Strike Audit, 2nd Edition, Fall 2013

7/27/2019 Strike Audit, 2nd Edition, Fall 2013

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/strike-audit-2nd-edition-fall-2013 1/28

2nd EditionB l o o m i n g t o n

I n d i a n aFall 2013

iubassembly.tumblr.com

A u d i tStr ike

of the April 2013

at Indiana University - Bloomington

Participants’



ContentsPart OneIntroductionStrike ProposalDemandsWhy Not a Student Union?Assemblies

DemonstrationsWorkersUnionsStrike ShowsStrike HubTrustees Meeting

PicketsFoodPolice ResponseNoun-ication

5

6

9

13

15

1617

18

19

22

24

2527

28

31

55

Thanks to many uncredited folks for the wonderful photos, analyses, and baller ass times

featured throughout these pages.

This text was not produced by a particular ‘working group’; just by friends who want to destroy what is,

so we can create what we want.



54

A Final Word From theIU on Strike Apologist WG

Part TwoSupport by Social Work Lesson on NonviolenceOutside AgitatationCrimson Flu

List of DemandsSound the Attack We Found DebtSquarely in the RedSolidarity with Those who StrikeEducation is a StrikeA Final Word from the IOSAWG

35

36

38

40

4244

46

48

50

52

54



Part 1:

R e f l e c t i o n s &Analyses

53

it is most obvious when one reects on their own experiences at

school.

The same trends connue when one zooms out to look at society

as a whole. The exisng power structures are maintained by Capi -

tal and the State, which the illusion of social mobility keep most of

us begging for the table scraps of the elite. And from schooling to

prison, there are many way in which would-be rebels are kept inline.

But, it doesn’t have to be this way! The enre system is dependent

on our complicity – it falters when we refuse to parcipate and

breaks down when we begin to acvely take it apart. All over the

world, people are ghng back.

If you parcipated in the strike in any way, I invite you to take a

moment to reect on what you learned through the experience.

Then compare that with what you learn in the same amount of

me in school. You might also compare the joy and connectedness

you felt in the strike with the boredom and alienaon of schooling.

Make your own conclusions and act accordingly.

Out of the schools and into the streets!

<3 an Indiana Uncontrollable



52

Less School Means More Educaton

I’d like to take a moment to compare what I learned in 20 years

of formal schooling with what I learned in two days of the recent

Indiana University system-wide strike:

Let’s start with what I’ve learned in school. In elementary school I

learned that those who don’t do what they are told are punished. Ilearned how to ignore or acvely suppress my own desires in order

to the t the mold prescribed for me. In high school I learned that

requirements for obedience extend well beyond the connes of

home and school and that the norms of society must be internal-

ized in order to be “successful.” In college I learned to tell authori -

es what they want to hear and how to do as lile as possible for

what I want. In graduate school I learned that hard-working adults

were not to have a life outside of work and how to persevere

through intense boredom.

In over two decades of schooling I learned two things: obedienceand conformity. And it was excellent preparaon for the dismal

but dierent work-worlds that opened to be with each successive

move up the ladder of educaon.

Conversely, I learned so much else in the two days of the strike. I

learned about making autonomous contribuons to a collecve

struggle and when to step back and make room for others’ inia -

ves. I learned how to fully confront comrades and about how to

make plans with a large and disparate group of people.

My parcipaon in the strike has taught me a great deal about au -

tonomy and ghng against power – and was also a great sourceof personal growth. Furthermore, I learned about the myriad

forms that resistance can take and about other struggles around

the world. I also learned that I can stand up to those in power

and that I stand by those who ght with me to the end. Similarly, I

learned that I have many friends and comrades who have my back.

This contrast reveals much about the true purposes of schooling.

The more I’ve learned about schooling, the more I am convinced

that it is intended to promote obedience and conformity in order

to maintain an easily manipulated populaon. This is clear if one

looks into the history and philosophy of schooling, but I believe

5

In April of 2013, a coalition of students, workers, andnon-students disrupted the usual ow of business atIndiana University. Months of build-up culminated intwo solid days of activities in resistance of austeritypolicies at IU. Strike participants took one of IU’s class-buildings as a hub from which to launch marches,give free classes, serve food, hold assemblies, andgenerally raise commotion across campus. Theseactions drew the support of thousands at IU, anddrew intense hostility from administrators and univer-sity police.

To the outside observer, moments like this oftenappear ‘random,’ as if they arose suddenly fromthe impulses of a few political wing-nuts. Those ofus who were a little closer to it know that the strikeat IU was brought about with many hours of work,

done by people with widely differing views. Throughit, we hoped to empower each other to stand upagainst unfair practices at IU, and against the uni-versity system as a whole.

As we continue to broaden this struggle, it seemsimportant to reect on some of the experiences thatcame out of the strike-- to review our methods andconsider what we’ve learned so that we can shareit with new allies. The authors of this text offer it as abrief account of events, and as part of an ongoingexercise in self-evaluation, the better to sharpen our

tools.

Introduction

Introduction



6

Indiana University, November 2012

Recent cuts at IU have disproportionately targeted international students and students of color, col-

lege education has been eliminated from Indiana prisons, and immigration laws have been imple- mented that make an IU education cost-prohibitive for undocumented Indiana students[i]. These, however, are only the most blatant manifestations of the increasingly exclusionary policies of the state and administration, which further restrictions in access to a quality education for many who desire it.

