Student Activism and the Promotion of Justice at Santa Clara University
"Contradictions, or at least dichotomies have emerged regarding the actual implementation of this call to action, and our task now is to harmonize these dichotomies if we can."
-Pedro Arrupe, S.J.
The following report is a presentation of findings based on qualitative and quantitative research that I conducted on the Santa Clara University (SCU) campus during the spring quarter of 2004. With this research, I sought to document the individual and collective experiences of student activists1 at this University in light of SCU's Jesuit commitment to the "Service of Faith and the Promotion of Justice." The central assumptions behind this paper are 1) that student activists are fundamentally misunderstood by the broader SCU community and 2) that the experiences of student activists at SCU reveal an institutional contradiction between the rhetoric and the reality of this University. Accordingly, my intentions in writing this paper are twofold. First, I aim to articulate clearly the ethical values held by student activists at SCU and to deconstruct the most common misconceptions regarding their motivations and actions. Secondly, I plan to discuss the contradiction that many student activists observe between University rhetoric and the reality of their experience. I will conclude by offering tangible recommendations as to how SCU can close the gap between rhetoric and reality and better support the work of student activists at SCU.
The idea for this paper originated in my own experience as a student activist at SCU. More specifically, the idea arose in response to the University Administration's perceived opposition to student involvement in movements for social justice on this campus. Considering the University's Jesuit commitment to the promotion of justice, I have come to believe that this opposition must be rooted in either misunderstanding or hypocrisy. Therefore, I intend to present clearly the values that motivate students to act on behalf of justice and to put forth their critiques of the SCU establishment. This clarification will reduce the possibility of misunderstanding and allow for an informed dialogue regarding the appropriate role for student activism at this Jesuit University.
Misconceptions
As I have stated, many student activists at SCU feel that they and their work are often misinterpreted by their fellow students, as well as by University faculty and staff. Often times, student movements are mischaracterized or simply dismissed by University officials, and students are denied the opportunity to clarify their true intentions and goals. Therefore, common misconceptions must be addressed before any genuine discussion of student activism is possible. I have outlined responses to several of the most common misconceptions below. These responses are based on both interview and survey data.2
Student activists are the only students who believe that SCU's policies are not in line with Jesuit values of justice.
Although only 10.7% of SCU students surveyed identified as activists, 49.1% of students surveyed believe that SCU's policies are only in line with Jesuit values "sometimes" (See Appendices A & B). Furthermore, I found that there is no significant3 correlation between identifying as an activist and being more critical of the school's policies (See Appendix C). This means that although nearly half of the undergraduate student body notices the contradictions between some University policies and the school's Jesuit mission, only about one tenth of them choose to publicly address these contradictions through activism.
Student activists are no more informed about issues of justice than the average SCU student.
Considering the connections between social awareness, experiential learning and intellectual engagement in the real world that are emphasized in University rhetoric, the survey results seem to indicate that student activists may very well be more informed than the average non-activist SCU student on issues of justice. The data show that there are strong and significant correlations between identifying as an activist and regular participation in educational events and community service. While only 32.8% of SCU undergraduates volunteer on a regular basis and only 28.2% attend educational events regularly, 57.9% activists volunteer regularly and 52.6% regularly attend educational ev ents (See Appendices D & E). This shows that activists are nearly twice as likely as non-activist students to be involved in these two areas of service and independent intellectualism. Furthermore, the data reveals that there is a strong and significant correlation between an individual attending rallies on campus and that individual considering student activists to be well-informed. In fact, the data show that 100% of those individuals who believe that student activists are uninformed or misinformed have never attended a rally on campus (See Appendix F). Ironically, this indicates that they are actually the ones making uninformed judgments about student activists.
Student activism has had no impact on this campus.
The survey data revealed that 56.3% of SCU undergraduate students believe student activism has neither a positive nor a negative effect on the SCU community (See Appendix G). This idea that activism has no impact on our campus is seemingly rooted in ignorance, for student activism has influenced SCU policies regularly throughout the school's history. I will briefly outline a few recent instances in which student campaigns have encouraged institutional change at SCU.
1. The Multicultural Center (MCC) is one of the gems of the University and is promoted as a symbol of the school's commitment to diversity and cultural exchange. It is important to note that the MCC as we know it today is a result of over 10 years of student activism. Though the MCC offices are now located in the Shapell Lounge near the Benson Center, they were once hidden away in the basement of Graham residence hall, which suffered from flooding and leaky water pipes, and was "plagued with rats and cockroaches."4 Students, especially students of color, who worked for or with this organization, felt that this location was an impediment to their work and the development of their clubs. In response to this marginalization, they organized three consecutive "Unity" movements and eventually gained the more congenial Shapell lounge space.
