate to say they were merely adept at bringing about change in a quieter fashion. For certainly, during this time change did occur. Individualized majors and the pass/fail options became available for the first time, anachronistic dress codes and curfew restrictions for women were eliminated and students finally gained seats on University Council. Of note is the fact that many of these changes can be directly attributed to the work of dynamic student leaders. In essence, student activism -- though more latent and uneven than on other campuses -- subtly transformed our University in the 1960s. And we all stand as the beneficiaries. Uncanny parallels exist between the issues facing University students then and now. Students demanded street lights and armed security guards as early as 1962. Campus publications criticized the fraternity takeover of the student government in the 1960s. And for years, the University invoked the in loco parentis doctrine, attempting to regulate private behavior of students (substitute drinking in 1998 for sexual behavior in the 1960s). And as in the 1960s, student activism is alive and well -- though it may not always be perceptible. The vociferous protests in the aftermath of last year's crime wave certainly succeeded in opening the administration's eyes to the need for increased security. The UA continues to act in the interest of the student body, putting pressure on the administration to place more Spectaguards on duty during the early morning hours and to make long-overdue renovations to the University's decrepit recreational facilities. In addition, hundreds of political, religious, community service and cultural groups remain active on campus. And a new group, the Progressive Action Network, plans on coordinating Penn-related student activism amongst several existing groups. So are the '60s dead at Penn? Absolutely not. Activism -- both today and yesterday -- indeed has lacked the explosiveness of the more famous protests. But the quieter dissent at Penn in the 1960s nonetheless left a legacy which all of us can appreciate -- and we have the potential to do the same thing for the next generation of students. Student activism starts with awareness. Ultimately, it can only be successful if we all play a role, since a small minority of leaders cannot do the work for everyone. Change doesn't occur overnight, however. Thus, I appeal to all of you to individually do something small, like vote in the next UA election; attend a SPEC meeting; keep abreast of the University's outsourcing deals or embark on a community service project beyond "Into the Streets."