I hope that members of our beloved school’s administration aren’t patting themselves on the back just yet.

There is no reason for them to believe that the recent so-called “disciplinary” actions are going to curb the actions of The September 29th Movement or its members.

In fact, the AUJ, OJA, and whoever else, could be making a mistake by trying to reprimand, place on probation or suspend any member of the Beardshear 8.

There is something that the administration isn’t realizing. The Movement isn’t necessarily under one person’s direction. It is a group made up of all kinds of people; everyone has a say and everyone’s input is considered.

It appears that the university has tried to single out who it thinks are the leaders, simply because they are the ones who are constantly in the public eye.

It’s an oxymoronic move on their part — brilliant and bone-headed all in one.

The recent moves to convict these students isn’t likely to cause dissension in the ranks. The moves are more likely to add fuel to the protesting fire.

Lately I’ve been doing a bit more thinking than usual, and have come up with a few conclusions.

It has occurred to me (not just recently) that the university isn’t to o big on students disagreeing with it.

It has occurred to me (just about four years ago) that the administration isn’t too happy with students shooting off their mouths about their unhappiness.

It has occurred to me (every day I spend here) that university administrators have no idea how students feel.

It has also occurred to me that the students don’t like feeling like they are being kicked to the curb in the name of the almighty dollar.

It has also occurred to me that students’ opinions just may not matter when they question the powers that be.

It has also occurred to me that the only way to cause a stir in the corner offices is to cause a “disturbance.”

Sometimes I wonder if the administration can spell, say, define or even use the word diversity in a sentence.

Last time I checked, this was supposed to be an institution of higher learning, not higher punishment.

With all the history classes, all the million-some-odd books in Parks Library and all the Ph.D.s on this campus, you would think that students conducting a sit-in would be used for the school’s advantage rather than as an excuse for the administration to avoid an issue.

There is an old saying that goes: “Those who choose to forget their history are doomed to repeat it.”

Looks like some people may need to review their elementary school social studies classes.

America’s middle name is protest. Every significant change or significant event in this country or in the world was caused by some form of protest. And every protest had its martyr or someone who sacrificed himself or herself for the cause. Christians have Jesus, Muslims have Mohammed, abolitionists had John Brown, and the civil rights movement had Dr. King, brother Huey and brother Malcolm.

Now I’m not trying to liken Milton, Meron, Kel or Taiyon to Jesus, Mohammed, or Malcolm. But the fact is that if they are turned into university examples they will become stronger in their mission. Support for The Movement may even grow.

The power of the administration is being questioned not only by The September 29th Movement and its constituents, but now by another group: the faculty.

The contact-level educators are even beginning to question the university by presenting a petition signed by numerous professors condemning the way these students are being treated.

But as the faculty and others have pointed out, there is a picture here much bigger than just unfair treatment. There is the issue of the violation of Constitutional rights.

The OJA and AUJ are violating these students’ right to free speech and right to assembly.

In the protest that occurred on Nov. 5, no one was attacked, nobody was hurt and the protest was completely peaceful—far from what it could have been had some uneducated, uncivilized, undisciplined people conducted it or caused it to be that way.

They assembled, they spoke, they conversed and they discussed.

They were asked to leave.

They politely refused.

They turned in their names just as they were asked.

They left.

Now they are being told that they violated rules and regulations.

Now they are being told that they may be suspended.

Now they are being told that they cannot hold leadership positions on campus.

What is the administration’s justification?

To make an example of them?

Probably, but don’t expect the example to be taken lightly.

Like Karen Carpenter said, “We’ve only just begun.”

I’ll see you next week, unless the university brings me up on charges ’cause of my column.

Holla if ya hear me! I’m out.

---

Rhaason Mitchell is a junior in journalism and mass communication from Chicago.