2. A two year campaign to make SCU a fair trade coffee campus, coordinated primarily by Paulina Flint of the class of 2002, is a perfect example of institutional change brought about by student concern and action. The campaign included an educational component, constant lobbying, and negotiating with Bon Appetit, the university food service. We are now lucky enough to have a Fair Trade option at the Mission Bakery. Although this was far from the campus-wide, fair-trade-only policy students had hoped for, it offers students the option of living a life of solidarity that supports the human rights of agricultural workers around the world.
3. In the spring of 2002, a group of nearly 40 students challenged the University's acceptance of a donation from Lockheed Martin, the world's largest weapons manufacturer. These students felt that, "A high-profile relationship with the largest weapons manufacturer in the world . . . is a blatant contradiction of Jesuit values and degrades the meaning behind the various symbols of faith and justice on our campus."5 Although the Gift Acceptance Policy that eventually resulted from this controversy was merely a symbolic gesture and had no significant ethical content, these students successfully challenged the University to consider the implications of the Jesuit commitment to "draw no profit whatever from clearly unjust sources."6
4. Most recently, a student-worker alliance organized around the SCU Facilities Department contract negotiations, which took place from January through April 2004. Workers had expressed concern about their job security and the bargaining power of their union, SEIU Local 715, due to a university management policy of phasing in sub-contracted labor over time. Workers in the maintenance and custodial units were demanding that their contract include language which would guarantee an end to this practice. Students and workers came together to publicly challenge the University Management and Administration to implement a just labor policy. On April 30th, 2004, a contract was agreed upon that would not only secure current union positions, but would also add additional permanent workers as the University grows and expands.
It is not necessarily surprising that most students are unaware of these and other gains made by student activists throughout the years. Often times when issues are taken up by the University and institutionalized in one form or another, credit is given to those who carry out the official business of creating and implementing policy. Occasionally, the University Administration even goes so far as to take all credit for a policy decision that had its roots in student activism. Evidence of this type of co-optation can be found in a recent letter sent to faculty and staff by SCU President Paul Locatelli, S.J. In this letter Locatelli makes a reference to the living wage movement of 2000 -2001 at SCU and claims that, "The union [SEIU Local 715] and some students claimed credit for SCU's decision to pay a living wage . . . In reality, at that time the University administration had already determined that it would be in the interest of social justice and our best interest . . . to pay that level of wages and allocated funds for such wages in the budget."7 According to Alumni with whom I spoke, students had begun pushing for the living wage on campus long before any official decision was made.8
Student activists are not grateful for their SCU education.
Nearly every student I spoke with acknowledged how privileged they feel to have attended a private University and to have been offered so many valuable opportunities at SCU. All of the students I interviewed are heavily involved in the SCU community and the surrounding community through programs such as the Santa Clara Community Action Program and/or the Arrupe Center, and feel that these experiences have been an integral part of their development as individuals and activists. Moreover, several of them have been sponsored by the school to travel to Asia, Africa, Europe and Latin America, in order to learn about oppressive international forces such as liberal economics, environmental destruction, sweatshops, drug trafficking and militarism. These students fully understand that most other universities, even other small private universities, do not offer their students such opportunities for engagement in the real world. Furthermore, several students mentioned that close relationships with specific faculty and staff mentors have contributed to their personal and intellectual growth, and credit SCU for maintaining a small community environment that allows for the development of such relationships.
Student activists' values are not in line with the Jesuit values of the University.
Every student I interviewed spoke comfortably and eloquently about Jesuit values. It was obvious from their definitions and interpretations that they all have a firm intellectual understanding of the ethics of justice. Furthermore, their personal stories and anecdotes reveal that they have integrated values of justice into their activist work and their lives. I will now offer collective student activists' definitions of the terms social justice, solidarity and compassion, three values which are fundamental to the Jesuit philosophy of justice, in order to reveal the similarities between activist and Jesuit interpretations.
Social Justice
In my interview with Jesuit scholar Drew Christiansen, S.J., he defined the concept of social justice within the study of Christian ethics as the "justice of institutions." He argued that social justice is not merely concern for social problems, but an active process of constructing institutions that prevent and/or help overcome marginalization.9 This definition is in line with the interpretations of many student activists who understand social justice to be a process of "institutionalizing human dignity."10 Several students discussed social justice in terms of shifting tides. They spoke of a political shift towards more equitable distribution of resources, a social shift in power dynamics and an ideological shift towards communal rather than individualistic worldviews. Fundamental to the activist understanding of social justice is the moral obligation to promote policies that benefit all and that resist those that value certain individuals in society more than others. Overall, students suggested that the concept of social justice is fundamentally rooted in the ethical principles of fairness and equality.
