Santa Cruz Good Times

Thursday
Apr 24th
Text size
  • Increase font size
  • Default font size
  • Decrease font size

Can Protests Win Hearts and Minds?

tom_honig_sProtesters didn’t exactly win over hearts and minds when they shut off Westside streets last week. When protesting UC Santa Cruz students cut off necessary access to campus, when they break car windows, when they intrude on others’ lives, they actually work against their goal.

Protests are a time-honored tradition, certainly an exercise in free speech. And since the ’60s, protesting has become the tool of activists everywhere – even by those tea party folks on the right.

But are protests effective?

Small protests really don’t work, because they actually are kind of cute. Watching a group of five or less padding about is easy to ignore. Really huge protests really don’t work, or at least they don’t once the collected rabble begins blocking streets, breaking windows and the like. I’ve never understood the strategy of trying to win people over by making their lives more difficult.

Imagine, for example, someone not wholly aware of what the protesters want. She’s driving along—maybe on her way to a doctor’s appointment—when suddenly her path is blocked. She can’t get where she’s going. Then her car window is busted. Hmmm. Don’t count on her for support.

Notice that I haven’t even gotten around to discussing the subject of the protest. Unfortunately, the situation here gets murky. Here’s where the UCSC students may have made their biggest tactical blunder. They’re protesting fee increases, which is certainly understandable. But the fee structure is more complex than they’re saying.

In an excellent analytical piece recently in the San Jose Mercury News, reporter Lisa Krieger explains that the fee structure actually helps the poorest students, and she also explains how UC students pay only about one-third the cost of their education.

I wouldn’t want to pay the additional fees myself, but the reality is that taxpayers are footing most of the bill. And for that they’re getting car windows smashed?

The UCSC protest was but one part of a general protest that had been called by educators statewide. Here’s where the strategy makes some sense. Protests generally work when the goal is to raise awareness of an issue. Certainly, funding cuts to education qualify as a big issue. It’s one of the tragedies of our time as our failing state government simply can’t cover the costs of education, at least as well as it has in the past.

Here again, however, there are some subtleties being lost. If the governor or the Legislature restored all the funding cuts to education – someone else would be hurt.  It wouldn’t hurt those in government. It would hurt others that are also in need. Sure, restore funding to education, but then where do you cut? Aid to the sick? Welfare recipients? Or do you throw criminals back on the streets?

What protests do best is arouse passions. There’s something intoxicating – at least for some people – about being taken up by a cause that’s bigger than themselves. Even those of us who believe in careful consideration of issues occasionally want to let loose and holler, “Let’s get the bastards!” After all, most of us feel like we’ve been screwed over by somebody, sometime, somewhere. A massive protest can be just the thing if you’re in need of empowerment.

However, measuring the success of a protest is more difficult. In this latest go-round, the antics of the UCSC student protesters will probably stick in people’s minds longer than the more important discussion about overall education funding.

The most successful UCSC protest in my memory happened more than 20 years ago, when students called on the university to divest its financial investments in South Africa during the apartheid era. What made that protest successful is that it was targeted directly at a group in power – the UC Board of Regents – who had the power to take action. Eventually, regents relented and the protesters carried the day.

This protest is far less targeted. It’s essentially about self-interest. It hasn’t won over the general public. The protesters may not be right. There’s a good argument against them – that a UC education remains a bargain, and is far cheaper than, say, an education at Stanford. In a brutal economic environment, raising fees on those who can afford it just might be the most equitable answer.

“I don’t want my parents to pay higher fees so I’m going to smash your car windows” isn’t exactly a rallying cry. Unfortunately, that’s what most people will remember.

No one argues with the right to protest. But when it’s over, the protesters themselves should ask: “Did we actually achieve anything?”

Comments (2)Add Comment
Lame
written by Nina K, March 13, 2010
Tom, How many women had a window smashed? One or hundreds? And that encompass the entire protest? One bad apple speaks for hundreds of others? How many people in the community can say that they knew what was going on on campuses? How many can say they know after a protest? I think your angle is a joke. You should come sit in on some of the classrooms on the first week of school when people are leaving in tears because classes are full and the teachers have to ask people to leave. They loose their scholarships, financial aide and insurances, just to name a few. until you see what's going on yourself you should think twice before writing some offensive article. Yea, there needs to be cuts some where else....blah blah blah...How about cutting the war? Educated people will be the economy for the future. For the future of California. Protest are not just for outlets. They get people to make a difference. They give people a voice. They get people involved. The next march is coming soon...in Sac. where the most impact can me made. And Arnold backed off some future education cuts that were up on the chopping block recently. Long and short, I thought your article was garbage. I think more people should stand up and protest. It's about time for people to using their power.
Misses the Significance of a New Movement
written by Joe Rigney, March 13, 2010
Mr Honig's myopic focus on the unfortunate property damage during the March 4 Day of Resistance (he mentions it five times) causes him to miss the historic significance of what is occurring across our state.

