Columbia Students Go on Diet — er, Hunger Strike
Three Columbia and two Barnard students started hunger striking yesterday, drawing a candlelit vigil of 70 and tummy rumbles all around. Drawing from the 520+ word "Statement from the Strikers" posted on the hungry kids' kinda-pro-ana blog, the Spec reports, "Among the litany are issues including alterations in the proposed Manhattanville expansion plan, more support for the Center for the Study of Ethnicity and Race, and stronger administrative response to bias incidents."
Funny how rebels with too many causes end up rebels without a cause. Bwog reports that a sixth striker dropped out last night, presumably because he got hungry. Also, starvation-ville is
Festooned with banners and full of cushions and survival supplies--we noticed a few jumbo rolls of toilet paper--the three-ring tent complex has seen a steady flow of visitors and curious passersby.
Nifty hunger strike bonus: Fewer bathroom breaks, reduced likelihood of soiling protest-tent. Meanwhile, administrators are kinda confused by the cluster of angsty starving kids in the middle of campus. Barnard prezzie Judith Shapiro points out that, though hunger strikes work for political prisoners under totalitariasm, they "may not always be a necessary strategy in a particular situation." Like rich brats on a liberal college campus in the most media-savvy city in the world, in the country that invented free speech. But the real gem from the Spec's coverage was Mark Lenger SEAS '09:
"It's too cold for a hunger strike," Lenger added. "When Gandhi was doing hunger strikes, he was doing it in a balmy, sub-tropical area. ... Unless we can see your ribs sticking out, then it's, really, in a PR perspective, sub-optimum."
May I propose an alternative: Hunger strike bikini babes calendar!
31 Comments | 
| 
Print This Post
Read more: Barnard, Columbia, hunger strike, protest
Email – 
Search
About
Follow us on Twitter
Report a bug
Archives
RSS Feed
November 8th, 2007 at 4:52 pm
Can Columbia students get any dumber? Like 80% of the Country immediately thinks “loons”.
November 8th, 2007 at 5:00 pm
please don’t think their actions are representative of all columbia students. there are PLENTY of people here who don’t agree with their demands or their tactics (see http://www.bwog.net for discussion).
November 8th, 2007 at 6:16 pm
This thing is so fucking stupid. it takes a lot for me to be embarassed by columbia students, but this takes it. These students should be so happy. they’re resorting to the same measures that that dumb youtube bitch did to protest Sanjaya’s presence on American idol…how progressive!
November 8th, 2007 at 7:40 pm
i saw them drinking coffee and gatorade . . . i don’t understand how they can expect anyone to take them seriously
November 8th, 2007 at 8:11 pm
it’s silly but hey, they’re college kids- what do you expect? things like this are how we figure out how to make things happen in the world, and that sometimes means trying things that don’t work. i think it’s a bit judgmental at best to say that these kids are “brats” or that we at columbia are “dumb,” and especially to generalize. don’t be so quick to judge.
November 8th, 2007 at 8:41 pm
Any male hunger striker should be fed pussy.
Are these strikers actually in the tents 24/7? Why are there tents there?
November 9th, 2007 at 12:35 am
if you think posting sexist comments under the cover of anonymity is going to make your case any stronger, it is not. also, speaking of sexist, i am offended by the image chosen for this post and the suggestion that the strikers are “pro-ana.” this is a repugnant denial of the actual demands and goals, which can be found on the website, which I don’t think anyone on here has bothered to take the time to read.
November 9th, 2007 at 2:15 am
Hey pro-strike: Listen, nobody at Columbia gives a shit about your little movement and your silly demands. You will fail miserably, and I’ll be there to laugh at the utter pointlessness of this cause. Just like every protest at Columbia, this is once again the work of some tiny minority who are extraordinarily naive. And as usual, they’re giving my alma mater a bad name.
November 9th, 2007 at 2:57 am
give them a fucking break. at least they’re trying to change something they care about. many of you are just going about your self-important lives, too self-conscious to even consider protesting something in a public arena.
