Autocracy suddenly seems popular on campus. In the last two weeks alone, administrators, The Daily and some individual students have all come out against democracy. Senior Vice President for Business and Finance Eugene Sunshine, responding to community outrage over the Lagoon decision, emphasized one of University President Henry Bienen’s favorite sayings, “This is not a democracy.” When asked if administrators would work to abolish the Board of Trustees, an unaccountable and secretive body composed largely of rich, white, male business leaders who hold ultimate power over all university decisions, Sunshine responded with a flat no.
In a Monday editorial, The Daily criticized members of the Northwestern Open Campus Coalition, which has called for a democratic campus, for “sounding like they want referendums.” Without explanation, the editorial asserted that “We can’t expect to elect the trustees or the university president.”
And on Friday, Howard Pashman wrote in a letter to the editor that NU “does not belong to the students,” and for that reason they should have no power over its decisions.
What could explain this disturbing opposition to democracy, an idea usually regarded as a supreme virtue? Thus far the only clear argument against democracy is that NU is a private institution, so its “customers” and employees have no right to participate in its decisions.
Let’s think about that for a second. A similar argument was used to justify slavery, and is still used to justify labor oppression and major environmental destruction. For me, this not only discredits the argument, but also links the fight for a participatory university to much larger and more intractable struggles.
Whether the community in question is a business, a nation or a university, the central problems afflicting it usually stem from its undemocratic character. A democratic Enron would not have destroyed the lives of many employees while channeling untold riches to the few at the top. A democratic textile factory would not violate its workers’ right to decent working conditions, wages or freedom of association. A country permitted to manage its resources democratically would not send its wealth abroad to rich foreigners or allow the companies operating there to destroy its ecology. And a democratic university would not ignore the wishes of those who live and work on its campus about everything from minor issues to long-term decisions.
The only relevant question here is whether we believe people should have a right to participate in the decisions that affect their lives. If not, we can immediately return to our comfortable apathy. If yes, we must push for democracy – not only in the university, but in corporations, international relations and voluntary organizations.
The task at hand is to democratize NU. We must demand of the administration and its apologists: Why, exactly, are binding community referendums on major decisions unreasonable? Why must ultimate power rest with an unrepresentative Board of Trustees whose members don’t even know our desires, much less base their decisions on them? And what is the central purpose of a university if not to prepare its students to participate in democracy and to fulfill democratic ideals in its everyday operations?