As students at IU, our interests, too, are being subju- gated to the interests of capital. As of this year, students pay for 51% of IU’s budget.[ii] Only 18 percent of the current year’s budget funding comes fromthe state of Indiana, as compared to 50 percent inthe early 1990s.[iii] Our professors, the facilities, and the administration are paid for mainly with our debts rather than state or federal funding at this suppos- edly ‘public school.’ At IUB, administrators receive signicant raises and unnecessary administrators are retained, but support staff pay raises fail evento cover the rising costs of healthcare and parking,and staff workloads increase with growing enrollment. The School of Continuing Studies has been cut,

forcing working people to pursue degrees at other institutions.[iv] Adjunct faculty and graduate students are relentlessly over-worked and underpaid,and undergraduates suffer in mediocre classes as a result. Pledges by past administrations to increase diversity on campus have been superseded by more protable investments: though former IU President Adam Herbert elicited a promise from the Board of Trustees to double the percentage of underrepresented minority students at IU in 2006, during Michael McRobbie’s presidency the percentage of black students at IUB has stagnated below 1976 levels, at

only 4.1 percent[v]. In IU’s Energy Master Plan for

The Strike Proposal

51

Solidarity With Those Who Strike

IF HARASSED FOR ORGANIZING, WE HAVE YOURBACK

Within the strike-organizing assembly,we’ve heard of moreand more workplaces at IU beginning informal conver-sations about the campus-wide strike planned for April11-12. We’ve also heard that employees in some of theseworkplaces have already faced threats due to their orga-nizing. If you are someone who has faced these threats,know that you are not alone. We will do everything we canto support you, and live up to the strike’s 6th demand:“No retaliation for participating in or organizing for thestrike. We stand in solidarity with anyone threatened dueto their organizing activities, especially since workershave already been threatened by overreaching application

of technical nostrike clause.” It will never be risk-free toorganize against the administration, no matter how manyother people are also angry enough to speak out againstthe unfair conditions and wages that are all too common atIU. But if we stand together, we can reduce these risks andght against intimidation by the administration and itslackeys. This is why we now make concrete commitments

– beyond just words – about what support we can offerto workers organizing at the university. If you come to usseeking solidarity and support, we will follow your leadconcerning which actions we may take to back you up. If you and your coworkers have received a general threat wewill also protect your anonymity in any actions we orga-nize or communication we have with employers. However,if you’ve already been personally threaten with suspensionor termination or have already been penalized, then youmight want us to ght directly on your behalf and raiseyour specic situation with your supervisors. Options forsupport include: Issue a letter of support and distributeit through local news agencies, posters, our websites, ande-mail lists. Mobilize support of students and faculty toprotest, speak out, and organize call-ins to your employeror to the administration – sit-ins or occupations until the

threat has been withdrawn.



50 7

the next two decades, cost-effectiveness is the sole consideration; the grossly destructive effects of cli- mate change and fossil fuel extraction are ignored entirely[vi]. And after an increase of over 45% intuition and fees over the past six years, costs for stu - dents are rising yet again—by over $1000 for resi- dent students in only two years[vii]. Meanwhile, the

administration continues to fund the construction of unnecessary new buildings and luxury-style apart - ment suites in order to attract wealthy students.There is a trend in all of this: university education, like the rest of society, is becoming a marketplace.

By 2020, President McRobbie has acknowledged, the state will likely provide only 10% of IU’s budget[viii].Students are treated as free consumers, but the courses we “take” are investments, and the debt we incur from them will burden us for years to come.Why don’t we have a voice in the university that is

equal to our contribution?

The rhetoric of “cut-backs” which disguises the pushtoward marketization is deceptive, and the promises of benets as a result of this transformation are dishonest. A market-based education system will result in more standardized coursework and sterile campus life for students, increasing career uncertainty and limitations for academics, and the insti- tutionalization of social immobility. The imposition of such a system ought to be opposed, so that educa-

tion may maintain its liberatory potential.Strike

Years of dialogue on the administration’s terms have failed to improve the situation. Tuition is higher thanever, and the administration is complicit in enact- ing the legislature’s directives. A strike is recognitionof this failure and a rejection of any terms set by the administration. The principle was demonstrated at IU by students throughout the 1970s whenever tuition hikes were proposed: each time, students

responded with a mass strike. Resistance has lapsed



8

in recent years, but we can begin again now to exer - cise our power as students and campus workers. We propose an IU-system wide strike to force an end to campus austerity, to interrupt the administration’s rhetoric of “inevitability,” and to animate the passive student body preferred by the administration with a new sense of condence and empowerment.

During the two days that the trustees meet next April in order to make consequential decisions onour behalf with only token outside input, we want them to be confronted with a campus that we’ve all shut down together. A strike would mean that students boycott classes, professors cancel classes or contribute to teach-ins, and that campus workers call in sick or walk out of work. We understand that there are serious limitations and risks involved,but we are open to dialogue to develop methods that advance the interests of students, faculty, and

workers together, on terms that feel empowering and comfortable.

Mass Assembly

All students, faculty, and staff are invited to the mass assembly at 5:30 PM on Wednesday, Decem- ber 5th in the East Lounge of the IMU. This meeting is an open forum to discuss the problems facing the University community, as well as to organize, plan,and prepare for the strike. Bring your ideas and your

responses to this document to the table. We can’t effectively challenge what’s going on alone, and we can’t speak to your experience unless you par - ticipate. This strike can make way for a radical shift in our daily lives at school. Help us make this a reality.

IUonstrike.tumblr.com

(citation information available online)

49

Squarely in the RedThis 8.5”x11” letter size yer was printed in red alongwith it’s companion tabloid sized poster of the same

design. Many felt that this poster was particularlyimportant as a reference to the struggles in Mon-treal the previous year, symbolicly tying our striketo the global movement of resistance against uni-versities and other institutions. This also gave somecontext for the red felt square that many peoplewho supported the strike wore pinned to their shirtor backpack.



