67. 68. 69. 70. 71. 72. 73. 74. 75. 76. 77. 78. 79. 80. 81. 82. of draft cards to General Hershey, January 1968. In October 1967 the Rev. New York Times, December 5, 1965, p. 1. An early and significant example of black anti-war protest was the leaflet cir- For the Hershey incident, see New York Times, March 22, 1967, p. 13. For New York Times, March 6, 1964, p. 11. See, for example, San Francisco Chronicle, November 13, 1968, p. 10. See New York Times, April 22, 1968, p. 16; Dave Dellinger, "Lessons from An early example was the failure of the Oakland Police to interfere with the The New York Times account of the San Francisco incident makes it clear that The flag-lowering incident is summarized as follows in Walker, Rights in Con- Walker, November 18, 1968, pp. 1-30. For other examples of attempted self-immolation see New York Times, Novem- For the Catonsville incident of May 17, 1968, see Facts on File, 1968, p. 263. 83. 84. 85. 86. 87. 88. 89. 90. 91. 92. See a Selective Service System Memorandum, Channeling, (Washington, D.C.: See Archibald Cox, Crisis at Columbia (New York: Vintage, 1968). See "Chaplain Coffin Explains His Position," Yale Alumni Magazine, March, See, for example, New York Times, April 24, 1966, p. 3; November 12, 1966, p. 7; February 23, 1967, p. 24; and May 31, 1967, p. 12. "The University and the Multiversity," in New Republic, April 1, 1967, p. 17. “Intellectuals and the War," in Viet-Report, October, 1966, p. 29. Chapter III STUDENT PROTEST The Berkeley student rebellion of 1964 sent shock waves through the academic community and puzzled the nation. Today, campuses throughout the country have been rocked by student protest, and the major campus that has not experienced a certain amount of turmoil and disruption is the exception. According to the National Student Association, during the first half of the 1967-68 academic year there were 71 separate demonstrations on sixtytwo campuses-counting only those demonstrations involving thirty-five more students. By the second half of the year, the number had risen to 221 demonstrations at 101 schools. On several campuses, massive student demonstrations have become a familiar and almost banal occurrence. Moreover, there has been a discernible escalation of the intensity of campus conflict, in terms of both student tactics and the response of authorities. Indeed, the early months of 1969 have been characterized by a hardening of official response to student protest on many campuses, as evidenced by the presence of bayonet-wielding National Guard troops at the University of Wisconsin and the declaration of a "state of extreme emergency" at Berkeley,2 Further, student protest now involves a wider range of campuses, and a wider range of students. The past few months have seen the rise of intense protest by black and other third-world students, on both "elite" and "commuter" campuses. The scope and range of contemporary student protest make certain kinds of explanation grossly inadequate. To explain away student protest as the activity of an insignificant and unrepresentative minority of maladjusted students is inaccurate on two counts. First, as a recent Fortune magazine survey suggests, roughly two-fifths of the current college-student population expresses support for some "activist" values.3 Second, fact-finding commissions from Berkeley to Columbia tend to present a rather favorable group portrait of student activists. In the words of the Cox Commission report on the Columbia disturbances: The present generation of young people in our universities is the best informed, the most intelligent, and the most idealistic this country has ever known. This is the experience of teachers everywhere. It is also the most sensitive to public issues and the most sophisticated in political tactics. Perhaps because they enjoy the affluence to support their ideals, today's undergraduate and graduate students exhibit, as a group, a higher level of social conscience than preceding generations. The ability, social consciousness and conscience, political sensitivity, and honest realism of today's students are a prime cause of student disturbances. As one student observed during our investigation, today's students take seriously the ideals taught in schools and churches, and often at home, and then they see a system that denies its ideals in its actual life. Racial injustice and the war in Vietnam stand out as prime illustrations of our society's deviation from its professed ideals and of the slowness with which the system reforms itself. That they seemingly can do so little to correct the wrongs through conventional political discourse tends to produce in the most idealistic and energetic students a strong sense of frustration.4 Empirical research into the personalities and social backgrounds of student activists tends to confirm this portrait. These studies recurrently find student activists to have high or at least average grades, to come from politically liberal families whose values can be described as "humanist," and to be better informed about political and social events than non-activists.5 The dimensions of student protest must be understood as part of a worldwide phenomenon. At the same time, the American student movement developed in the context of American institutions in general and of the American university in particular. Accordingly, in the first section of this chapter, we examine American student activism in international perspective. Next, we trace the development of student activism in America in the 1960's, giving special attention to the rise of the Students for a Democratic Society; and briefly, to black and Third World student protest. We then consider the organization of colleges and universities in the United States in relation to campus conflict. Finally, we consider some implications of our analysis for administrative response. American Student Protest in International Perspective6 Our understanding of the current American student movement can perhaps be advanced by analyzing some of the ways in which it resembles or differs from student movements in other nations. To the casual observer it is clear that student protest is now a world-wide phenomenon. In 1968 alone, student demonstrations and strikes paralyzed universities in nations as far apart, geographically and culturally, as Japan, France, Mexico, West Germany, Czechoslovakia, Italy, and Brazil. Indeed, a recent study commissioned by the United Nations estimated that those in the 12-25 age group now number 750 million and will total a billion by 1980. At that time, the study predicted, "Youth of the world will begin to predominate in world affairs. "World opinion is going to become increasingly the opinion of the world's youth and the generational conflict will assume proportions not previously imagined. "Young people in all walks of life," they add, "are prepared to march, to demonstrate and to riot if necessary in support of views which may not be those of the electorate, nor of the majority; nor yet of the government."7 Conventional wisdom is much given to the view that youth is "naturally" rebellious. We are not surprised when young persons experiment with adult ways and criticize those who enforce constraints, because we know that youth |