Strikes, protest and dilemmas

My socks are soaked through. My teeth chatter just a little. My mind whirs over a day that began at 6am and didn't really finish from the 1.30 am edit last night and the surreal sensation of group dynamism over the last two days. I have witnessed two days of protests in the last 48 hours.

Today it was UC Berkeley and the culmination of three days of strikes. As a graduate student there I cannot claim objectivity. Yet, as a journalist, I also feel uneasy chanting or screaming or 'participating'. To be present and to cover the news seems the best way to be useful.

And yet, what is my opinion?

Yes, I believe the university has been privatised.
Yes, I believe it is horrible that there is a fee hike of 32 percent for students from next January.
Yes, I hate that 38 janitors lost their jobs and that professors face furloughs.
Yes, I believe in the symbolism of a protest to tell the world that they cannot cut back on public education without people getting angry.
Yes, I believe that marches create solidarity and the beginnings of ideas, coalitions, imagination and power.

And yet, I believe strongly that protests cannot and will never be the only way to express discontent. Marching because we're annoyed at student fee hikes unless we look at it as part of something larger seems problematic. Yes, we're angry. We're all angry, but I feel sad and a little sickened that many people only come out on the street when it impacts them directly: why didn't this many students work harder earlier to prevent the privatisation of education? What can we do to make higher education in California truly public? -- it's going to require a lot more than just shouting and playing drums - important as that is. Why didn't we see these kinds of protests in these kinds of numbers against the Iraq war? What does it take for people to risk arrest, to risk losing out on their classes so they can make a point? What does it take for me to do so?

In a way it seemed to confirm something self-interested about people (not for those in the building or for many who were there, but for some of those who came to stand around and chant on the sides). And perhaps there is nothing wrong with being self-interested. We're all self-interested. I just wish we could all strive to reach beyond ourselves more. Because, the privatisation of this university began a long time ago - and although some people saw it - not enough people did enough about it then. I have only been here for three months, but I wonder if we've left it too late. And if we're striking at the wrong people. California cannot balance its budget. How can we push for change in Sacremento? Is striking here enough? Where do we go if we want real change as opposed to a chance to let off some steam?

Then there was the second protest yesterday, where the presence of the protest seemed to be a direct and proven way of getting rights. Yesterday hundreds of hospitality workers in downtown Oakland marched for a contract that gave them affordable health-care. Their demands were clear, the terms considered. And the company responsible defined. And yes, this was also a case of self-interest. But somehow, it seemed to be a clearer case in point. (but perhaps that is only because of my own lack of understanding of the whole thing).

Perhaps this is where journalism is a blessing. You can stand and not chant and talk to people and show interest, without ever having to take sides. That is part of your job. You are there to amplify other people's voices.

Or, if like me right now, your head is too tiered to make head or tail of it and all you want to do is curl up and sleep, once your post has been filed,you can do that - content that within the time frame hopefully you did all you could do. With that, dear readers, I climb my loft to sleep. I'll leave pondering to change the world til tomorrow.