Full disclosure: I am a white, female, middle-class undergraduate student in the College. I was, and always will be, a supporter of the Living Wage Campaign's mission. I have not been an active member in the campaign, nor had I participated in any large way in the hunger strike. I am not speaking for or as a representative of the campaign. I love being a student at the University and am so thankful for the opportunity to study here. I value the work of all members of the community from the person who makes sure there is toilet paper in the bathroom, to the nurses at Student Health, to my professors and teaching assistants, to the deans and President Sullivan. The climate and tone of the student community in response to recent events, however, is disappointing - our privilege has been made more visible and instead of responding with the mindset of working to change and make our community a better place for everyone, we have responded by waving these privileges like a flag under the guise of rationality and educational superiority.
I will be the first to admit that when the hunger strike began I was conflicted about where it was going and its effectiveness as a means of achieving the campaign's goals. It was not because I thought it was juvenile or even unwarranted. I found myself more worried that the amount of time and effort the participants' minds and bodies would be able to exert would be greatly diminished by fasting, and that the level of activism this campaign requires would suffer.
As the strike and campaign unfolded, this had not been the case. Listening to the comments of students and the stories of the strikers and workers, I realized that my position was just as damaging to the campaign as calling it irrational. I had forgotten the best thing about humans is our ability to fight, survive and overcome. I had dismissed the validity of their concerns and the urgent nature of the situation because I doubted their strength and organizing power. The tactic may not be traditional nor make everyone comfortable, but that does not detract from its value - or more generally from the mission of the campaign. The members of the campaign had been extremely thoughtful and conscientious in addressing the more problematic aspects of a hunger strike, especially in terms of health, duration and sustainability. The beauty of the hunger strike was how it had evolved into such a communal effort - as strikers were physically unable to continue, new strikers often joined. They have the support of faculty, staff, students, community members and outside organizations. They are a wonderful example of what a caring community can be.
Yet when I heard my fellow students talking about the campaign in classes, at meetings and events, it was not about the actual issues which the campaign was bringing to light. It was about how a stupid hunger strike was, how small three dollars was, how the campaign should better cater to their audience of the student body, and how the campaign's actions were unreasonable and unfair to the University.
Pause. Say what?
So, what we are saying is that the campaign should take into consideration the demands of privileged students, or only do whatever would make them comfortable? Or stop demanding a living wage merely because the University is suffering injustice at the hands of twenty students hunger striking?
That does nothing to address or change the fundamental issues the campaign raises. Issues of social, racial and economic inequality, how we value work, poverty and the University's role as a power structure in the community are constantly being derailed by the administration and student body with arguments about rationality, motive, legality, methods and timing. The campaigners were not striking because they were irrational or filled with hatred toward the University. They obviously care deeply about this community. They were striking in solidarity with a vital part of the University community which has been silenced and ignored for many years. So what this means is simple. This is not about the students. This is not about the administration's politics or the reputation of the University. Stop making it about those things. Stop talking and listen.
Listen to the worker's testimonies. Hear the stories of some of the strikers and what the strike meant to them or why they joined. You might learn that not everyone sitting in your classroom had the luxury and stability of your own life. They had to fight like hell to get here and I think we have lost sight of how amazingly strong they are for it. We can argue economics and politics all we want, but it is at the expense of the workers, their families, the University community and Charlottesville as a whole, and we have to stop denying that.
And then think.
As you write your rent check today, think about how difficult it would be to be paid minimum wage - or even $10 an hour - and write that check. Now add two kids and gas and car insurance - because housing close to Grounds is too expensive. Or bus fares if you cannot afford a car. Do not forget about utilities and medical bills. Most of us are not facing that battle right now, and often the rent check is not even coming from our bank account. Yes, I am aware students work and take out loans - I am one of them. Yet it is uncomfortable to imagine. We do not like to think about it, but we must. And we must have critical conversations about it. Otherwise, we will continue to take for granted the opportunities we are given and fail to see the struggles and amazing strength of those around us. That is what this is about.
The University can fight and work to find ways to pay a living wage. The University would still be a successful institution after implementing a living wage. The testimonies and spirit of both the strikers and workers have shown how strong and cohesive this community is and can be. Stop doubting it.
Emily Loranger is a third year in the College.
Read More
PARTING SHOT: On the art of walking and chewing gum
By Nathan Onibudo | YesterdayStudent journalism, and maybe even life more generally, is about holding space for multiple conflicting truths.
PARTING SHOT: Confessions of a nepo baby
By Grace Thrush | 2 days agoWhile I can’t point to one specific “aha” moment where I finally started to dispel my self-consciousness and claim my pride for the paper, I got there gradually over the course of my term as managing editor.
PARTING SHOT: Asked and answered
By Honor Wood | 2 days agoLooking back, the answer has been abundantly clear all along. I did it for the people.
