One of the courses I teach is called “Science, Activism, and Political Conflict,” and one of my ambitions with that course is to show students that both of these things—activism and political conflict—are normal in science, and in academic life more generally. That’s a theme that we like to emphasize when speaking in “defense” of student protest. It’s part of a storied tradition, it’s respectable, it’s normal. But in order to explain why I think what you all are doing is so important, I want to start today by saying that actually, student protest is nowhere near normal enough in the history of higher education in this country. The real scandal is not that there has been student protest. It is that there has not been much, much more of it.
The way we narrate the 1960s campus antiwar movement today foregrounds specifically student activism. That’s as it should be: students supplied the movement with most of its energy and especially with most of its courage. Like we see today, students are often more willing than faculty to take risks for the causes they believe in. But I think sometimes a one-sided emphasis on student activism can reproduce a condescending attitude toward protest, framing it as an expression of youthful exuberance—as if there were anything wrong with that—rather than the necessary corollary of eminently reasonable political and moral principles. So I want to note that opposition to the Vietnam War—and to universities’ material complicity in the American-backed slaughter—transcended all boundaries on campus.
We have spent months naming what is happening to Gaza: an atrocity fully commensurable with the great atrocities in which the United States was involved in the twentieth century, with support from companies that elite university endowments invest in. But it often seems—and I say this above all in a spirit of self-reproach—that we don’t really believe it, or else we would have reached the breaking point described by Savio, that point when continued participation in the machine becomes impossible and you have no choice but to defect. You all are showing that you do believe it. And that you understand that the reality of genocide demands refusal.
In the midst of the Great Depression, as fascism gained momentum and the world moved again toward war, a group of radical scientists in Great Britain attempted to organize their fellow scientific workers—to recruit them to the cause of revolutionary anti-imperialism. In my class, we read a book by one of them, the crystallographer John Desmond Bernal, called The Social Function of Science. There Bernal makes an argument that I think is even more important today than when he first wrote it:
The fact is that we are emerging from a period when war was a specialized task affecting a small portion of the community, and are now reverting to one in which every member of the community, tribe, or nation is primarily a warrior. Under modern industrial conditions war is no longer fought only by the men in the field of battle but by the whole national industrial complex. The indirectness of participation is a very convenient mask.
That is the mask with which Harvard hides its complicity with the American military-industrial complex and its investments in Israel’s war machine. And it is the mask that you all are threatening to remove. I hope you succeed.
posted by f.sheikh