48 9

Discussions and debates during the rst few monthsof the strike organizing process were often focusedon the question of demands. In the rst Mass Assem-

bly for organizing the strike, on December 5th, a listof grievances was compiled, and Monday assem-blies over the following weeks formulated a prelimi-nary list of demands. These were: 1) Immediatelyreduce tuition and eliminate all fees; 2) Stop priva-tization and outsourcing; 3) End the wage freeze;4) The administration must honor its commitment todouble the enrollment of African American studentsto 8%; 5) Abolish SB 590 & HB1402; and 6) No retalia-tion for participating in the strike.

The demands included in this list are all related to

questions of inclusion and autonomy. In using the listof demands to challenge exclusionary, racist, anti-worker laws and university policies, the strike orga-nizing assembly was attempting to express solidaritywith people at IU engaged in ongoing strugglesaround diversity at IU, the cost and education, andthe rights of university workers. The assembly under-stood both that these issues are all connected, andthat powerful, disruptive political mobilization wasneeded if signicant advances were to be made inany of these struggles. The preliminary list of demandswas intended, therefore, to suggest that people

Demands



10

engaged in various struggles against exclusion andcontrol at IU work in solidarity with one another on astrike, by which it was hoped that the power to gainserious concessions from the state could be built.

The decision to create a list of demands, however preliminary, was the subject of signicant consterna-

tion and debate among organizers, though it wasagreed early on that demands were a necessaryorganizing tool if a strike was to generalize signi-cantly at IU. The sentiment that demands were nec-essary was based both on feedback organizers hadreceived in their efforts to promote the initiative, andon the fact that the list of grievances generated atthe Mass Assembly of December 5 needed to becondensed if it was going to be useful. Within theassembly, one concern about the use of demandshad to do with the danger of appealing to authori-ties whose power is illegitimate. Such appeals can

be limiting and are easily manipulated by those theyare meant to confront. Another concern expressedwas that these demands might draw attention awayfrom contention over other legitimate sources of dis-content. Finally, some organizers criticized the useof demands on the basis that the assembly might bemisunderstood as attempting to represent peopleother than its participants.

Among the most commonly expressed criticismsfrom outside the assembly was the seeming impos-

sibility of demands one and two, and that theyfailed to offer solutions to the problems they identi-ed. Indeed, an IDS opinion writer wrote a columnin which he proclaimed that the only way the costof college could be lowered was through increasedprivatization and outsourcing, and therefore thedemands contradicted themselves.[1]

The assembly’s interest with the rst two demands,however, was not to pose objectives which could beachieved through a single strike, but to promote selforganization in order to build the power needed to

challenge legislation and administrative directives.

47

We Found DebtThis is another tabloid sized poster which was onepart of a trio of posters which referenced pop cul-ture. The other posters say, ‘You knew we weretrouble when we walked out,’ and ‘Stay Angry andKeep Fighting.’



46 11

The rst and second demands are worded verygenerally because the assembly recognized thatthe cost of college will not be lowered, and priva-tization and outsourcing will not be stopped byadministrators or politicians. These goals will not beachieved without broad based militant organizationon campus, yet they are necessary if the university

if to retain its role as a promoter of socio-economicmobility. Endlessly increasing tuition, privatization,and outsourcing at “public” universities are nottechnical problems; they are products of a poli-tics dominated by business interests. People whooppose such austerity policies will have to developsignicant disruptive power if they intend to accom-plish anything. This is also the reason why no solutionswere proposed in the demands: by posing solutionsthe assembly would seem to encourage nego-tiations with the administration and campaigns for ofce in student government, which would draw

energy away from the project of building power and into the realm of endless forum discussions andisolated appointments to committees from whichnothing can be changed. The administration wishesto involve student dissidents in negotiations by whichthey can elicit agreements about the forms dissentwill take, without seriously addressing the reasons for discontent.

Another common criticism, that the demands failedto address a specic authority, can be responded

to similarly: it is not politically viable for administra-tors and politicians to ght against austerity andcutbacks at IU, because the business interests thatnance and support them stand to benet fromprivatization of the university, the use of univer-sity research for private prot, and an increasinglyindebted student population.

The demand to end the wage freeze was some-times criticized because the administrative programof a wage freeze was not in effect. A de factowage freeze has been in effect across various sec-

tors of university workers for several years, however,



12

because these workers have been receiving wageincreases that failed to make up for increases inthe costs of services like parking and healthcare.Somewhat similarly, the nal demand, “No retalia-tion for participating in or organizing the strike,” wascriticized by Provost Robel on the basis that anyonewho engages in civil disobedience should be willing

to accept the consequences of their actions, andthat this demand therefore showed the strikers lack of moral fortitude. That demand was included spe-cically because signicant portions of the universityworkforce are barred from striking in their union con-tracts, and because of the state-wide ban on strikesby public employees, not so that students would beable skip class without punishment (as if that wereeven vaguely difcult).

Finally, there was some criticism of the fourthdemand because it lacked nuance, and of the fth

demand because it failed to call on the universityadministration to oppose discriminatory legislation.Both of these are legitimate criticisms. Each of thesedemands, as well as the concept of demands, isunder consideration by participants in the strike andthe organizing assembly, and it remains a questionof debate and discussion how demands ought tobe used in our context.

45

Sound the AttackThis is an 11’x17’ tabloid poster printed in color with

the joker’s costume a pale yellow with dark red shoes.The face featured on the jester is that of MichaelMcRobbie, the president of Indiana University.

The demonstration this poster promotes was con-ceived as a chance to build energy shortly beforethe days of the strike. The demonstration includedvery loud dubstep and other dance music as wellas chanting and drumming. After this demonstrationwas the encounter with Provost Lauren Robel in her ofce.