Solidarity
In his 2003 Convocation speech, "International Education in an Era of Globalization: Beyond Competence to Genuine Understanding of Cultures," SCU President Paul Locatelli, S.J., stated that, "A well-educated solidarity means recognizing that each one of us is bound to all of creation in a moral ecosystem. Solidarity is a readiness to connect with and support all who make up this global, moral ecosystem." This definition, which highlights the key elements of recognition and readiness to support, is strikingly similar to the definitions offered by student activists. First and foremost, student activists characterized solidarity as a "collective acknowledgement of injustice," rooted in a belief in collective liberation. One student referenced Martin Luther King Jr.'s claim that "injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere"11 as fundamental to her understanding of solidarity. Another offered a statement by Lilla Watson, an Aboriginal activist who says, "If you have come to help me, you are wasting your time. But if you have come because your liberation is bound with mine, then let us work together." This idea, that we are all implicated in the oppression and liberation of others, informs the direct necessary connection many activists make between an understanding of solidarity and the obligation to actively support struggles against injustice.
Many student activists employ the concept of solidarity as a guiding principle in their work. They recognize the responsibility that comes with an acknowledgment of suffering and injustice, and use their privilege to bring attention to the causes of others. Senior Blair Thedinger presented solidarity as "identification with the suffering of a group you don't belong to and the willingness to challenge that oppression in cooperation with members of that group."12 Furthermore, several students argued that solidarity involves both experiential learning and academic research, with Senior David Zwaska arguing that, "an informed solidarity is most valuable."13 Recognizing this fact, students engaged in activism tend to reject "fuzzy thinking"14 and overly-sentimental analysis, and instead commit themselves to active, informed solidarity.
Compassion
In his article "The Cost of Speaking the Truth: The Martyrs of Central America, El Salvador," Jesuit theologian Jon Sobrino, S.J. says of compassion, "It is an action, not just a feeling, although it is nice that we have these feelings. It is a reaction in response to the suffering we see before us. And the reaction then becomes the principle which guides and orientates our whole life." Similarly, many students understand compassion to be a feeling that brings with it a moral obligation to act. Some activists experience compassion as a "yearning to give love,"15 and others interpret their feelings as a "desire to relieve human suffering."16 In the struggle to make human connections across the lines that divide us, such as race, class and nationality, compassion allows the individual to give up a part of her/himself to a new understanding of another's experience. Compassion can lead to a shift in consciousness that allows us to become agents in a world of suffering and can be an impetus to act for change. Many student activists understand their own involvement in social movements to be rooted in this value of compassion.
As is clear from these definitions and interpretations, student activists understand the concepts of social justice, solidarity and compassion much in the same way as do the Jesuits. Since this is the case, one can understand why students are often confused when they first experience resistance to their work at SCU. If both the University and the student activists are using the same terms, and interpreting those terms in a very similar way, what explains the tension between these two groups? In the course of my interviews with student activists one explanation was offered time and time again, in various ways, by various individuals. Student activists believe that there is a gap between University rhetoric and the reality of policies and internal politics at SCU.
Rhetoric vs. Reality
Santa Clara student activist Jelena Radovic reflected on her experience of transformation from a volunteer to an advocate for justice by asking, "How can I volunteer at a homeless shelter and not wonder why people are homeless — it's all connected."17 Stated more generally, her question is this: how can we be taught about and exposed to inequality and oppression, and not feel inclined to act publicly and politically to change the systems which are the root causes of these injustices? Furthermore, how can we go beyond the SCU bubble to learn about injustice and not return home without applying this new knowledge to our immediate surroundings? Much frustration among activists is rooted in SCU's apparent rejection of this connection, which has been so fundamental to their growth as intellectuals and advocates. Though some students noted the University's financial support for off-campus activism (i.e. for traveling to School of the Americas demonstration and the United Students Against Sweatshops conference), they also argued that the University has made it clear that activist critiques are not welcome on campus. In order to present their critiques more clearly, I will discuss them in terms of four general themes: False Advertising, The Church and Politics, Minority Politics and the Bottom Line.
False Advertising
I will begin with the most common criticism offered by student activists, which deals with the contradictions between SCU's public image and the reality of its policies. Many students, including myself, were drawn to this University because of its image as an institution that works for justice. The University claims to promote an "educational environment that integrates rigorous inquiry and scholarship, creative imagination, reflective engagement with society, and a commitment to fashioning a more humane and just world."18 However, many student activists think that the University does not always practice what it preaches.