November 9th, 2007 at 4:58 am
You know, when I walk past the little tent, I think of happier times. Carefree times. Namely, when I was 5 years old and would build forts made from sofa cushions and prop up the entire thing with sticks and blankets and then refuse to come out for dinner. Viva la resistance! How jealousy smites my heart, I wish that in my young adulthood I could be socially and politically innovative enough to come up with the concept of a hunger strike in a fort in the middle of campus. Dipshits.
Furthermore, I can’t fucking wait until the parents of these noble young souls hear about this. Specifically, the gleeful moment when a car comes screeching up to the curb of 117th and Broadway, and the roar of a lioness, (aka an Ivy League mother) can be hear like the echoes of Mufasa: “Bitch, get out of that tent, get your ass to your lecture, and eat a damn sandwich”
Speaking of food, I wanted to go and pelt the protesters with brownies from the cafeteria. Or is that racially motivated as well? Me wonders.
November 9th, 2007 at 10:09 am
what really bugs me is the pompous, pretentious attitude of the strikers and their supporters, who are so convinced that their views are right and that everyone else who even dares to question their demands and tactics are flat-out wrong. what makes you so sure that no one on here has bothered to read the strikers’ website? i have, and i can tell you that even after careful and critical thought, i find their demands to be overwrought and unrealistic. have you seriously never entertained the possibility that one can read and understand your “evidence” and arguments, and STILL come to a different conclusion from yours? stop assuming that everyone who doesn’t agree with you is an ignoramus attacking the strike for no reason. hypocrite. you’re just as close-minded as you claim others to be.
November 9th, 2007 at 11:39 am
There’s an anti-racism rally at Yale today.
I would be scared to show up, what with how controversial the idea of anti-racism is at Yale.
November 9th, 2007 at 12:31 pm
Yeah, like who are they rallying against? Racism itself? The graffiti artist who tagged Davenport? How rebellious. Now a pro-racism rally, that would be ballsy. You might actually encounter some degree of risk. Jesus H. Christ, petition the government to abandon loan-based financial aid and replace with tuition, or forgive all outstanding student debt. Do something that might actually make a difference.
November 9th, 2007 at 12:35 pm
‘replace it with grants,’ sorry
November 9th, 2007 at 12:44 pm
@Yale: Don’t you mean “replace it with graffiti”?
I guarandamntee you that in twenty years, these hunger strikers will be the same people donating to Manhattansville. They will see how Manhattansville is good for both the university and the Harlem neighborhood.
The day will be the day when a nigga can walk free in Harlem, and not get shot.
November 9th, 2007 at 12:51 pm
Three comments up (@ pro strike), you deserve a handshake.
November 9th, 2007 at 1:51 pm
I agree with Keggy. I tried writing a longer comment an hour or two ago to this end, but it vanished into the glitchy “awaiting approval” abyss, so this’ll have to do.
November 9th, 2007 at 10:55 pm
thanks. as a student of color who has finished the core curriculum at columbia and had four years to think critically about race and power structures both in and out of the classroom, it just makes me so angry to have my viewpoint written off by strike supporters, merely because i don’t agree with them.
November 12th, 2007 at 12:53 pm
I find it extremely disappointing that so many of you resort to anonymous, childish slandering of students who are actually dedicated to social and cultural progress. It pains me to see such ignorance, blindness and intentional disengagement amongst fellow students, and fellow human beings. For you all to ignore the significance of the strikers’ hopes of contributing to a more (culturally) conscious, integrated and concerned environment, I would hope that you come to realize that people like you are validations for the strikers’ efforts. If more people were simply concerned for, and supportive of, progress against the historically systematic forces of oppression and misunderstanding in this world, wonderful people and students, like the hunger strikers, wouldn’t need to sacrifice their time, energy and bodies as they have. I challenge all of you, especially those of you behind the curtain of anonymity, to reflect on the immense amount of progress that this institution has yet to make.