44 13

At several Mass Assemblies leading up to the strike,some very well-meaning people suggested that thestudents present could organize more effectivelyby starting an “ofcial” student union. The more thesuggestion was given, the less willing Assembly par-

ticipants were to allow the ‘union conversation’ totake up precious and scant Assembly time. This textseems like a nice opportunity to offer at a cogentresponse.

In order to enter into a genuine negotiation, trustis required. Dialoguing with IU’s administration hasbeen attempted many times in the past. Groupsseeking reform have asked the administration tomake changes. The administration has, many times,promised to make these changes a reality. Unfor-tunately those types of ‘campaign-style’ promisesoften go unmet, and all the work of those involvedin organizing those projects is lost. Rarely are thosegroups able to regain momentum after such a blow.We don’t trust the promises of the administrationand we refuse to let our momentum be funneledinto phony ‘negotiations’ of any kind. Forming aunion would ostensibly have the goal of creating abigger powerful voice to bring to the table. We arenot interested in talking at a table, as we feel thetime for talk is well past. Instead, we prefer to act.

In deciding on what actions to take, one method ofchoosing tactics involves a review of the past. Whathas worked historically? What has failed? There wasa time when unions were a strong expression of col-lective power: the late 1800’s, the 1930’s. What wasonce innovative and powerful has now been socompletely assimilated into the expected daily grindof business as usual in a corporation as powerful asa state university. Little can come from such tacticsthat the university does not already have the tools totemper. Why undermine ourselves by lobbing thema slow pitch, when we can throw them a curve ball?

Why Not a Student Union?



14

More often than not, unions are now found in theform of overgrown top down governmental styledorganizations where the voices of the collective arefunneled and ltered through a few powerful rep-resentatives. We choose to resist types of organiz-ing that build hierarchies into our interactions. Thisincludes all styles that involve representative politics

of any kind. Rather than creating a group of man-agers whose function is keeping the rest of us ontask, who stand as liaisons between the administra-tion and the rest, we would rather stand on equalfooting with one another and act together againstthe administration.

43

List of DemandsThis was printed as a black-and-white 11”x17” tab-loid poster. There were also front and back halfsheets using the same graphic theme which weredistributed by the thousands.



42 15

Our assembly is a non-hierarchical meeting/dis-cussion forum. Individuals come together to planactions, discuss happenings, and make report

backs. One person volunteers to facilitate (or sev-eral people throughout the course of an assembly),which involves keeping discussion on track, makingsure all topics for a particular assembly get covered(list of topics decided at the beginning by attend-ees), and taking stack.

Stack is simply a list of people who have raised their hand to indicate they want to talk, kept in chrono-logical order. Occasionally, one may be given thechance to jump ahead of stack if their comment isparticularly urgent. Finger waves (up for yes down

for no) can be used as temperature checks or asnonverbal responses to a talking point.

A drawback of assembly is that sometimes you’ll getan attendee who’s long winded and inarticulate,or just likes to hear themself talk, and doesn’t giveother people much space to speak. Many of thosewho have had a chance to take part in a non-hier-archical assembly say it’s difcult to participate in or return to a more hierarchical based model. Every-one has an equal chance to be heard.

Assemblies

Assemblies



16

During the two days of the strike, on April 11 and12, there were three major demonstrations. The rstof these was publicized beforehand as the ‘strikedemo’ with posters that said “Stay Angry and KeepFighting,” “We Found Debt in a Hopeless Place,”

and “You Knew We Were Trouble When We WalkedOut.” It took place around midday on April 11.During the organizing process, the assembly hadhoped that this demo would be around one thou-sand people strong, but ultimately it consisted ofabout three hundred and fty people. Though thisturn-out was smaller than hoped for, it was still larger than any demo that had happened in Bloomingtonfor years. The march went through much of campusand into Ballantine Hall, took over all of Tenth Streeton campus, and ended with lunch at the WoodburnHall Strike Center. The strike probably became most

generalized during this demonstration.

After the lunch at Woodburn on the same day,another march occurred that went to Franklin Hall,where the Board of Trustees meeting was takingplace. At Franklin, the marchers rallied and chantedslogans for a while, disobeying police orders to keepthe sidewalk and steps clear and eventually pushingthe police inside the building and taking the steps.This was followed by a period of confusion becausesome people wanted to go into the meeting andothers wanted to continue marching to spread the

Demonstrations

Demonstrations

41

to forgo a raise — to sacrice for the university. As loyaland hardworking employees, you do this, thinking thateveryone will sacrice together. Unfortunately, whilethis thinking appears to be fullled for a short time,top administrators eventually receive raises retroac-tively, but not you.

Most of the support staff is now doing the jobs of twoor three people. The university has failed to maintainadequate stafng for the work required, and in addi-tion, has failed to offer raises for the additional com-pensatory work conducted by current support staff.

As existing support staff, you end up paying more forhealth insurance. Almost every year, you are asked topay more and more. And while you can complain orcall upon your union to advocate for you, you can neverstrike as a means to a just end as this action is forbid-den by the IU Board of Trustees.

Thus, you suffer year to year. At times, you can’tmake ends meet; you struggle to pay the bills; and youremain an afterthought while top administrators linetheir pockets with higher raises on the backs of yourchildren who each year pay higher tuition to attendIndiana University.

Now let me be clear: On April 11 and 12, you cannotstrike or you could be red. But you have accrued sickdays, and I hear that a bout of the “crimson u” hasspread about the campus. If you don’t stand up foryour own job and for the injustice faced by studentsand staff alike, then who will?



40

Strike Out, but‘Crimson Flu’ Coming

By Brice Smedley | Submission to the Herald-Times

This guest column was submitted by Bryce Smedley of Bloomington, former CWA 4730 union president andIU support staff.