Demonstrations in Berkeley, Oakland, San Francisco, Concord, Vallejo, Santa Cruz, Aptos, Watsonville, Monterey, Davis, Sacramento, Stockton, Fresno, Los Angeles, and numerous other locations across California and the U.S. were taken because of the loss of state support for public education.

Parents pulled their children out of classes and marched. High School students walked out of classes. Educators and staff walked off the job. Students shut down UC Santa Cruz, Interstate 880 in Oakland, tried to block I-80 in Davis, staged a sit-in in Fresno, and occupied a building at UCLA.

While Mr. Honig makes some mention of the broader coalition that is organizing to resist the further degradation of public education, he states that the student involvement is "... essentially about self-interest. It hasn’t won over the general public." In fact, what makes the demonstrations so important is that students and workers united with the "general public" in political protest.

The significance of the March 4 day of Resistance is that people across the state are organizing to stop the collapse of government services. This is not about "self-interest," this is about an equitable distribution of wealth that provides equal opportunity and quality of life for all Californians.

In contrast to Mr. Honig, I would suggest that the students at UC Santa Cruz have achieved something incredible. They are an organizing force within a movement that has the potential to transform politics within California.

Write comment
smaller | bigger

busy
 

Share this on your social networks

Bookmark and Share

Share this

Bookmark and Share

 

Best of Santa Cruz County 2014

The 2014 Santa Cruz County Readers' Poll Come on in, and have a look around. There’s a lot to see—hundreds of winners selected by thousands of GT readers across Santa Cruz County. So if some of this looks familiar, it’s probably because you helped make it happen. But there are always new things to discover, too—you could go to a different winner or runner-up every day in the Food and Drink category alone, and you’d be booked just about until next year’s Best of Santa Cruz County issue comes out.

 

Something Essential Disappears

Lunar and solar eclipses follow one another. Lunar eclipses occur at full moons, and solar eclipses at new moons. Two weeks ago at the full moon we had the blood red moon—a total lunar eclipse (the next one is Oct. 8). On Monday night, April 28 (new moon), as the Sun, Moon and Earth align, a solar eclipse (Sun obscured) occurs. Eclipses signify something irrevocably is changed in our world. The Sun is our essential life force. Monday’s new moon, 9 degrees Taurus, is also an annular solar eclipse when the Moon moves centrally in front of the Sun, yet does not cover the Sun completely. The Sun's outer edges, still visible, form a “ring of fire” around the Moon.

 

Sugar: The New Tobacco?

Proposed bill would require warning labels on sugary drinks Will soda and other saccharine libations soon come with a health warning? They will if it’s up to our state senator, Bill Monning (D-Carmel). On Feb. 27, Monning proposed first-of-its-kind legislation that would require a consumer warning label be placed on sugar-sweetened beverages sold in California. SB 1000, also known as the Sugar-Sweetened Beverages Safety Warning Act, was proposed to provide vital information to consumers about the harmful effects of consuming sugary drinks, such as sodas, sports drinks, energy drinks, and sweetened teas.

 

Film, Times & Events: Week of April 17

Santa Cruz area movie theaters >
Sign up for Tomorrow's Good Times Today
Upcoming arts & events

RSS Feed Burner

 Subscribe in a reader

Latest Comments

 

Palate-Stretching 101

A wine education with Soif’s experts As a veteran of many weekend wine “seminars” at Soif, I have to confess that I’ve never known less (going in) and learned more (coming out) than I did last week at the Spanish Wine Tasting with ace rep Brian Greenwood. These are classy, casual events and it’s hard to imagine having this much flavor fun anywhere for $20.

 

Martin Ranch Winery

Sauvignon Blanc 2011 One of my favorite wines is Sauvignon Blanc, and this one made by Martin Ranch is particularly lovely. Bright, crisp and refreshing, it’s perfect to pair with fish and shellfish—and good for picnics as it has an easy screw-cap bottle. There’s nothing worse than setting down your blanket, pulling out your sandwiches—and then realizing you don’t have a corkscrew.

 

Foodie File: Red Apple Cafe

Breakfast takes center stage at Gracia Krakauer's Red Apple Cafe Before they moved to Aptos, Gracia and her husband Dan Krakauer would visit friends in Santa Cruz County and eat at the Red Apple Café all the time. Then they moved up here from Santa Monica five years ago, and bought the Aptos location (there’s a separate one in Watsonville) from the family who owned it for two decades.

 

How would you feel about a tech industry boom in Santa Cruz?

I feel like it would ruin the small old-town feeling of Santa Cruz. It wouldn’t be the same Surf City kind of vacation town that it is. Antoinette BennettSanta Cruz | Construction Management