And if any of yall take issue with my perspective, feel free to get at me. I encourage you not to resort to petty retorts.
Peace,
Mike Williams CC’10
November 12th, 2007 at 6:56 pm
Mr. Mike Williams’ comment exemplifies perfectly why so many people at columbia do not support the strike and its proponents.
The implication that people who do not support the strike are automatically people who are not “simply concerned for, and supportive of, progress against the historically systematic forces of oppression” is completely ludicrous. I’m a minority alumna of CC currently working for a human rights NGO. I care about Columbia, and I was disappointed at the administration’s slow response to the recent bias crimes on campus, but I guess I must still be on the side of oppression since I don’t see eye-to-eye with the strikers. Thanks, Mike, for enlightening me to the fact that I am a bigot and a racist, simply because I don’t agree with the “significance” of the strikers’ demands and methods. Thank you for dismissing my point of view with such moral certainty just because I don’t think that the Center for the Study of Ethnicity and Race deserves more of the university’s finite funds than, say, the Center for the Study of Human Rights (at least not without a thorough investigation gauging the student body’s level of interest in an Ethnic Studies major). Thank you for labeling me as blind, ignorant and intentionally disengaged, just because I don’t think that the strikers should be crying for widespread change in the Core without even having a clear plan for HOW to change the curriculum. I guess people like me are just the reason why wonderful people like them are voluntarily sacrificing their time and bodies.
But really, thank you for opening my eyes to what a horrible person I am.
November 12th, 2007 at 8:25 pm
I don’t even go to Columbia, and though I thought it would be the perfect mix of city and academics for pursuing graduate studies, I’m beginning to think differently. Is it hunger strikers that rankles me? Nope. Well then, it must be because someone disagrees with the hunger striker’s viewpoints, right? No, disagreement is fine. However, there’s a fine line between disagreement and just being downright pompous, and sanctimonious in your condemnation of a strike, or its viewpoints.
From the blog:
“funny how rebels with too many causes end up rebels without a cause”
Like rich brats on a liberal college campus in the most media-savvy city in the world, in the country that invented free speech
From posters:Can Columbia students get any dumber? Like 80% of the Country immediately thinks “loons”.
Any male hunger striker should be fed pussy.
Hey pro-strike: Listen, nobody at Columbia gives a shit about your little movement and your silly demands. You will fail miserably, and I’ll be there to laugh at the utter pointlessness of this cause. Just like every protest at Columbia, this is once again the work of some tiny minority who are extraordinarily naive.
Speaking of food, I wanted to go and pelt the protesters with brownies from the cafeteria. Or is that racially motivated as well? Me wonders.
_______________________________________________________
Perhaps you’re just going for humor, but think about it. Naive in your eyes they may be, but they are young people willing to give it a go in a visible fashion. No, it’s not just a blog, nor a petition, an email list, or something equally as “media savvy”…However it’s a visible and vocal stand for something they believe in. It’s hard to be ignored, and if you haven’t noticed, our generation has developed quite the reputation as the quiet generation (Thomas Friedman of NYT going so far as to call us generation Q) for the exact “media savvy” techniques that would be termed more effective by some in this blog.
Displacing 5,000 residents is something to be thought about.
Coming from a smaller school where some of our ethnic studies departments are sorely lacking and indirectly controlled by those adhering to old status quo, a different funding initiative is something that can always be thought about, but at least some degree of departmental autonomy makes reasonable sense.
However, whether you disagree some, most, or all of the issues these students wish to bring to light, I find it hard to believe that there is NOTHING they support worth debating or that is completely without merit. Their dedication(any hours taken out to protest under a rigorous curriculum anywhere is dedication) is to something they believe in which will probably not benefit them in their time at Columbia. I am dismayed to learn that for this, they are apparently deserving of junk being thrown at them or ridiculed.
