of course you haven't. you're up against a particular debate technique.
>If they wanted to form a human blockade of the Daily Herald offices, or
>indeed occupy them,I'd have no problem with that. This would be a direct,
>forceful action that would provide a sharper focus on the inequities that
>exist at Brown, and would ask the question, Just who do the editors represent?
>
>Instead of running off with the papers, why not hold a public reading of
>Horowitz's ad, and publically demolish each point in turn? Urge other
>students to read this crap and show what an utter fool Horowitz is. This
>way, Horowitz is engaged, but not on his terms. He can't cry "censorship"
>when everybody is reading and laughing at his arguments.
It'd be interesting to know if these ideas were considered. The only objection I have is this: IF indeed their position was that they don't think they should be subjected to those ideas, then this tactic would be counter their goals. Maybe their goals were to remove those ideas from public viewing. In the abstract, I have nothing but contempt for that position. Practically, however, I understand why one would get tired of it all after awhile. But I've explained this before.
However, this does bring me to something I wanted to raise before. I've been involved in several strategizing sessions and the one thing I was always grateful for were the insights of older activists who told us what we were up against, what the public response might be and how to forestall particular responses by engaging in this action and not another.
When I worked with the Center for the Study of Citizenship we put some of these insights into practice, after making a lot of mistakes with the Huskietown USA film forum. We were, among other things on that project, trying to figure out ways of actually fostering forums, free spaces, public debates, discussions, etc. _How_ we did things mattered as to whether those free spaces were nurtured or if we managed to strangle them inadvertently because we hadn't considered a variety of alternatives. Contrary to those who think that discussion like this --inchoate theorizing so to speak--are and were extremely important because it forced us to come up against ideas we hadn't thought about before and prepared us for the difficulties of actually engaging in practice--as limited as it was.
With regard to other, non academic settings for strategizing, I think the insights of older folks were invaluable, re: a service workers' union struggle and the fight to obtain plant closing legislation. In both cases, the exp of older activists gave us some insights re: how best to present the union argument in communities that were extremely anti-union and where workers were petrified and mollified by years of economic recession.
In other struggles, the folks I recall best were 60s antiwar and union struggle veterans. There was also a notorious couple (in their 70s) and their kids, peace activists from way back circa WWII, but also libertarian socialist, iirc. They were notorious because their whole family--kids and all--shit on the steps of the court house during the sixties.
They provided great insights into what had happened throughout their various struggles. We didn't do everything they said, but their input was very helpful. I remember Bill Griffin and John Marciano very solemnly explaining that we were very likely about to get arrested. He knew very well that most of us hadn't a klew, even though none of were 18 yo's and really should have known better. Heck I was brining my kid to all the protests, carting him around in a backpack. I left him home that day!
Because he recognized the import of what we were doing he held nothing back and he also suggested alternatives. e.g.: if we did X in Y place, we would get arrested. but if we did X in Z place, we wouldn't. If you choose to do X in Y place this is what will happen, this is what it will cost, these are the ramifications for your personal/professional life.
During the Gulf War, the libertarian socialists (damn! i wish i could recall their names!) suggested that we should bring US flags with us and preempt the patriots. They knew what we hadn't thought of: our protests would draw, in full force, the American legion with uniforms, flags, etc. They were right. We never would have guessed that, busy as we were debating tactics, strategy, spilling our guts about dealing with the hostility from others. And so forth.
I think some sort of generational linkages need to be made. This is a difficult thing to do, particularly today when so many kids are tired of the nonsense about how great the old days were, etc. So I think it's incumbent on any of us who do get involved and bring experience with past struggles to share our insights, but to do so in a way that's sensitive to this problem. I'm outta the loop re campus activism, but when I've been involved in the past, there wasn't always a lot of advice forthcoming, particularly at bigger universities. Small state college campuses -- yes! but that's because, as most of us know, these small not too prestigious unis are where the radicals end up, rather than at Brown.
ahhh. I'm going to go blubber now to think how lucky I was to have known those people and that they didn't end up at Dennison, Columbia and other places where they'd been but couldn't get tenure.