Students shared feelings of frustration with the hesitancy of SCU to publicly take a stand on current issues of social and ethical importance. SCU has proven to be an institution that focuses its social and institutional critiques on injustices of the past (which are now sanctioned as injustices in the realm of public opinion), but often fails to take a public stance on current issues. For instance, several students commented on the University's willingness to speak publicly today about the tragic war in El Salvador in the 1980s, but noted its failure to take a public stance on the recent wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
The claims of false advertising go beyond the realms of policy and public relations to the heart of the University, namely into the classroom. Though SCU claims to "educate the whole person in solidarity with the real world,"19 many activists expressed frustration with the subject matter presented in their classes and with the angle from which it is taught. Peter-Hans Kolvenbach, Superior General of the Society of Jesus has stated clearly that, "no point of view is value free. By preference, by option, our Jesuit point of view is that of the poor."20 Students argue that this standard has not been fully embraced at this University and that issues of social justice are "watered down" in the classroom.
The Church and Politics
Many students believe that, in its efforts to appear apolitical, Santa Clara denies the reality that, as a religious and social institution, it is involved in the construction of values and ideologies, an inherently political project. Moreover, these students believe that the element of SCU's Jesuit mission that calls for the "Promotion of Justice" ought to increase the University's involvement in politics. In today's world, where "two thirds of human kind are on the road"21 of oppression, working for social justice and on behalf of the poor means working against political, economic and social institutions that support injustice. SCU's hesitancy to embrace its role as an influential religious and social institution should not be considered a shrewd political move, but rather another example that the University is "simply not willing to pay the price of a more just and more humane society."22 Several students complained about this facade of neutrality. Their frustration reflects the reality that in today's world, taking no stance is taking a stance in support of the unjust status quo.
More specific to the student activist experience is the double standard they have observed in relation to social justice and the physical space of the Mission Church at the heart of the SCU campus. Many at SCU have claimed that the Mission Church is not the proper place for political activism, and when students have dared to touch this protected sanctuary with their movements, they have been dismissed as disrespectful and reprimanded. In two particular circumstances, police action was threatened in order to remove students from the area in front of the Church.23 On the first occasion, students protesting the Lockheed Martin donation chose to fast outside the Mission Church for four days as a symbolic act of repentance. Campus safety threatened to call the police on the first morning of the fast, but in the end the students were simply reprimanded by the Office of Student Life for breaking the campus free speech policy which was in place at the time. The second occasion was in the spring of 2004 when students and workers gathered for a candlelight vigil outside of the Mission Church on Holy Thursday to encourage the University community to consider the connections between the suffering of Christ and the struggle for workers' rights at SCU.
While student activists are prohibited from demonstrating inside or directly in front of the Mission Church, people enter the church each week and hear scripture and homilies involving political issues, such as the treatment of marginalized peoples or the injustice of violence and war. In this way, the Mission Church has become a biased space on campus that silences the real life struggles of the community and illuminates instead only hypothetical or distant struggles for justice, peace and humanity. SCU claims to be a place where students can learn to integrate their faith and their belief in justice, but unfortunately only certain interpretations of justice are allowed in or near the Mission Church. This leads some activists to wonder who decides what types of politics are welcome in this space.
Student activists at SCU want to see a Church and a clergy that are actively engaged in the struggle for justice right here at Santa Clara University. They feel that there are radical stances to be taken in behalf of justice and human dignity, and that the Church should be a hub of involvement in the struggle. They argue that the white crosses in front of the Mission Church, which bear the names of Salvadoran Jesuit Martyrs, testify to the necessity of this struggle. These crosses represent for many student activists of faith the idea that faith requires the public denunciation of injustice. In this way, the Mission Church is the most appropriate sight of resistance on campus.
Minority Politics
We have all heard Margaret Mead's famous statement urging us to "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed people can change the world,' and reminding us that, "Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has." The spirit of this quotation, which brings inspiration to many in the struggle for justice, is often disregarded by those who promote an ideology of democracy as majority rule. This ideology impacts student activists at SCU who, as I mentioned above, make up only 10.7% of the undergraduate population and, therefore, always represent a minority on campus.
This perspective on majoritarian democracy was presented by Kirk Hanson, Executive Director of the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics at SCU, in his article, "Defining the Institution's Values: Four Questions to Guide Discussions of Gift Acceptance." This article, which focused on the debate over the Lockheed Martin gift acceptance in 2002, refers to the "appropriate response" of the campus community to student concerns stating that, "The most common strategy is probably silence — and at times this is appropriate, such as when the protest is from a vocal minority."24 Though this statement was made by one individual regarding a specific situation, the substance of Hanson's argument regarding a "vocal minority" is used by many at SCU to dismiss student activism.