When visiting Columbia, I decided to go eat at a place near campus and outside the gates where I was confused to find an owner or manager seemingly dismayed at my college aged self walking in. When I was upbeat, smiled, greeted her and cleaned up after myself after eating she asked me where I was visiting from because you “don’t act like the Columbia kids” [normally do]. It didn’t make sense until now…
I respect every dissenter who voiced their opposition intelligently with grace. Some comments caused me to reevaluate my support for some tenets of the initiative and I’m grateful for thought provoking criticisms.
To the pompous sort who reinforced every notion of the stereotypical ivy leaguer I sought to avoid after graduating boarding school, I hope you learn something from outside the gates of your campus before graduation.
-Nonsibi (Not for one’s self)
November 12th, 2007 at 8:56 pm
just because you’re willing to stand up for something doesn’t mean that you should be applauded for it. my problem with the strike is that the protesters act as if their demands hold moral certainty, which they do NOT. the issues they raise–manhattanville, reformation of the core, expansion of Ethnic Studies–these are definitely not the black and white issues that you make them out to be, Nonsibi. these strikers are not evil people–just misguided. i for one do not, and will not, stand up and cheer for their misguided demands and methods.
November 12th, 2007 at 9:00 pm
a comment from bwog.net that might shed some light on why some people oppose the strike:
As a minority alumnus of Columbia College who works in city planning… the strikers are ridiculous.
1) Expansion:
Columbia isn’t using Eminent Domain, they announced that forever ago. Get with it. I would have agreed that use of it in this case would not be appropriate but they aren’t even asking the city to pursue it. Trust me, this area is RIPE for development, or in the catchword of the day, ‘gentrification,’ which I don’t feel applies so much to Manhattanville because unlike what is happening in Harlem much of Manhattanville is actually something of a wasteland and does not have the population density of most of Manhattan — this is a fact, and I’ve been in the neighborhood many times — and besides, Columbia ALREADY OWNS the land. 5000 displaced residents might seem awful but they will be compensated and in contrast with what would happen/is happening with other developments is actually pretty minimal. Furthermore, they’ve been extremely transparent and open when dealing with the public despite the hostile climate. Columbia will almost certainly be much fairer and more generous with the residents than any private developer who would have bought the land would be and will provide a lot of new public spaces like parts and storefront space. There is NO FREAKING WAY this neighborhood is not changing dramatically in the next 10 years, Columbia or not. Demand in Manhattan continues to far outstrip supply and Manhattanville is right on the “already developed” border.
2) Core:
Different schools have different curriculums. If you don’t like the Core, nobody is exactly forcing you to go to an expensive, elite Ivy-league university with a well-advertised Core curriculum. Seriously. Stop whining.
3) Ethnic studies:
This major seems rather nebulous and vague and any new department is going to be born overnight. If the demand is there, put together a petition and show the University that a significant number of people actually want to major in this topic. “Hunger striking” over it is the height of ludicrocity. It was never promised to you when you chose to come here.
4) Climate on campus:
It’s a liberal university in New York City. I never once felt oppressed by the administration or the people on campus. Throwing a hissy fit when people disagree with you goes against everything your college education is SUPPOSED to be teaching you. Not to say there is nothing wrong with Columbia, we all know there is–but it is not a cruel conspiracy designed to keep down the little people.
November 12th, 2007 at 9:04 pm
another comment from bwog that highlights the problems that strikers have thus far not addressed:
“I have some questions for these hunger strikers:
1) Can you provide me with any kind of data about how much support there is on campus for your demands? If not, have you taken any measures to try and get this kind of information? Do you believe that your views are representative of the student body? If not, please justify to me why you feel that you all have the right to enforce your vision of Columbia on others, and what gives you the right to negotiate with the administration on factors that will affect everyone, or is this simply a case of you knowing what is best for us, and we should listen for our own good?
2) Regarding your demands on the Core: can you give me any more information about your vision of what this class would be? What kind of texts would be read? What measures would you take to ensure that this class did not further marginalise others by not including their culture and history in this, as I am assuming this class could not be all encompassing of the entire history of colonialism and racism. What would be the criteria for picking texts? Furthermore, why do you feel that this class should be mandatory, when there are many classes on colonialism and ethnic studies out there. Why do you feel that this is a more important class that one on, say, womens studies, or on the current political situation in the Middle East, or more specifically a class which explores the Israel/Palenstine issue? If you hunger strike until this class is create, what is to stop someone doing the same thing next week until their class gets added to the core? What should the limits of this be?
3) Regarding your demand that there are more student voices and seats on the core committees, how do you think this selection process should work? How would YOU make sure it was fair and representative. If it IS fair and representative, and the majority of voices still do not share your vision of the core, what would you do?
4) Regarding your demands that the ethnic studies department be given more resources and can hire many more faculty, can you please justify why you think that the university’s limited resources should be directed in this way? By this I mean that Columbia has limited funds, and thus unfortunately putting its funds towards the Center for Ethnic Studies will mean that there will be less money that can be spent on other Centers in a similar situation. Can you give me any data on GENERAL student interest in the ethnic studies department? Can you show that more students would benefit from this than from directing this money towards, say, the Center for Women and Gender Studies, or The Center for Human Rights? If there is more student interest in these other areas, surely the money should go there?
5) Regarding the following demand: Interested Ethnic Studies majors collectively, shown through a vote, must be given 1 or 2 votes (depending on committee size) which will be delivered by the current student positions on all hiring committees for junior and senior faculty to increase student presence and determination of CSER’s direction.
Is there any precedent for this in any other Columbia departments? Should this be something that is enacted across the board, or just in the Ethnic studies area? Why or why not?
I really genuinely would be interested if any of those involve in the strike could answer any of these questions for me please.”
November 12th, 2007 at 9:24 pm
oh please -
Not once did I say anything about the Columbia community having to support the strike itself. And, contrary to your accusation, I do not feel as if you are a bigot or racist just because you don’t stand behind the strikers – that is a very defensive, and ill-founded reaction. Personally, I’m not that fond of the ‘with us or against us’ mentality, which especially in this situation would alienate the community and prove counter-productive. It is much more important to me to support their concern with the status quo. I don’t wish to argue whether or not the strike is the best method, or even if it has been efficient up until this point. But, what moved me to comment was the overall negative and hostile response to their efforts, to their desire to influence… progress and improved cultural understanding and appreciation. Again, I personally take no issue with people not supporting the strike in and of itself (there are bound to be points of contention, such as your valid concern with the Center for the Study of Human Rights), but I’m disturbed by so many folks’ lack of appreciation for what the strikers hope to gain for this campus community, which is then a gain for greater community. I’ve heard as well as read, many responses to the strikers in which people have labeled them bratty, selfish, and spoiled.
Columbia ‘09er wrote:
“Hey pro-strike: Listen, nobody at Columbia gives a shit about your little movement and your silly demands. You will fail miserably, and I’ll be there to laugh at the utter pointlessness of this cause. Just like every protest at Columbia, this is once again the work of some tiny minority who are extraordinarily naive. And as usual, they’re giving my alma mater a bad name.”
This is unnecessary and thoughtless immaturity, and I take these types of people to be those who fail to recognize, or do not care about, the sad reality of our society’s handling of all forms of oppression. Whether or not the strikers have chosen the best course of action, or the most efficient demands, they deserve respect for hoping and for trying to catalyze much-needed progress.
Yes, these are wonderful people. They are wonderful because, while imperfect as any other person, they are dedicated to a positive project, and they sacrifice their time and energy because there exist the many nasty, demeaning and mocking reactions to ideas of progress. They are met with opposition for TRYING to achieve progress, of all things, for the ENTIRE community. Instead of contemplating the positivity of the strikers’ efforts and/or offering suggestions, people spend too much time dismissing and debasing their endeavor as childish, foolish, silly, or selfish.
