Tens of thousands of protesters are planning to descend on Pittsburgh in late September in order to oppose the G-20 summit being held at the David Lawrence Convention Center. Environmental groups, human rights organizations and advocates for the poor all plan on protesting the G-20 Summit and, although I disagree with many of them, I fully support their right to nonviolently express their opinions in public.
That being said, a small minority of protesters promises to physically disrupt the G-20 through illegal means. Organizing on the Internet, this minority has released countless statements denouncing capitalism as a brutal economic system responsible for the world’s ills.
One such group, the Pittsburgh G-20 Resistance Project, calls the G-20 “the managers of our oppression” and is calling on people to “confront and disrupt the G-20 and its political, corporate and institutional enablers throughout the city” according to a proclamation on its website.
Toward this end, the Resistance Project is planning an unpermitted march in violation of city ordinance on Sept. 24.
According to plans detailed on its website, the march will involve unspecified “direct actions,” a term that has, at past international conferences in London and Seattle, served as code for violently disruptive protests and vandalism by other groups.
Most notably, the anarchist Direct Action Network planned protests against the World Trade Organization meeting in 1999 in Seattle that included the vandalism of storefronts, the smashing of windows and violent confrontations with police.
The Resistance Project has even posted a list of targets for unpermitted protests, including Starbucks, the Carnegie Mellon Robotics Institute and the Oakland Planning and Development Corporation on Atwood Street.
The Resistance Project also issued an online statement calling for supporters who cannot come to Pittsburgh to “plan local actions” and to “disrupt schools and financial institutions” as a form of protest against the G-20 Summit.”
But this vague language is a clear threat against educational institutions around this country and their ability to function free from the interference of extremists. What really piqued my interest was that a Pitt student organization, Students for Justice in Palestine, is listed on the site as having endorsed the Pittsburgh G-20 Resistance Project.
Wondering why a student organization would support the disruption of educational activities, I spoke to Jonas Moffat, the group’s president. During our conversation, Moffat listed a series of grievances that, he said, justified his organization’s opposition to the G-20 Summit.
From President Obama’s escalation of the war in Afghanistan to the state of health care in the United States, Moffat’s grievances had absolutely nothing to do with the policies of the G-20 but instead focused on the policies of the United States as an individual nation.
Moffat’s sole criticism of the G-20 was that it had excluded Iran and Venezuela from membership in the group even though both states possessed large international economies. Our conversation became more confrontational when I asked Moffat if he believed that Iran, as a state sponsor of terrorism, and Venezuela, as a socialist state opposed to international capitalism, should be allowed into an international body designed to promote economic cooperation.
He refused to answer the question, saying simply that some people (he didn’t specify who) believed it and then said that some people also believe that the United States is a sponsor of international terrorism. When asked to provide a yes-or-no answer as to whether the United States is an international sponsor of terrorism, Moffat said that my questioning was too aggressive and ended the interview.
In a later interview with The Pitt News, Moffat said that he declined to answer the questions because the members of Students for Justice in Palestine have many conflicting opinions and he didn’t think it would be right to give an opinion on behalf of his group or inject his own opinion. Moffat did say, however, that his group’s leaders and more active members voted on whether to endorse the proclamation, and the decision was unanimous.
I respect individuals who defend their convictions reasonably and factually, but for the leader of a student organization to defend his group’s actions through innuendo and suggestions is simply irresponsible. Moffat owes us an explanation of his reasoning because his organization is calling on students to take action against their schools.
Moffat’s group has endorsed a proclamation calling on students to disrupt schools, and his only justification for this is that the G-20 hasn’t allowed Venezuela and Iran, two nations ruled by dictators, to participate in the Summit.
This is ridiculous, and what’s even more disgusting is that every student on campus is funding this group’s activities through the student activities fee. According to Moffat, Students for Justice in Palestine received about $5,000 in funding from SGB last year and he expects to receive even more financial support from the University this year.
Certainly, the student activities fee is used to support a broad range of activist organizations with goals not every student agrees with.
But Students for Justice in Palestine has called on students to disrupt educational activities, and it is unconscionable that we should all be monetarily supporting its existence on campus. Academic funds should not go to those who do not respect the academic process and instead encourage its disruption.
Indeed, Pitt’s “Guidelines for Student Organization Certification” says that student organizations must “refrain from advocating, inciting or participating in any material interference or physical disruption of the University” and by calling on students to “disrupt schools,” Students for Justice in Palestine is employing language that has led to such violations in the past.
It is inappropriate that such a group be affiliated with or supported by this University, its administration or student body. At minimum, this organization’s certification should be suspended and their conduct reviewed by the Student Organization Resource Center.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment