Following the popular Occupy Boston march in Charlestown on Monday, everyone on campus can't stop talking about the movement. Whether you support it or oppose it, this activist group has managed to jumpstart a heated dialogue about its validity and purpose. The supporters say they are the foundation of a new kind of movement, spearheaded by a powerful utilization of social media and focused on implementing ideals of direct democracy in order to fight social and economic inequality. In brief, they are protesting the status quo. The opposition says that the movement lacks a measurement system for success, has ambitions that are too broad and impractical and lacks efficiency when they have no clear leader. In brief, they wonder if Occupy Boston is only protesting the status quo, or actually doing something to change it.
The Tufts community has, in our own corner of the world, created a very polarized system in response to this movement. Both sides have been guilty of the same quick assumptions and political one-liners that make us sound intelligent and informed when we argue over coffee in the Rez. We have created a polarized and inefficient way of debating the validity of a social movement, which frankly bears great resemblance to the political system that Occupy Boston moves to protest. If we consider ourselves activists at Tufts, then this is a serious misrepresentation of what activism truly embodies.
It has always been my belief that the true power of activism comes twofold: the power that a group of people has to help a social movement and also the power that a social movement has to motivate and resonate with said group of people. We must not forget that social movements give us purpose and resolve, just as we give them passion, energy and resources. So, in light of the polarized system we seem to have inadvertently created through the Occupy Boston debate, we may have lost sight of the true power that a social movement has to affect us. And, just as important, we may have lost sight of the power that a social movement has to affect other Jumbos.
Regardless of my view on the effectiveness of Occupy Boston, I respect it because it has empowered my fellow Jumbos. It has resonated with them and spoken to them much in the way that other activist groups have spoken to me. I imagine many of us have felt that exhilarating feeling where we realize that we ourselves can make change in whatever social movement has truly resonated with us — and that active citizenship isn't just an admissions office slogan. And then, in light of our newfound passion, we are empowered to go out and actually implement that change, using the incredible resources that we are provided at Tufts.
I believe that the end to this debate is not the resolution of right or wrong, success or failure — it is respect. Those involved in Occupy Boston should be moved to understand that not all who oppose Occupy Boston are disinterested in social and economic inequality — these Jumbos simply resonate with other social movements with different structures and messages. Those not involved with Occupy Boston should also be moved not to be too hasty in their criticism of the movement, as this is just another opportunity for our classmates to get involved with something that truly empowers them to affect change.
Each and every Jumbo I know prioritizes making a mark on their community and their world in their own unique way. If we respect and value this sentiment, the Tufts community would do well to embrace social movements that don't necessarily resonate with us. So instead of immersing ourselves in arguments and condescending dialogue, I urge my fellow Jumbo to be inspired to find the social movement that resonates with you and have a true and sober respect for the ones that resonate with others.