Furthermore, I encourage you to reexamine their idea of CORE reform, which centers specifically around a change in the major cultures requirement. As of now, your conviction that they have no clear idea as of how to alter the CORE, seems misinformed. Instead of being so quick to jump on the defensive, I challenge you to reflect on the situation and on what the strikers hope to accomplish. If you, and any other people on these boards and in our community, really have no clue as to what that may be, then know that nothing is preventing you from engaging them in open-minded dialogue. Learn from them, and constructively help them learn from you.
Peace
November 12th, 2007 at 9:45 pm
Is it a hunger strike if someone have access of a source of nutrient (gatorade)? many trauma patients who cannot intake food through mouth are kept alive through saline & glucose drips. Last time i checked, gatorade = sugar + salt + water.
more to the point, when i was speaking to a “hunger striker” who purportedly had been on strike for five days, he coyly told me that he just had a cheeseburger…
If you want to get your point across, by all means, demonstrate, organize petitions, & invite speakers. what i sense here is false-advertisement trying to get people to shed tears. & who’s guilty of “slander” (or should i say libel) now.
November 12th, 2007 at 9:48 pm
Food for thought -
You wrote that “Different schools have different curriculums. If you don’t like the Core, nobody is exactly forcing you to go to an expensive, elite Ivy-league university with a well-advertised Core curriculum. Seriously. Stop whining.”
This is a discussion that I would definitely be better suited to have verbally..but, I’ll try here, quickly. Essentially, what is important to realize is that it is not about “liking” the Core at an elite university. The issue is with the undeniable dearth of sensitivity, understanding and concern with respect to cultural differences and power dynamics within our society. It’s simply true. In order to push society in the direction of progress that impacts everyone’s assessment and handling of oppression and conscientiousness, people must start first with on an individual level with themselves, and then with their respective communities. Our community is Columbia. While I believe that we are all eternal students because we can always further develop and learn, I know that I challenge myself daily to be a contributor of positivity and understanding to the world. Those are my individual steps, and I invite you to consider them as well. On a community level, it is our responsibility to change the nature of Columbia as a wonderful, yet in many ways elitist, complacent, and insensitive entity, to one that truly values and fosters connections across cultural, ideological, political – all lines.
That is why you don’t just not go to an institution like Columbia. Being one who cares about pushing society to value more understanding and appreciation across all lines, means that you MUST come to an institution like Columbia – so that you can thump it off of its complacent ass.
Peace
November 12th, 2007 at 9:50 pm
Great points, Knef.
Peace,
Michael
November 13th, 2007 at 2:09 am
Columbia-
That’s fine. I’m not saying that you should have to applaud their efforts. It is up to you to say they are misguided, and I respect that. However, it is the demeaning and derogatory manner in which some have chosen to engage these folks that is distressing. At the very least, they are deserving of a manner of respect that frankly, was thrown out the window by many who posted and created the blog post. From my standpoint, I see folks looking at every possible juncture to undermine and/or ridicule, with very few making constructive comments, which you in fact have made. I thank you for that.
Obviously, these kids are not striking for their health or for any sort of fun. There’s obviously SOMEthing distressing enough for them to protest. Perhaps they will provoke even more thought into how these residents are displaced. Perhaps the CORE curriculum will be given a look. Perhaps detractors might look to criticize initiatives and help clarify what’s viable for passionate kids… Perhaps…anything…other than utter complacency. I truly think all would be better served than spending one’s time quibbling about “what a racism rally”(Yale’s comment) would look like(It’s called a Ku Klux Klan rally by the way, and they still happen in my state)
Columbia- I have problem with dissent, when it’s constructive and respectful. Thanks.
NonSibi- (Not For One’s Self)
November 13th, 2007 at 2:13 am
no problem with dissent*
November 13th, 2007 at 2:28 am
just maybe you should read food for thought’s whole comment before quickly jumping to defend…
s/he copied and pasted that entry from bwog in order to ’shed some light’..clearly s/he was not able to…