Student activists challenge this line of reasoning as an illogical Appeal to Popularity. One student stated that it was "arrogant" of the University to disregard the well-researched critiques of a small group of interested students as mere "minority opinions." Activists argue that their campaigns are rooted in the stated values of SCU, not simply in their personal opinions, and believe that policies should not be approved based on mere majority opinion. Unlike public universities whose missions emphasize only academic training and research, SCU espouses a philosophy of ethics and justice and, therefore, sets a higher standard for itself. Student activists suggest that this standard requires the consideration of the best arguments for justice on a given issue, even if those arguments come from a small group on campus. One student argued that, "There is no point in the University having ideals if it won't work for them,"25 while another stated that, "There is no validity in teaching a philosophy without putting it into practice."26
Along with this rejection of the majority mentality, students also reported a sense of frustration with the "silent majority" at SCU. Many student activists spoke of the general apathy they experience on this campus. They suggest that there are always the same people at educational events and organizing meetings, and that most students are not interested in learning about or working for justice. Furthermore, activists also argue that the apathy of many SCU students cannot simply be interpreted as support for unjust policies. To support this argument, many students noted the lack of sophisticated counter-movements by all the students who allegedly support the school's policies. Though nearly every student campaign begins with an attempt to educate the community about the issue at hand, justice has proven throughout history that it cannot wait for the apathetic, if not directly opposed majority to take notice. Therefore, the SCU administration should not simply reject minority opinions in favor of the status quo, but rather should genuinely engage the concerns of student activists who are choosing to actively shape the community.
The Bottom Line
The final area of critique has to do with the contradictions between Santa Clara the Jesuit University and Santa Clara the non-profit institution that acts as a business. This has been an influential contradiction in many student activists' experiences at SCU. Though activists are not so naive as to think that SCU can merely cease to be concerned about financial matters, they do call into question the University's priorities. SCU senior Allison Cole, arguing that SCU is a "profit-driven business that prioritizes fiscal decisions," holds that, "there is a problem if the school cannot run according to its own values." Her statement reflects the sentiment of many students I spoke with who feel that financial stability is a real concern, but it is not an excuse to compromise our values. Many activists are concerned that SCU's financial policies often deviate from the Jesuit values of economic solidarity, simple living, and the preferential option for the poor. Furthermore, some activists are impelled to ask, as the martyred Jesuit Father Ignacio Ellacuria once did, for whom is this education? Many fear that SCU has strayed from its mission of educating for justice and merely seeks to attract wealthy student who will one day be wealthy donors, regardless of their social consciousness. In his article "A Vocation for Catholic Higher Education?" theologian Stephen Pope speaks to this issue stating that, "Catholic Universities cannot simply be places where well-to-do students receive a good education in order to assume their place in the next generation of corporate and professional elites." Catholic Universities, and Jesuit Universities especially, should work to challenge this cycle of social and economic stratification rather than to support it. Pope also argues that, "The credibility of the Catholic University lies neither in its endowment, nor its graduation rate, but in whether its graduates are genuinely concerned about taking the crucified people down from their crosses."27
Recommendations
The 34th General Congregation of the Society of Jesus called upon every Jesuit institution to promote justice in one or more of the following ways: direct service and accompaniment of the poor, developing awareness of the demands of justice and the social responsibility to achieve it, and participating in social mobilization for the creation of a more just social order.28 The final section of this report is a compilation of recommendations offered by student activists as to how SCU can and should integrate the third element of social mobilization more fully into the culture of the SCU community.
"Every Jesuit academy of higher learning is called to live in a social reality and to live for that social reality, to shed university intelligence upon it and to use university influence to transform it."
- Peter-Hans Kolvenbach, S.J.
The Service of Faith and the Promotion of Justice in American Jesuit Higher Education
SCU should take a public, pro-activist stance and encourage students and faculty to get involved in local and global movements for justice. Many student activists feel that advocacy and activism are stigmatized on campus and considered by many to be separate from the Jesuit mission of the University. Recognizing that this is not the case, it is important for SCU to present social and political activism, both within formal government institutions and with affected communities, as a critical element in the struggle for justice. Furthermore, the University should acknowledge its social position and influence, and engage in public intellectualism regarding current social, political, and economic justice issues.
"The Church should take the lead in providing the necessary information to the public about her own affairs, and in welcoming criticism. In settling disputes, and arriving at decisions, she should take into consideration all relevant evidence."
- Pedro Arrupe, S.J
Witnessing to Justice in the World
SCU should create a structured system of open dialogue on campus. Many students reported that their concerns on various issues have been repeatedly dismissed by the Administration and that they have been denied access to decision makers in the University. This response of silence forces activists into an adversarial position and leads to escalation in their campaign tactics. Furthermore, there are often grave misunderstandings between student activists and the University establishment, which could be avoided if there were a proper channel established to publicly present and discuss student concerns.
Students here [at SCU] become members of a mutually supportive, intellectually powerful, compassionate, and open-minded community.
