The roar of the nation’s lowest 99 percent does not end in the encampments at Zuccotti Park. Over the past few weeks, “Occupy” movements have spread to cities across the United States. Yet puzzlingly, our peer institutions have been slow to place their own spin on the movement. Harvard students have marched in solidarity with Occupy Boston and Yalies have camped in New Haven streets, but there has been markedly little on-campus activism. Occupy Duke stands as something of an anomaly. What can we make of it?
It would be enlightening to dissect the primary goals of the movement. Prior to The Chronicle’s Oct. 13 article describing Occupy Duke’s first meeting, students were mostly unaware of the group’s motives. Did it exist to decry those interested in Wall Street careers? To bring to light financial aid issues on campus? Students were greeted with no more than bright neon flyers that were more incendiary than informative.
What is now clear, however, is that Occupy Duke strives primarily to encourage critical dialogue regarding the concerns raised by Occupy Wall Street, namely income inequality. The movement believes it is imperative to foster a democratic space—manifested in the form of weekly meetings—in which spirited honest discussions can be held to address these issues, especially at a University campus whose student body is unreflective of the general United States population.
We commend Occupy Duke for shouldering the burden to initiate such discussions. It is high time for the campus—which disproportionately consists of 1 percenters—to think seriously about these issues. The organization might benefit from enumerating these goals more clearly, as much of the antagonism directed toward it stems from comparisons drawn to Occupy Wall Street.
The Occupy Duke effort has also chosen to align itself with Occupy Durham. The two organizations do indeed have a close working relationship, as Durhamites and Dukies have attended each other’s respective events. Further, the Duke organization has acquired a sense of legitimacy, having been institutionally endorsed by a separate Occupy movement.
At the same time, it is sensible and appropriate for Duke students to spearhead their own “Occupy” effort instead of exclusively lending support to Occupy Durham. We disagree with those who claim that the establishment of a separate Occupy Duke movement exacerbates the Duke-Durham divide. Occupy Duke has a very specific agenda that is ideologically distinct from that of Durham’s movement. Its purpose is to be educational, not revolutionary. Occupy Duke as an organization is wholly necessary.
We urge, however, Occupy Duke not to organize campus-wide protests as a means of stimulating discourse. Any sort of organized activity that remotely resembles public condemnation of the high corporate life will only marginalize the very students (i.e. hopeful investment bankers) with whom these critical discussions must be had. Moreover, Occupy Duke has no authority to adopt a paternalist attitude and tell students which careers they should or should not pursue.
It thus becomes apparent that Occupy Duke has no malicious intent. It merely seeks to create a platform in which pressing social and economic issues can be discussed. Isn’t that what college is supposed to be about?
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.