The second casualty
16 hours ago
Sunday, September 20, 2009
Sunday, September 20, 2009
Day of Action at UCI
This is the UCI Day of Action blog. It contains a press release, program of events and a link to a critical document that has been developed by a group of concerned faculty.
6 comments:
The LA Times editorial linked on the Latest News column should be recognized as indicating the breadth of popularity of the furloughs among the public. Remember, the LA Times is a relatively liberal paper. And this editorial is one of the stronger mainstream media defenses of the public mission of the UC that we have seen.
Fighting the furloughs head-on is a losing battle.
But the article does show that the fee increases grabbed people's attention. The fee increase made the LA Times address the sustainability of the public mission of the UC. Anything that forces a debate over the future of the public mission is a good thing. Fee increases do that. Fighting over the furloughs does the opposite - it focuses public attention on the possibility of sustaining the middle class subsidy at UC by decreasing wages.
These actions are not about furloughs. They are not protesting furloughs. They are protesting and seeking to draw attention to extremely inequitable implementations of unwise cuts.
Actually if you read the UCI Day of action press release, our action at UCI is about "Defending the UC" and trying to make a case that the UC and UCI is a great public institution that needs robust support. Perhaps if anonymous #1 actually clicked on the link before criticizing the Day of Action for being immoderate, he or she could make a more informed comment. This is a basic rule of exchange and dialogue, not to mention the kinds of critical thinking we are supposed to be teaching.
Dear Editor
If this were a seminar in which the boundaries of the discussion were limited to the assigned text, then your criticism would be right.
But this is not a seminar, it is politics, and the boundaries are set politically (i.e., by contestations of power, in the broadest senses of the terms).
Indeed, I did not even mention the UCI Day of Action press release, because the intent of the organizers at UCI was not what I wanted to comment on. Admirable as their/our/your intent might be, intentions are not where the future of UC is going to be determined.
To that end, the LA Times editorial seemed much more revealing to me about the political terrian we are on. We ignore it at our peril - not because we must accept it, but because it is the battelfield on which we must fight.
I believe that the wording of the UCI press release is already taking into account the vexed politics of our beloved state and the alleged popularity of furloughing public employees. We ask therefore not for sympathy for our personal plight, but for recognition of the UC's value. That anonymous #1 chooses to ignore our specific articulation of the state of affairs is not simply an academic omission. Using the fear of "the people" and popular opinion is a familiar -- political -- tactic. We are keeping our message at UCI positive. There are certainly those who would like to see a more radical position in our publicity. For the present moment, we will emphasize our common stake in defending the UC and in urging public support for public education, and public higher ed.
anonymous, what you mean by "indicating the breadth of popularity of the furloughs among the public"?
do you believe furloughs are popular? and do you believe that popularity is what politics is all about?
Join the Conversation
Note: Firefox is occasionally incompatible with our comments section. We apologize for the inconvenience.