The Year of The Student
The 1960s have been galvanized in international historical memory as the glory years of student radicalism and countercultural movements. They also represented a major shift in the epistemological landscape of the university with the advent of post-structuralist literary criticism. Students internalized the shifts and it manifested itself as political radicalism. [i]While the sixties were not the first instances of student resistance to institutions and government, student action took on a new power in that decade due to the level of media attention that protests and the often-violent state response to student uprisings received in the media. Iconic images of the shootings at Kent State University, for example, seem fresh in our minds today. In his book on the subject, Mark Boren suggests, “that at crisis moments, students are at the centre of extremely powerful sociological, political and physical forces for which they are generally unprepared.”[ii] Student protest movements in the sixties spanned the entire globe and addressed a number of social and political issues particular to the societies in which they took place: from toppling unpopular governments to general counter-cultural protests against consumerism and other social values, idealistic young students took to the streets to try to change the societies that they lived in. Due to the brevity of the blog format, here below I will give a brief, necessarily simple overview of the different types of student movements that arose around the world. I will then focus primarily on the student actions of 1968 in the United States and France, as those were the most influential on the protests in Montreal during Rocke Robertson’s tenure as McGill’s principal. I will present this brief history as a series of case studies in order to try and capture the spirit and general narrative of student protests at this time.
Student resistance was an important political force outside of the West, indeed, popular protest and rioting can often seem like the only means of political expression under oppressive totalitarian regimes like those in the Soviet Block and East Asia. The general narrative in Soviet controlled states can be accessed through the Prague Spring. In 1967 Czech students took to the streets “holding candles and shouting for power.” [iii] The protest was met with a massively brutal, violent police crackdown. The state-controlled press pinned the blame for the violence on the students, who responded with a poster campaign to try and set the record straight about police violence. The movement continued until the fall of 1968 and managed to achieve a few political and social reforms but was ultimately crushed by the Soviet army. After that, Czech students staged sporadic protests and increasingly resorted to more desperate tactics like terrorism and public suicide, while this sometimes-garnered international attention, they failed to enact any meaningful change. [iv]
By contrast, much of East Asia in the 1960s was far less stable than the Soviet republics, allowing student protests to enact much more powerful political change. In Indonesia, president Sukarno was maintaining a tenuous grip on his control of the country balancing his power between the communists and the military.[v] Indonesia’s students were basically at war, with communist student organizations battling anti-communist students in the streets. The anti-communist student organization, KAMI, using a long-term media strategy, was able to gain popular support and called for Sukarno’s ousting. Unable to control the situation, Sukarno turned it over to his general, Suharto. He orchestrated a military coup and KAMI continued to exercise some political power, but deprived of its unifying opponent, infighting and factionalism undermined its power.
1968 is often called The Year of the Student, and like another important political revolution it began in Paris. In January a student group calling themselves Les Enragés began agitating on the Nanterre campus of the University of Paris for educational reform as well as the destruction of imperialism, the military and the bourgeoisie. When the university decided to hold disciplinary hearings for the leaders of the group on May 6, students held large-scale protests at the Sorbonne that erupted into riots in which hundreds were injured. The uprising continued to spread through the streets of Paris and by May 5 a national student strike was declared. Students gained the support of labour unions and occupied Paris’ Left Bank. Victory seemed imminent when president de Gaulle fled Paris at the end of May. He returned a day later though; calling a general election and giving a speech that enjoyed a surprising amount of support from a Parisian population that was fed up with the interruption of their daily life by a student movement that seemed radical and disorganized. [vi] Upon winning the election, de Gaulle introduced educational reforms and a wage increase that was enough to satisfy striking students and workers, he used his political power deftly in order to hamstring a student movement that might topple his regime. While the French student movement was ultimately unsuccessful in toppling de Gaulle, it served as an inspiration for students all around the world due to its material successes in taking over the universities and indeed, a large section of Paris and achieving an effective general strike and support from labour.
The year of the student in the United States saw students fighting for two distinct political goals: Civil Rights and against the Vietnam War. The year of action began at South Carolina State College where students began demonstrating for university reforms centred on civil rights. They received support from Student Nonviolent Coordination Committee and as such the protests ballooned in size. The National Guard was called in and as students charged police officers began shooting, killing three students and wounding 27 more. The violence served to spread the fires of resistance across the country; students occupied buildings at Howard University and managed to obtain some reforms to their representation there as well as freedom from formal charges due to their actions. The action spread to traditionally white universities as well, students at Columbia combined the two goals, protesting the construction of a new gymnasium in Harlem that would not be accessible to the black residents there as well as the university’s involvement in research that aided the Vietnam War. Students occupied a number of major faculties and the police were called in to evict them from the buildings, the ensuing violence would come to be known as the Battle of Morningside Heights. Following the violence, students went on strike to protest disciplinary action against the movement’s leaders. “The Columbia University revolt showed students that…the university was the perfect site for protests… idealism and freedom of expression were – at least theoretically – on equal footing with political realism”[vii] The anti-Vietnam War movement came to a head at the Democratic convention in Chicago where students supported an anti-war candidate. The “Siege of Chicago” was widely covered in the national media and ultimately undermined the Democratic campaign in the election allowing Richard Nixon an easy victory. Student movements in the United States did more in the way of provoking thought and swaying national opinion than in enacting real reform. Some historians assert that protest was only possible due to the elitist background of dissident students and the idealism that afforded them[viii]. Nonetheless, The Year of the Student lives on in history as an important political turning point in the power of young people across the world.
[i] Edward Ericson, Radicals in the University, (California: Hoover Institution Press, 1975)
[ii] Mark Delman Boren, Student Resistance: A History of the Unruly Subject, (New York: Routledge, 2001), 4.
[iii] Ibid. 136
[iv] Ibid. 136
[v] Antoine C.A. Drake, The Sukarno File 1956-1967: Chronology of a Defeat, (Boston: Brill 2006).
[vi] Boren, Student Resistance. 154
[vii] Ibid. 176
[viii] Edward E Sampson, Student Activism and Protest, (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1970), 4.