- The Jesuit Advantage
SCU Website
Recognizing that the faculty and student body are influenced by statements and decisions handed down from above, the University Administration should avoid stigmatizing language or treatment of student movements, especially those that focus on on-campus issues. Students have reported that, in the past, the Administration has made public statements to faculty and students rejecting student activist claims without ever speaking with the activists directly. Neither open-dialogue nor educational campaigns are possible if the Administration publicly disregards and discredits the concerns of its students.
Moreover, a few students reported that they had been personally targeted by University officials for their participation in particular on-campus movements. In order for SCU to become a truly progressive institution open to internal evaluation, it is necessary that this confrontational approach to student activism is abandoned.
"Jesuit Institutions are responsible for educating citizens who are well-equipped for public and political life."29
- Drew Christiansen, S.J.
Interview, April 29, 2004
SCU should develop a Social Justice and Activism Major that trains students for careers in strategic advocacy, social movements and public campaigns. This major would necessarily be interdisciplinary and could involve courses from departments and programs including but not limited to Political Science, Sociology, Modern Languages, Religious Studies, Philosophy, Economics, Ethnic Studies and Gender Studies. This option will allow those students with a particular interest in activism to develop the awareness and skills necessary to impact the social and economic policies that contribute to injustice.
"The test of well-educated solidarity is not whether we can work with overseas partners, but whether we have become global citizens, people who accept the challenge of the global common good and work to overcome what threatens it."
- Paul Locatelli, S.J.
International Education in an Era of Globalization:Beyond Competence to Genuine Understanding of Cultures
SCU should strive to challenge the minds as well as the hearts of its students. Many students suggested that this could be done by integrating more political and social education into the experiential learning programs on campus. Though personal and spiritual reflections after community engagement are critical to the fulfillment of the "Service of Faith", structural analysis is necessary for the "Promotion of Justice." Students must learn to see themselves as both members of a human or spiritual community and members of an unjust civic society. Within service or experiential learning programs, preparation and reflection should encourage personal and public action in behalf of justice.
"Teaching economics in favor of the poor, not in favor of the wealthy, means building the kingdom of God."
- Jon Sobrino S.J.
The Cost of Speaking the Truth: The Martyrs of Central America, El Salvador
SCU should genuinely integrate the preferential option for the poor into all departments. Recognizing that all pedagogical choices are rooted in ideology and bias, the University should not hesitate to recruit and promote Faculty that integrate intellectual pursuit of justice into not only their own writing, but their classrooms as well. The fact that student activists were able to single out faculty members that employ the preferential option shows that many, if not most, professors fail to consistently do so.
"Kneel down before the crucified people and ask what have we done so that they are on the cross, what are we going to do to bring them down from the cross"
- Jon Sobrino S.J.
The Cost of Speaking the Truth: The Martyrs of Central America, El Salvador
SCU should work to support and connect students with programs, like Casa de la Solidaridad, which place special emphasis on issues of social justice. Several of the activist students that I interviewed mentioned experiences traveling or studying abroad in the Global South as a key factor in their commitment to justice. Understanding that most students tend to study abroad in Europe and other parts of the Global North, SCU should promote more alternative programs that will take students out of their comfort zone, place them at the feet of the crucified people of the world, force them to consider their own role in global injustice and inspire them to act for a more just and humane world.
Conclusion
On July 31, 1973, Father Pedro Arrupe, former Superior General of the Society of Jesus, delivered his now famous speech, "Men for Others: Training Agents of Change for the Promotion of Justice," to the International Congress of Jesuit Alumni of Europe. He began this speech by humbly admitting to Jesuit alumni gathered that day in Valencia that, "If the terms of 'justice' and 'education for justice' carry all the depth of meaning which the church gives them today, we have not educated you for justice."30 With these words, Arrupe set in motion a wave of change that continues to influence Jesuit universities today. He established a precedent that, "in the future the education imparted in Jesuit schools will be equal to the demands of justice in the world."31
This statement, along with much of Arrupe's philosophy, outraged32 many in the Society who considered this integration of faith and justice to be a "radical" shift.33 Peter-Hans Kolvenbach, S.J., recounted this historical tension stating that, "As Father Arrupe rightly perceived, his Jesuits were collectively entering upon a more severe way of the cross, which would surely entail misunderstandings and even opposition on the part of civil and ecclesiastical authorities, many good friends and some of our own members."34 Student activists at SCU today are faced with this same type of misunderstanding and opposition. They and their actions are often considered to be radical, extreme and inappropriate. Despite the resistance they encounter, they are inspired by the legacy of "radicals" such as Pedro Arrupe, who challenged the status quo and shifted the range of discourse regarding issues of justice.
Therefore, student activists are urging the University to reevaluate its commitment to the Promotion of Justice and address the gap between University rhetoric and University reality. They are daring to say that they have not been educated for justice according to the demands of justice in the world, a world ravaged by war, extreme inequality and unnecessary human suffering. Student activists are challenging this University to recognize that action on behalf of justice has a new meaning in this world and that accompaniment of the poor and direct service are not enough to take the crucified people of the world down from their crosses.35 For the University to respond to the demands of justice, the education of SCU students must be increasingly oriented towards action on behalf of justice.
Footnotes
1. Student activists are defined for the purposes of this paper as Santa Clara University students and alumni who are currently involved in activist campaigns on campus and those who have been involved in the past. A point of clarification is necessary regarding the use of this term. When discussing qualitative data gathered in interviews and focus groups, the majority of activists involved fall left of center on the conventional political spectrum, although they vary greatly in terms of social, political and religious beliefs. The quantitative survey data, however, relies solely on self-identification to categorize activists and non-activists, without regard to political ideology.
2. I conducted a survey of 177 Santa Clara University undergraduate students on issues relating to student activism and Jesuit values. The survey was distributed by SCU faculty members associated with the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics working in the departments of Biology, English, Economics, Religious Studies and Philosophy. The sample population was made up of 52.4% underclassmen and 47.6% upperclassmen. As for their area of study, 63.1% of the respondents were students in the School of Arts and Sciences, 33.6% were Business students and the remaining 3.4% were in the School of Engineering. See Appendix 1 for survey questions.
3. For the purposes of this report, significant relationships are defined as those at or below the .05 level.
4. Christine Epres, "Students strive to save the MCC," The Santa Clara. 27 May, 1999.
5. Colleen Snyder, "Debate: Students offer divergent opinions on heated Lockheed issue," The Santa Clara, 22 May, 2002.
6. Arrupe, Pedro, "Men for Others: Training Agents of Change for the Promotion of Justice," Justice with Faith Today, ed. Jerome Aixala (St. Louis: The Institute of Jesuit Sources, 1980) 136.
8. Patricia Adams, Santa Clara University Alumni, Personal Interview, June 4, 2004.
9. Drew Christiansen, Jesuit Theologian, Personal Interview, April 29, 2004
10. Focus Group. April 21, 2004.
11. Focus Group, April 21, 2004.
12. Blair Thedinger, Santa Clara University Student Activist, Personal Interview, May 30, 2004.
13. David Zwaska, Santa Clara University Student Activist, Personal Interview, May 3, 2004.
14. Paul Locatelli, "International Education in an Era of Globalization: Beyond Competence to genuine understanding of Cultures," delivered at Santa Clara University on 14 January, 2003.
15. Maggie Smith, Santa Clara University Student Activist, Personal interview, May 5, 2004
16. Blair Thedinger, May 30, 2004.
17. Jelena Radovic, Santa Clara University Student Activist, Personal interview, May 21, 2004.
18. Santa Clara University Mission Statement <http://www.scu.edu/president/publiccommentary/diversityletter1998.cfm>
19. Peter-Hans Kolvenbach, "The Service of faith and the Promotion of Justice in Jesuit Higher Education," delivered at Santa Clara University on 6 October, 2000.
20. "The Service of Faith and the Promotion of Justice in American Jesuit Higher Education," delivered at Santa Clara University on October 6, 2000.
21. Jon Sobrino, "The Cost of speaking the truth: Martyrs of Central America, El Salvador," delivered at Villanova University on 15 October, 1990.
23. It is important to note here that neither of these actions took place inside the church itself.
24. Hanson, Kirk. "Defining the Institution's Values: Four Questions to guide discussion of gift acceptance." Markkula Center for Applied Ethics. <http://www.scu.edu/ethics/publications/submitted/hanson/gift_acceptance.html>
25. Focus Group, April 21, 2004.
26. Allison Cole, Santa Clara University Student Activist, Personal interview, April 7, 2004.
27. Pope, Stephen. "A vocation for catholic Higher Education?" Commonweal, March 28, 1997.
28. Joseph Daoust, S.J., "'Of Kingfishers and Dragonflies' Faith and Justice at the Core of Jesuit Education," delivered at Santa Clara University on 15 October, 1999.
29. Drew Christiansen S.J. personal Interview. April 29, 2004.
It is important to note that the use of Father Christiansen's quote here does not necessarily mean that he endorses the recommendation.
30. Arrupe, Pedro. "Men for Others: Training Agents of Change for the Promotion of Justice," Justice with Faith Today. Ed. Jerome Aixala S.J. (St. Louis: The institute for Jesuit Sources, 1980) 125.
32. Peter-Hans Kolvenbach, "The Service of faith and the Promotion of Justice in Jesuit Higher Education, " delivered at Santa Clara University on 6 October, 2000.
35. Jon Sobrino, "The Cost of speaking the truth: Martyrs of Central America, El Salvador," delivered at Villanova University on 15 October, 1990.
