Sustaining the Burning Dissent

Somebody get some matches and a can of gasoline. It’s time to torch a car.

The youth of France could teach us young Mennonites a thing or two about not accepting the status quo. It was only a few months ago that the youth of France’s marginalized immigrant population rose up against the death of two people at the hands of the French police. Their message widened to tackle the gross unemployment of young adults and ethnic discrimination in French society. The government tried to minimize the situation, and the French youth began torching cars to emphasize their point.

The French government promised reforms and passed a new law that would allow employers to fire young workers more easily. Affluent youth from the universities took to the streets to protest their lost rights. The movement grew, and a national strike was called. The government refused to strike down the law, and protesters started throwing Molotov cocktails at the police.

This latest conflict is far from over. French unions have called for more strikes while the government has promised to crack down on lawlessness. Thankfully the violence in this latest protest is minimal. All sides of the issue decry the few that have lashed out violently as detractors to the cause. But that has not stopped pictures of the violence from filling televisions and newspapers internationally.

Eventually the flames of violence will die down. Sadly, the organized dissent at unjust policies and promises of politicians to correct their ways will disappear in like fashion. A brief protest is relatively easy to raise in the face of injustice. Sustaining that movement is much more difficult.

This same dilemma can be found in a recent Mennonite protest against authority. Bethel College students staged a sit-in at the college administration building after a prioritization processed that appeared to be merely about the money destroyed valued academic programs. In true Mennonite fashion, the protest was a peaceful display, but its eventual result was the same. The administration talked with student leaders and made some compromises. After a couple months, the conflict was forgotten by all outside Bethel’s campus.

EMU has experienced none of the above. No cars burned outside the Commons to protest the firing of faculty members over homosexuality. Protesters did not congregate on the lawn to denounce the loss of funding for treasured programs. The administration consented to let students keep the Shen with an increase of $17 to student activity fees. Like the French youth and our compatriots at Bethel College, we scored a minor victory. But one must question the true merit of this victory when the administration has merely allowed us to charge ourselves more money.

I in no way support using violence to make a point regardless of how valid that point is. The car torching I proposed at the beginning of this article was strictly metaphorical, but I was and am completely serious about the sentiment behind the expression of protest. The strength of authorities like the administration is time. Dissenting faculty members will eventually leave. Students will either tire of the fight or graduate. Administration policy will pass unchecked.

I do not doubt the administration’s good intentions in their policies, but I also do not doubt the ability of those in authority to fail their constituents. Like any organization, the university depends on the balance of the administration, faculty, and students to ensure that only the best policies are enacted. As two more faculty members leave at the end of this semester out of the administration’s inability to treat all members of the campus fairly, it is easy to lose the fire of dissent. But those of us that disagree with their policies must not tire. The power of sustained movement far surpasses that of brief violence, and our university needs the power of students to continue as a place of peace and justice.