A general “strike” is being organized by Indiana Uni-versity students who feel the brunt of an unfairlypriced higher education system that forces upon themyears of student loan repayment and debt. Support of this action by Indiana University support staff is war-ranted despite the fact that ofcial staff strikes, evenby the representative union, CWA 4730, are prohibited

by the board of trustees under the mutual agreementof cooperation.

As the former president of CWA 4730 and no longeran employee of Indiana University, I nally have thefreedom to speak my mind without putting my formerunion colleagues and other support staff in jeopardy.So, let me take the bold step to call upon all IndianaUniversity support staff to strike alongside our stu-dents and stand up for a meaningful and symbolicallyimportant cause rather than allow this opportunity toslip by.

Here is why you should strike if you work for IndianaUniversity as support staff:

You are some of the lowest paid Big Ten universityemployees and barely receive annual raises while thetop income earners on campus receive huge pay raiseseach year. In fact, you have been asked in some years

17

strike or return to Woodburn for an assembly. Policewere only letting ve people in at a time and publiccomment was prohibited during the meeting, soentering in order to disrupt was impossible withoutrisking arrest. Lots of slogans were chanted and someparticipants used the ‘peoples’ mic’ to speak abouttheir issues with debt, but it started to rain harder

and the situation, which had become an uninterest-ing stalemate, seemed unlikely to change, so someorganizers led the march back to Woodburn for anassembly.

WorkersThroughout the build-up to the strike the peopleinvolved in the organizing assemblies were enthusi-astic to reach out to the people who work on IU’scampuses. A couple things that came out of thisenthusiasm were a phone number and an email

address which workers could contact to reportthreats of retaliation against them for support or par-ticipation in the strike or related activities. Hundreds ofyers were distributed at workplaces around campusurging people to contact the email or number if theysought help or support in their workplace.

This line of action was continued when at the endof a roving noise demonstration most of the groupcrammed into the Provost’s spacious and luxuri-ous ofce to make in person the demand that noworker be retaliated against for strike participation.This was followed by a threat to occupy her ofceif it was made known that anyone at the universityhad been terminated or otherwise punished for theparticipation in the strike. This threat was communi-cated again to workers by yer as an offer of solidar -ity and action if such was requested.

The provosts ofce was not occupied a secondtime, but after the strike there was a march to theRPS ofce in solidarity with some people who workedthere and participated in the strike despite work-

place threats.



18

After the rst mass assembly in December when it wasdecided that a strike should occur, union leadershipat IU expressed their opposition to the idea of a strike.Although union leadership appreciated the pointsof the demands, the union’s hands were effectively

tied by their strong connection to and willingness togo along with IU’s administration. Although some dia-logue was initiated between a few organizers andthe unions, it became clear to many that their lead-ership had no real interest in supporting the strike inany way, and instead actively discouraged worker participation. Union ofcials policed union membersinto not discussing the strike, threatening their jobs ifthey were even seen holding a strike yer.

Union leadership is willing to work within the dictatesof the administration rather than giving a real voice

to the grievances of workers. Striking is illegal withinthe union contract, removing any leverage workerscould have. The unions are beholden to the will of theadministration and were therefore unable to strike.

Banner drops, wheatpasting, and grafti all helpedcontribute to an atmosphere of discussion andanticipation of the strike across campus. Most busstops, bulletin boards, and buildings were kept cov-ered with strike materials and many sidewalks werechalked daily in the lead-up to the strike itself.

Workers excitedly reported that many of the park -ing garages on campus were sabotaged on the rstmorning of the strike, via the destruction of ticketmachines. This not only interrupted the normalroutine but concretely helped people by savingthem money, demonstrating the positive potential

for future disruption.

Unions

Building Tension

39



38 19

Strike ShowsIn the weeks leading up to the strike, there wereseveral shows at collective houses around town inan attempt to distribute propaganda and bring instudents to a politicized setting that was less struc-

tured and far more accessible than the Mondayassemblies. The most largest and notable of theseoccurred over the weekend before the strike at themassive 30+ tenant co-op where many of our friendslive. Whats follows is one person’s short recollectionof that night.

Simultaneously from four different rooms, on twodifferent oors, came music so drastically differentand overwhelmingly loud that my only aural rec-ollections of it are blurred around the edges. Fromthe poorly-lit living room the soundwaves of crash-

ing cymbals and guitar twangs snaked out, over theliterature table -- which was covered with hundredsof colorful posters, hamburger-fold zines, and little red felt squares -- and then awkwardly collided withthe sound of treble-y, dissonant piano-jolts midwaydown the hallway.

Here, in a small bathroom-sized room to the left, wasa man sitting behind a desk... in between two fernsand a couple of lamps… wearing a green, plasticcriss-crossed mask that resembled the lattice on top

of a pie. He vowed from the beginning of the night



20

to play a shitty default-voice keyboard incessantlyall night and, as far as we know, he succeeded. Most of the couches in front of him sat empty for amajority of the night so occasionally I would drop into talk with him as he clumsily smoked a cigarettewith his right hand and thoughtlessly banged thekeyboard with his left. Shit was super weird; thanks

for that John. Just beyond the reach of seemingly-random key-board jitters, but still very much in the path of theliving room sound-snake was the leaking, thumpingbass of four-to-the-oor Eurotrance coming fromthe co-op’s oversized kitchen. The jangly guitar riffsfrom the living room melted in the doorway of thisdark, sweaty, overcrowded room and mixed withthe way-too-relevant Mr. Vain sing-along:“I knowwhat I want and I want it now!” The warm, collectivepower of that room was something I can only com-

pare with walking down a crowded street shoulders-pressed against hundreds of other people… which,incidentally, came just a few days later during the strike. Since that night, the potential of subtlety-insur - rectionary lyrics of modern dance-pop is somethingI’ve want to explore further for these sorts of politi-cized musical situations. [I’m not kidding...listen to‘”Die Young” and tell me it’s not about wrecking shitin the street with your best friends.]