Appendix A
Does R consider self an activist?
|
Frequency
|
Percent
|
Valid Percent
|
Cumulative Percent
|
|
|
Valid yes
|
19
|
10.7
|
10.7
|
10.7 |
|
no
|
158
|
89.3
|
89.3
|
100
|
|
Total
|
177
|
100
|
100
|
Appendix B
Are SCU policies in line with Jesuit values?
| Frequency | Percent | Valid Percent | Cumulative Percent | ||
| Valid | Always | 6 | 3.4 | 3.5 | 3.5 |
| Almost Always | 79 | 44.6 | 46.2 | 49.7 | |
| Sometimes | 84 | 47.5 | 49.1 | 98.8 | |
| Almost Never | 2 | 1.1 | 1.2 | 100.0 | |
| Total | 171 | 96.6 | 100.0 | ||
| Missing | System | 6 | 3.4 | ||
| Total | 177 | 100.0 |
Appendix C
Are SCU's policies almost always or sometimes in line with Jesuit Values? * Does R consider oneself an activist? Crosstabulation
| Does R consider self an activist? | Total | ||||
| yes | no | ||||
| Are SCU's policies almost always or sometimes in line with Jesuit Values? | almost always | Count | 6 | 73 | 79 |
| % within Does R consider self and activist? | 33.3% | 50.3% | 48.5% | ||
| sometimes | Count | 12 | 72 | 84 | |
| % within Does R consider self and activist? | 66.7% | 49.7% | 51.5% | ||
| Total | Count | 18 | 145 | 163 | |
| % within Does R consider self an activist? | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | ||
Chi-Square, .133; Gamma, -.399
Appendix D
Does R volunteer? * Does R consider self and activist? Crosstabulation
| Does R consider self an activist? | Total | ||||
| yes | no | ||||
| Does R volunteer? | yes | Count | 11 | 47 | 58 |
| % within Does R consider self and activist? | 57.9% | 29.7% | 32.8% | ||
| no | Count | 8 | 111 | 119 | |
| % within Does R consider self and activist? | 42.1% | 70.3% | 67.2% | ||
| Total | Count | 19 | 158 | 177 | |
| % within Does R consider self an activist? | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | ||
Significant at the .05 Level / Gamma .529
Appendix E
Does R attend educ events regularly? * Does R consider self and activist? Crosstabulation
| Does R consider self an activist? | Total | ||||
| yes | no | ||||
| Does R attend educ events regularly? | yes | Count | 10 | 40 | 50 |
| % within Does R consider self and activist? | 52.6% | 25.3% | 28.2% | ||
| no | Count | 9 | 118 | 127 | |
| % within Does R consider self and activist? | 47.4% | 74.7% | 71.8% | ||
| Total | Count | 19 | 158 | 177 | |
| % within Does R consider self an activist? | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | ||
Significant at the .05 Level / Gamma .532
Appendix F
Has R ever attended a rally at SCU? * How informed are student activists? * Does R consider self an activist? Crosstabulation
| Does R consider self an activist? | How informed are student activists? | Total | |||||
| well-informed | neither more nor less than average |
misinformed/ uninformed |
|||||
| yes | Has R ever attended a rally at SCU? | yes | Count | 7 | 2 | 9 | |
| % within How informed are student activists? | 77.8% | 28.6% | 52.9% | ||||
| no | Count | 2 | 5 | 1 | 8 | ||
| % within How informed are student activists? | 22.2% | 71.4% | 100.0% | 47.1% | |||
| Total | Count | 9 | 7 | 1 | 17 | ||
| % within How informed are student activists? | 100.0% | 100.0% | 100.0% | 100.0% | |||
| no | Has R ever attended a rally at SCU? | yes | Count | 16 | 9 | 25 | |
| % within How informed are student activists? | 25.8% | 11.7% | 16.0% | ||||
| no | Count | 46 | 68 | 17 | 131 | ||
| % within How informed are student activists? | 74.2% | 88.3% | 100.0% | 84.0% | |||
| Total | Count | 62 | 77 | 17 | 156 | ||
| % within How informed are student activists? | 100.0% | 100.0% | 100.0% | 100.0% | |||
Non-activist figures significant at the .05 Level / Gamma, .570
Appendix G
How does activism affect SCU?
| Frequency | Percent | Valid Percent | Cumulative Percent | ||
| Valid | positively | 62 | 35.0 | 35.6 | 35.6 |
| neither pos or neg | 98 | 55.4 | 56.3 | 92.0 | |
| negatively | 14 | 7.9 | 8.0 | 100.0 | |
| Total | 174 | 98.3 | 100.0 | ||
| Missing | System | 3 | 1.7 | ||
| Total | 177 | 100.0 |
