There you have it, folks. It’s finally over. The SWA and Chancellor Wrighton have come to an agreement regarding the living wage and the University’s treatment of its workers. After three weeks of intense debate, the core group of SWA protesters, about a dozen in sum, will go back to class.
Or actually, they won’t. At least, not the ones who voluntarily withdrew (took a “W”) or the ones who are so far behind in their work it wouldn’t even make sense to return. Most likely, this core will now graduate a semester or two behind all their friends, due to the loss of this semester. Coincidentally, that’s another $250,000 bucks they’ll be forking over to Washington University – no wonder the Chancellor let them stay. He’s halfway to his $500,000 pledge!
Friday, the chancellor sent out an email in which he stated that “Dean McLeod will work with individual students and faculty members to address issues related to missed classes and exams and make-up work. Final decisions will remain with the faculty” While it is hard to derive exactly what this statement means, it is obvious that the University seems hesitant to make these students own up to their responsibilities. What the SWA did was a classic example of civil disobedience. However, the basic tenet of it is that one must accept the consequences of one’s actions, even if those consequences are harsh. Dean McLeod and any others need not be involved in cleaning up these students’ records. If they have to take a “W,” let them take a “W.” If they have to fail a class, let them fail.
If the SWA protesters are smart, which they seem to be, they know this already. If they consider themselves to be truly devoted to the cause, they won’t let someone else take responsibility for their actions. If I were in their position, taking a “W” or an “F” would be more honorable than letting Dean McLeod simply “suggest” to a professor that I receive special treatment.
I realize I sound like a blatant SWA basher, and that is what they’d have you make of me and Student Life, but in truth I am proud of the SWA for standing up for what they believe in, for practicing civil disobedience. I just wonder whether it was a good idea in the long run. For one, they’ve basically played the trump card for the entire student body. How long until a sit-in becomes effective again? It’s safe to say that the University is not going to bend to every student group that sits themselves inside Brookings Hall. Has the sit-in emboldened other groups who might want to protest? Or has it taken away their ammunition?
It’s probably a bit of both. At the very least, the sit-in has brought the University out of its administrative shell, forcing it into open dialogue with its students. This is a good start, and I hope the University remains open. Open doesn’t mean catering to every student’s wants and desires, but it does mean being available to hear them.
Thank you Chancellor Wrighton and students of the SWA for your hard work. You’ve come too far to not face the consequences.