As Gaza solidarity encampments sprung up across university campuses last spring, students faced severe institutional repercussions for their activism. At Princeton, at least two students had their diplomas withheld and 15 were arrested. Across the country, over 3,000 students were arrested for participation in Gaza solidarity protests.
For some, these consequences are disproportionately dire. Undocumented and international students run the risk of being deported if arrested and are limited in their ability to protest, especially with politicians like Donald Trump threatening to infringe on their freedom of assembly. The protests are crucial in raising awareness of the crisis in Gaza and pressuring complicit institutions to divest from genocide. But when we talk about these protests, we need to consider different risks people face: rhetoric that encourages the entire student body to take action or condemns apathy from student cultural groups fails to consider these students’ circumstances.
I am a part of a community of immigrant and undocumented students with strong political beliefs. Some of my friends and I feel conflicted about this issue: should we engage more directly in political activism for causes we believe in and run risks unique to our socioeconomic situation or do we choose not to join and feel called out for our “apathy?” Students who participate in certain actions run risks of deportation, loss of financial aid, and severe disciplinary action. For those of us who choose not to act, our principles and convictions can be questioned. Because I choose not to participate in protests, I am constantly asked whether I truly care about showing solidarity with Palestine; “silence is complicity,” my friends who are involved tell me.
There are indeed different ways in which a student who feels limited in their ability to protest — an undocumented, international, or low-income student — could express support for the pro-Palestinian movement, some of which do not put students at risk of facing harsh consequences. Students can promote educational content on social media, correct misinformation, or donate to charities and fundraisers. However, the powerful presence of the protests combined with the pressure put on student groups to show strong support for the cause, get involved, or make a statement on the protests can contribute to a pressuring atmosphere that may make students feel they are never doing enough.
The same conflict can then arise out of being a member of one of the many cultural and affinity groups on campus. While the importance of these affinity groups in protecting student’s rights is undeniable, it must be acknowledged that a group’s participation and showing support of a cause can place all of its members at risk. This was seen firsthand when the information of students belonging to several affinity groups at Harvard that posted an open letter condemning Israel was doxxed. Similarly, chat logs from the Black Princeton group chat was leaked after a student asked for footage of the Clio Hall occupation. Expecting support from those groups — even indirectly — comes at a cost. When this cost involves doxxing or leaking information, undocumented and international students are put at heightened risk. As such, we cannot expect them all to show public support for the cause or be involved — or at the very least, we must allow them to do it at their discretion, in their own chosen approach.
Assuming that a lack of demonstrated public support is synonymous with apathy is misguided. We cannot assume that everyone who is not participating in pro-Palestinian protests or showing their outright support for the cause is doing so because they simply do not care. While concern for Princeton’s relative lack of activism is well-meaning, attempting to increase campus activism should not come with a harmfully pressuring atmosphere. It should also not push students to make decisions that could impact their future permanently — and it should be especially mindful of how the consequences of activism can disproportionately affect students from marginalized groups.
It is up to students to stand in solidarity with protesters while being aware that those only showing their support from the sidelines may be doing so out of concern for their safety. As students, we must increase our focus on the barriers for students who want to protest but cannot out of fear of their rights being infringed upon. For now, students facing these barriers should show their solidarity within the bounds of their circumstances — simply being educated on the issue is already progress. Before we can call on everyone to show their solidarity, we must ensure everyone can show it.
The ideal solution to this problem would be for the University to safeguard protest as not a privilege that can be revoked at will but rather a right. The language that “the University reserves the right to determine the time, place, and manner of all [activism]” has allowed the University to arbitrarily restrict student speech, which can dissuade students from protesting. Someone facing possible deportation or the loss of their financial aid is unlikely to risk running afoul of the University’s caprices. If such changes are not made, the opinions and experiences of students who face these higher consequences will continue to be undermined.
As we begin a new academic year, we must reconsider our rhetoric aimed at encouraging students to act. We must recognize that participating in the protests and encampments poses a higher risk for some than others. At the same time, the Princeton community must pressure the administration to protect the rights of students to protest and freedom of expression. International and undocumented students should not have to be afraid to denouncing genocide. Until everyone can express themselves without fear of undue consequences based on their identity, Princeton cannot claim to be an institution aspiring to “encourage all members of the University community to learn from the robust expression of diverse perspectives.”
Jorge Reyes is a first-year opinion contributor for the ‘Prince.’ He intends to major in Molecular Biology and is from Louisville (Loo-uh-vul), Ky. He can be reached at jr7982@princeton.edu.
Read More
We must dispel the myth of Princeton’s economic diversity
Raf Basas“Princeton’s administration must implement a class-based affirmative action system to create a domestic student population which is socioeconomically representative of America. In the meantime, effectively serving the nation and humanity involves a realistic understanding of the world’s socioeconomic dynamics — and it starts with us recognizing that Princeton’s population, when compared to the nation as a whole, is not economically diverse.”
“Princeton’s administration must implement a class-based affirmative action system to create a domestic student population which is socioeconomically representative of America. In the meantime, effectively serving the nation and humanity involves a realistic understanding of the world’s socioeconomic dynamics — and it starts with us recognizing that Princeton’s population, when compared to the nation as a whole, is not economically diverse.”
Pathologizing men is unproductive. We should invest in better men-focused spaces
Nicholas Manetas“The lack of avenues for men to talk about masculinity is not an excuse for problematic behavior. But when discussing the challenges facing men involves pathologizing them and blaming their struggles on their own toxic masculinity, we suggest that masculinity is inherently problematic and cannot be expressed in a healthy way.”
“The lack of avenues for men to talk about masculinity is not an excuse for problematic behavior. But when discussing the challenges facing men involves pathologizing them and blaming their struggles on their own toxic masculinity, we suggest that masculinity is inherently problematic and cannot be expressed in a healthy way.”
As Progressive Jews, we call on Princetonians to boycott Thursday’s ‘Son of Hamas’ lecture
Guest Contributors“Princeton cannot claim to be in ‘the Service of Humanity’ when overtly Islamophobic speakers are being invited to a campus where Muslim students live and learn daily. By allowing speakers like Yousef on campus, Princeton is serving nothing but the perpetuation of hateful rhetoric.”
“Princeton cannot claim to be in ‘the Service of Humanity’ when overtly Islamophobic speakers are being invited to a campus where Muslim students live and learn daily. By allowing speakers like Yousef on campus, Princeton is serving nothing but the perpetuation of hateful rhetoric.”
