Ethnic Studies

So today in Asian American Studies we watched a film called "On Strike!" It mainly focused the student strikes in California about keeping ethnic studies within the universities, dated back to 1999, not so long ago when you think about it. There were conflicts about whether or not the department of ethnic studies was practical enough to be kept as a continuing part of the schools. Administration simply could not increase funding for its classes and kept cutting back every year. It was finally cut back so much it was decided it should be eliminated altogether. Simple enough, no?

Many students felt strongly about keeping it. What would happen if the diversity of such studies were taken away? There were arguments about how classes such as ethnic studies promoted a higher knowledge because it isn't information given to you that you're expected to believe because it is based on a equation. It promoted diversity, it better represented students of many backgrounds, it wasn't insignificant.

Students at UC Berkeley in 1999 had peacefully protested while police forces were ordered by the current chancellor to remove the students from the area. After sit ins and student rallies, they decided a hunger strike would probably get the most attention. After a week of hunger strikes, again the police force was ordered to come in and remove the students at all costs. All costs. Students were cornered around their camp, demanded they leave because they're on private property, maced, beaten, some were almost run over by the bus. Thankfully no one was injured, but the attention these protesters got brought in a lot more supporters, not only from the school's faculty and student body, but also the the community outside of campus. About half of the students were arrested, but later released the next day.

Everyone that supported this cause spread from other campuses. They believed that the current recession affected minorities and having ethnic studies helped fight the misrepresentation of these groups. Moving away from ethnic backgrounds, it was for the betterment of education overall as well, to prevent the ignorance of history, how it wasn't just the perspective of white Europeans. There are other point of views, many of which will tell you that history was written by the winners in the larger output of textbooks given to our schools. The cause was to promote diversity among such studies and to continue its existence in the future.

The chancellor and his administration agreed to meet with the student protesters. I think the involvement of the faculty shook the chancellor up. The school belonged to the students, without them, there would be no school. Arresting the students only prolonged the problem so it came down to negotiation to end this violence and the protesting. Every thing was met in regards to keeping ethnic studies, the only thing the administration would not agree with was amnesty for the students that were arrested the last night of the hunger strike. Overall, the fight was won.

I found it a little more down hearted when a few students also said that if ethnic studies were taken away today, they would most likely be indifferent about it. Words of the engineering majors I may add. Shouldn't something like this bring a community together, even if it's UCI? I'll admit our school has a lack of school spirit and unity. I envy campuses like Berkeley, UCLA, etc. for being such a community together. It's what makes a school worth mentioning about, not just the academics and whatever merits it's known for. But back to the students that said they wouldn't care of ethnic studies were taken away, I think they'd only do anything about it if the rest of the school was doing it. Damn conformists, can't make up your own opinions and have to rely on others.

Unlike the math and sciences, ethnic studies was considered unimportant because it falls under the wings of humanities and social sciences, this was discussed in class, not the film. The administration, as students in my class have argued, believed that ethnic studies was probably not as profitable towards the schools, because it wasn't practical enough for occupations in the long run. If you look at the construction going on at UCI, as one student put it, you can probably see where the bias is. SSLH (social science) was supposed to have had extensions of buildings back in the 60s, when the school was just opening, they're finally doing the construction right now. Department of Sciences and supposedly the new Law school that's supposed to be opening, have had donations and more funding than any other department on campus. If you compare the age of these buildings, you'd find that the science buildings are a lot newer and better maintained than those that belong to humanities or social science. Only now is the rest of the school catching up with that.

I don't know how coherent I actually am in this post because I am slightly ranting after all. With humanities and social science, it's not all about personal gain, it's about what you can contribute to the community. It's what the whole group can give back to itself. As a non-science, math, business, political science major or any other major that would seem remotely practical and guarantee a successful job in the future (as most Asian parents would put it, if not mine especially), discussion about ethnic studies really reinforced the confidence of my choice to stick with psychology and Asian American Studies.