Meanwhile, some of the bass thumps jumped up thewalls, through the ceiling, and met the guitar at thetop of the stairs where a constant stream of studentswith sketchy zines sticking out of the back pocketswere waiting for some cheap beer. And once theymade it to the adjacent room they were met witha combination DJ-bartender, shufing between thetwo to make occasionally change, grab an iceycan of beer, and queue the next trap remix. All I really remember about this room was that everyone seemed to be smiling.

37

you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action”; who paternalistically believeshe can set the timetable for another man’s freedom…”(http://mlk-kpp01.stanford.edu/index.php/resources/article/annotated_letter_from_birmingham/)

Mrs. Robel: “…I am holding on to the hope that there

will be no further physical assault of community mem-bers, or other actions that detract from our abilityto react, as a university, with reason and fairness toconcerns.”

Henry David Thoreau, from “A Plea for Captain JohnBrown”: “I do not wish to kill nor be killed, but I can fore-see circumstances in which both these things would beby me unavoidable. We preserve the so-called peaceof our community by deeds of petty violence everyday.” (http://thoreau.eserver.org/plea2.html)

It’s probably useful to state here that I’m not endors-ing the strike or its demands. The purpose of this articleis to point out that the administration is trying to shut astudent movement down, and if that means they haveto stoop so low as to send out an historically inaccurateemail to every single one of us recounting an adminis-trator’s rsthand experience with the recklessness of thestrikers, they’ll do it.

Sorry, Mrs. Robel, but history shows that the strikers’ tac-tics were in the right.

A push or a shove is not violence. Interrupting classesand turning over desks is not violence. And while thisnext tactic hasn’t been used yet, I want to announcepublicly that locking administrators in their ofces is alsonot violence.

It seems that you are confusing force with violence, Mrs.Robel, and from the already nervous response you andthe rest of the administration have given to the strikers,I fear that you are ill prepared to handle the nonviolentforce to come.

-Tyler Thompson



36

Lesson on Nonviolence: A Response to Provost Robel’sStatement

Last Wednesday via email, Provost Lauren Robel sent allof us on campus a good example of what administra-tive anti-strike propaganda looks like. In her message,she mentioned a bad encounter with a group of strik-

ers, the administration’s readiness to increase conse-quences should bad encounters continue, and her thoughts on nonviolent civil disobedience. (Note: I trustyou all at the paper have access to the source for theRobel quotes to come)

In a short column like this, it’s impossible to untangle theentire web Mrs. Robel spun in her email. But one of thetopics she mentioned was civil disobedience, and sinceI found her portrayal of this topic to be wildly inaccurate(and easily proven so), I’d like to take this opportunityto compare Mrs. Robel’s words on civil disobedience to

what past leaders who famously used the tactic havesaid about it.

Mrs. Robel: “Participation in civil disobedience is a moraldecision, a matter of conscience.”

Nobel Peace Prize winner Nelson Mandela: “For me,nonviolence was not a moral principle but a strat-egy; there is no moral goodness in using an ineffectiveweapon.” (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/17/books/review/Conniff-t.html?pagewanted=print&_r=0)

Mrs. Robel: “I have also encouraged those who supportIU on Strike strongly to examine their consciences abouttheir tactics.”

Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.: “I have almostreached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’sgreat stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is notthe White Citizen’s Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, butthe white moderate, who is more devoted to “order”than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which isthe absence of tension to a positive peace which is the

presence of justice; who constantly says: “I agree with

21

Even after the incredibly exciting and powerfulmoments of the actual strike, I still look back on thisparticular night as one of the most enjoyable andmore strategic happenings to come out of the strikeplanning. In none of our attempts at “mass assem-blies,” noise demos, and open occupations werewe able to gather such a large amount of students

outside our typical circles and bring them into a situ-ation where talking about the strike was “cool” andpeople were able to speak freely about their situa-tions without the awkward constraints of consensusdecision making. As I sit here and reect on where togo next from here my only logical conclusion is takethe joy, energy, and music from shows like this andbring them into the empty buildings of campus. Firstat night... then, maybe, indenitely.



22

Strike Hub

35

IU on Strike: Support by Social Work StudentsLetter to the editor, Indiana Daily Student

“I will graduate with $23,000 of debt. I am in my fthyear of college because I could not afford to goto school full-time. I work two jobs, one on-campusand one off-campus. Neither pay a living wage. My

younger brother is graduating high school this year and has not applied to any colleges yet because heis afraid of a future lled with debt. This is not some -thing a high school senior should worry about. Edu-cation should not be a market that is only accessibleto higher social classes or lower ones willing to makeprofound sacrices.” - Joe, Sophomore, IU

As social work students, it is in our Code of Ethics topursue social change on behalf of vulnerable andoppressed populations. The upcoming strike illumi-nates an opportunity for us to support a cause for

greater equality in education, and to support stu-dents who will face economic uncertainty when theygraduate.

We strike against students paying 51% of the IU budgetat a public university.

We strike against graduate students and adjunctfaculty being overworked and underpaid, meaningmediocre classes for students.

We strike against broken pledges to increase diversityon campus by doubling underrepresented minoritystudents in 2006, when the current African Americanstudent population rate is lower than the rate in 1976.

We strike against a 45% increase in tuition and fees inthe past 6 years.

We will strike on April 11th and 12th while the Boardof Trustees meet to make consequential decisions atIU.We support the strike. No work, no class.

[A list of signers names follows in the original document.]



