[857] in Discussion of MIT-community interests
Re: Discuss Mandatory Dining at the UA Town Hall Meeting Tonight
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Niko Suave)
Wed Oct 3 18:39:56 2001
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0110031623310.19520-100000@sub-zero.mit.edu>
Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001 17:11:01 -0400
Reply-To: "Documentation at http://web.mit.edu/beland/talk/talk.html"
<MIT-Talk@MIT.EDU>, Niko Suave <niko@ALUM.MIT.EDU>
From: Niko Suave <niko@ALUM.MIT.EDU>
To: MIT-Talk@MIT.EDU
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0110031610200.19520-100000@sub-zero.mit.edu>
I apologize for sending such a short, flippant e-mail. Let me provide
a few more details about what I mean.
I was part of the relatively short-lived MIT Choice effort. Besides
being about a year or two too late (I don't even remember when we were
doing this anymore), MIT Choice had a few other fundamental flaws that
I didn't realize until now. What makes me sad is that I see those
same flaws coming up again and again in attempts by students to block
the administration.
In a word, we believed too much in the good faith of the administration.
We let them run us in circles. The administration is good at waiting; it
knows that the students at mit have a lot on their minds. They know
that we've got tests and problem sets, and that every minute they spend
talking to us and debating with us is one less minute we have to work on
that; they know that that fact brings us one minute closer to the breaking
point.
The problem with MIT protest is that it's always civilized; it's always
reasonable; it always ends on time. People always go home and finish up
their work and view the protest is closed. It can't be that way.
We may be able to win a fight about the dot*, and we will almost certainly
win concessions on this issue, just as we won a few concessions on the housing
issue. If MIT students want the administration to get the idea that they
are not to be ignored in the future, they have to demonstrate that they
are not ignoreable! Ultimately, the administration knows that when all is
said and done, we will make noise and then stop. We need to NOT stop; we need
to make them rue the day they crossed such clever, vindictive individuals.
God could I go on about this, and other speculation on the fate of
student protest at mit. Suffice to say that I think simply being
reasonable is not enough. I also think that MIT Administrators are very
smart and dedicated people. I think they, like us, are working for a better
MIT: I just think that their vision of what a better MIT is differs
drastically from ours, and that this schism will always frustrate understanding
between the two groups.
niko
* - note: the fight on the dot was the one fight at MIT that I have seen
the students simply rise up and get in the way. People went there, and
they didn't leave. And the administration essentially caved.
On Wed, 3 Oct 2001, Niko Suave wrote:
> > > Chancellor Clay is expected to attend the meeting tonight, in 10-250,
> > > beginning at 7:15pm. Students should also attend, and attend angry.
> >
> > Where "angry" == "with well-reasoned arguments for why this is a bad
> > idea", right?
>
> what makes you think a well-reasoned argument will get listened to?
> it takes both kinds. most change happens as a result of drastic
> action.
>
>
> niko, who's seen several years of well reasoned arguments get completely ignored
>
> p.s., wow this e-mail is going to a lot of lists.
>