Part Two:A small selectionof yers &writingsc i r c u l a t e dbefore, during, andright after the strike

23

sharply differed from the everyday experience of lifeon campus, and ruptured day-to-day life even for passive witnesses. For participants, the strike chal-lenged some of the most basic assumptions of theuniversity. Where the dominant model would haveit that education is a costly product requiring count-less administrators and functionaries to deliver, we

taught each other and learned for free. Afterwards,many participants agreed that we’d also expe-rienced a much richer kind of learning during thetwo days of the strike than we ever had in our usualclassrooms. We learned that we can take space,time, and resources outside the connes of capitaland the state. More pragmatically, the strike hubwas a central space in which to gather that was theright size for the number of people who participatedin the strike. One potential drawback of this central-ization is that we weren’t nearly as visible anywhereelse on campus, but proposals to address this by

picketing or passing out iers around campus werelargely thwarted by bad weather. All in all, Wood-burn felt very pleasant during the strike (except whenpolice were around), and staying there helped usbuild bonds of afnity and trust with each other thathave extended beyond the strike itself.



24

Following the strike, many organizers felt that gath-

ering for the Trustees meeting was a low point. Therewas a police presence that blocked off the entranceto the building where the trustees met. The groupoutside chanted and soapboxed. People had beenexcited about being able to express their grievanceswith the trustees, but became disappointed and dis-illlusioned by being barred entrance which createda palbable feeling of rage. The police began lettingve people in at a time. As the demonstration pro-gressed the group began to split with some favoringto leave the doors of the meeting and march intotown, while others either wanted to stay or marchback to Woodburn. In the end, everyone slowlymarched back to Woodburn where an impromptuassembly was called which excitingly managed torecapture some energy from the crowd. This wasalso the rst introduction for many to the assemblymodel.

It was a predictable and brilliant tactic by thepolice to allow students in ve at a time to controland divide them. We thought they might do this atWoodburn, but they didn’t; they played that card

later. That formed an ideological or tactical divide

Trustees Meeting

Trustees Meeting

33



32 25

between people who were willing to accept termsof police and people who weren’t: do you want tocreate power or create a spectacle? Spectacle isnot power.

From there the strike turned into a media opportunity-- a moment of cooptation. This spectacle means

playing into the hands of cops, media, university -- avortex of shit. Soapbox speeches in front of the meet-ing ended up acting as the “climactic moment.”The strike was linked to the board of trustees meet-ing by the dates that were chosen and although itseemed symbolic and widely intelligible, it createdthe problem of making protest at the board of trust-ees meeting one of the expectations, which legiti-mizes their authority. People were trying desperatelyto convince others to leave the doors of the meet-ing and a tug-of-war commenced between goingand staying that momentarily frustrated many par-

ticipants. Next time we should be willing to split themarch or make our intentions clearer before partic-ipating in a demo that most organizers felt wouldonly be cathartic for newcomers.

To broaden the presence of the strike, we attemptedto organize numerous picketing groups for the daysof the strike. They were to set out early in the morningand establish small demonstrations at key locationsaround campus. Picketing was meant to provide aneasy way for newcomers to plug in to the strike. Toorganize the pickets, sign-up sheets and point-peo-ple were established. We appealed to others at theuniversity, like frats and specic academic depart-ments, to create their own pickets at whatever loca-tion felt important to them.

Participants stood near academic buildings andother high-trafc campus areas from about 7:30 to10 a.m. They held signs and distributed iers to pass-ers-by, encouraging them to join IU on Strike activi-

ties instead of attending work or class. Picketers

Pickets



26

had signs and banners, some of which they madethemselves & some that had been painted the nightbefore. They also took red squares to distribute oncampus, along with other literature pertaining to thestrike.

In reality, very few new people participated in the

pickets and it largely fell on the shoulders of thesame folks who had already been organizing in thebuild-up. Thus, turnout for this particular effort wasquite small—especially on day two. The pickets didhelp to make the strike a bit more visible in the earlymorning hours. In the future, we should do more toget folks signed up for picket teams in advance,rather than hoping they will just turn up. There wassome discussion of having specic meetings andevents targeting different departments on campus,such as the education school. If we had done this,we might’ve taken the opportunity to also establish

picket teams based in those departments. In either case, care should be taken not to overextend thosewho are doing the most by refusing to drop aspectsof a project that are not coming together well. Pick-eting as a tactic does seem to have potential, butwhen it became evident that there wasn’t enoughenergy behind our pickets to make them work,we might have been wiser to cancel it and allowthose few who had committed to spend their timeelsewhere.

It’s worth noting that in one of the last assembliesbefore the strike, there was some question aboutwhether to proceed with the pickets. The decidingfactor seemed to be a comment from someonewith less experience at IU who suggested that it hadworked in their context. This just to highlight that,while lessons from other universities are useful, wecannot assume that the same tactics will translateacross campuses and states.

31

In the rst assembly after the strike, it was widelyagreed that any further organizing should takeplace under a new name. Not only had “IU onStrike” been used by the media and administratorsto write off the robust, diverse strike as the work of a

single student group, but also now that the events ofApril 11th and 12th had passed, “IU On Strike” wouldclearly be a misnomer. On the other hand, we hadspent many months distributing strike literature, iers,and images; why not embrace our shared identityas “strikers” and continue to build on the recognitionwe’d already gained?

A strike is a form of action that challenges hierarchyby refusing to fulll one’s usual role in it. The generalassembly used its strike proposal as a rallying point,to encourage the beginnings of a cohesive culture

of resistance on campus. Many students, professors,and some workers, did indeed refuse to performtheir usual functions on the days of the strike, and itopened conversation and debate across campus.

Many of us felt that part of the strike’s value was thatit broke with the normal structure of things; throughit, participants not only ‘questioned authority,’ butexperimented with different ways of relating to eachother and to space on campus. We hope that theseexperiments will keep multiplying across IU, and werefuse to let our anger be funnelled into ritualizedprotests and static student groups. For this reason,many who participated in the strike agreed to dis-tance ourselves from ‘IU On Strike’ and set our sightson new collaborations against the university.

Noun-ifcation



30

The police were fairly hands-off through most of Thurs-day, with the exception of an ofcer who seemed toenjoy shoving people outside the board of trustees’meeting. Given this, many of us were surprised by theseemingly heavy-handed show of police force thatevening. This in spite of the fact that we’d used thespace as ‘respectfully’ and ‘appropriately’ as could

be imagined for any kind of protest action, withoutcausing any damage or obscene disturbances.They entered early and aggressively, and in retro-spect it’s clear that we could have coordinated our response better (one comrade was even asleep atthe time and was awoken by a cop instead of oneof her friends!).

Never assume that an apparently lenient approachby cops will continue, particularly past nightfall whenthey have the benet of a dark and empty campuswith fewer potential witnesses to their actions. And

always assume there’s a cop in your midst duringthese kinds of events, because there probably is atleast one. We were certainly more coordinated onthe second night and enjoyed a pleasant exit fromWoodburn, but it was discussed that many would’vepreferred to hold the building overnight and beyondif it were possible. Many people said that their favor-ite part about Thursday’s encounter with police wasthe way in which people had each other’s backs.Some refused to leave the building until everyonewas out while others pushed toward police after therandom arrest until the cops had to hide back insideWoodburn. Marching to the jail and presenting our comrade with gifts upon his release felt particularlyempowering, and a great way to recapture the joyous spirit of the strike.

27

One key component of the strike center was fooddistribution. The “Noms Committee” was formedto provide food at Woodburn during the strike. Thecommittee provided breakfast, lunch, and dinner toall persons who would take it-–not just supporters of

the strike. Food was sourced primarily from dump-sters and food banks with supplements from dona-tions by individuals. Donations of food and moneywere sought from businesses downtown using a can-vassing model, which got a lot of posters hung upin store windows, but not so much food. The mealswere cooked by a group of 12-18 people workingfor almost 9 hours all through the night, using a bor-rowed commercial-size kitchen and supplies whichwe received by donation and through local non-prots. Many energy shots were consumed.

Having food throughout the strike created a stronger sense of community based on a feeling of sharedspace. It allowed participants to remain at Wood-burn throughout the day, and provided an alterna-tive to using the university’s dining services. The foodtable and distribution also acted as a visible root for the occupation indicating that something outsideof the university’s normal functions was happening.

For as much work as went into this aspect of the strike,however, food ran somewhat low on the secondday and we ended up ordering pizzas with donatedcash. If we’d planned for and prepared more mealsthat would store for multiple days, we could’vestretched that money further. Additionally, the mealplans we had originally conceived ended up blur-ring into a sort of continuous snack time as leftoversfrom a meal would be left out for people betweenthe designated serving times which became less dis-tinct as the schedule became more divergent fromthe plans.

Cooking all night before the rst day of the strike

totally exhausted the food crew, many of whom

Food



28

wished to participate in other signicant ways thedays of the strike. When some people had originallyplanned on marching and other things they endedup sleeping in late or lying exhausted on the terrazzooors of the strike hub. Maybe getting more dona-tions of prepared food or nding other ways of out-sourcing this work away from the organizers couldhave helped with this, as well as nding a kitchenwhere we could have started earlier in the day.

Indiana University police maintained a visible pres-ence from the beginning of the strike. Throughout therst day, police cars and bike patrols drove aroundWoodburn and unsuccessfully attempted to controlThursday’s march by positioning themselves in frontof and behind the crowd. An undercover ofcer monitored our activities inside the strike hub for mostof Thursday. On Thursday night, the IUPD exhibiteda massive show of force against strike participants.Twenty fully-armed ofcers entered through theopposite side of the building and swept up towardthe main lobby. At the time, there were 60 or 70strike participants at Woodburn working on writing,cleaning, and other projects. Though we had beentold to clear out by 11 o’clock, police arrived twentyminutes early and immediately began shouting and

shoving people out the door. A decent number of

Police Response

29

people tried to slowly gather their things and cleanup both as a way to resist police orders and becauseit was heard their might be a comrade upstairs whohad not heard the police come in at rst. Those whoattempted to go and collect their belongings or check on friends were threatened with arrest, whileone ofcer repeatedly implored students to ‘think ofthemselves’ rather than assist others.

After everyone was outside, a shouting matchbetween police and strikers on the opposite sideof the doors ensued. Several ofcers outside of thebuilding moved suddenly to arrest one of the strikers,seemingly at random, after a small window panewas shattered in one of the doors. Some jeered atthe cops in response and several ofcers drew their batons threateningly, commanding them to stayback. This command was promptly disregarded asseveral people advanced on the armed ofcers until

the police were forced to retreat back inside thebuilding. The resistance continued as people triedto block police cars by standing in the street. Imme-diately after the police left the area strike partici-pants marched by the sounds of the Wu-Tang Clanin solidarity with their arrested friend, from campusto the Bloomington jail where the person was heldand eventually released later that night. They weregreeted joyfully by concerned friends and com-rades with small gifts of food and beverage beforeeveryone dispersed for the night.

When strike participants entered Woodburn on thesecond day of the strike, about a dozen uniformedIUPD were already camped out on tables in themain lobby. They continued to patrol the halls asthey had the previous day. It is unknown whether they had another plain-clothes ofcer in the build-ing. That night, strike participants chose to leave thebuilding before it closed rather than confront police.Arm-in-arm, all wearing colorful bandanas thatwere handed out, and singing the old anti-fascistsong ‘Bella Ciao’, they marched to the front gates

of campus, trailed by police cars.

Documents

Strike Audit, 2nd Edition, Fall 2013