On April 12, 2012 at the start of the annual Indiana University Board of Trustees meeting, a lone ringtone cut through the stiff decorum. With “Für Elise” still whining, flustered audience members dug into their suit jackets and purses to reassure that their cell phones were actually silenced.  At the front of the room board members continued unfazed by the faux pas.  Moments later another ringtone sliced through the gallery, eliciting the same reaction.

Initially, these tones seemed like an accidental sputtering, but within minutes, they became more frequent. The overlapping cellular noises soon created an intentional chorus of disruption that competed with the authority at the front of the room. This was not an accident or a slip of manners.  No, this was a rallying cry.  As students unleashed their ringtones, they signaled that on this day the Trustees would not be treated with unwarranted deference.  

Following the cell phones, a group of about twenty students rose to form a circle at the side of the room.  Next a student turned to the gallery and invited the seated crowd to join what he called a real meeting. He stated that instead of just listening, they too could be part of the decision making process. 

Fundamentally these students challenged the premise that the Trustees meeting could be open to the public, but at the same time prohibit public comment. Therefore, by asserting that students should not be excluded from discussion and decisions about student issues, the group formed a parallel meeting alongside the Trustees. 

For the next hour the Trustees and the student group played a sort of political chicken.  Juxtaposed were one meeting, radically democratic and accessible, and another, hierarchical and elite.  As the students raised their voices, employing the “human microphone,” the Trustees turned their own speakers up full blast.  As students aired grievances, the Trustees continued, heads down, fixed to the task of out-enduring the students.  It was as if, by acknowledging the demonstration, for at least one moment, the Trustees would be yielding the students some sort of credibility that the Board members were unwilling to relinquish.

Finally: After rearranging the room so that the chairs were in a circle to promote discussion.  After writing the number of a lawyer on their arms with Sharpie.  After assigning each other buddies for safety.  After taping dollar bills to their mouths suggesting they were silenced by money.  With police officers lining the hallway outside of the room.  With RTV6 poised to catch a story.  The students finally chose against civil disobedience and arrest.  Instead with one final surge they stated their grievance and marched out of the room. 

With the chant, “This is what democracy looks like.  Show me what democracy looks like,” the group established a list of grievances.  They stated, “We want investment in clean energy on campus, and the coal plant off.  We want a redistribution of power.  We want the Board of Trustees to pay attention to staff concerns.  We want affordable healthcare for all.  We want the Office of Women’s Affairs to remain open.  We want the de-privatization of food on our campus and more community gardens.  We want a real education on economics.  We want to do away with racist anti-immigration policies.  We want tuition to be affordable.  We want quality over efficiency.  We want to cut funding for the police force on campus.  We want public comment.  We want guns off of our campus.  We want horizontal education.  We want an end to the endemic sexual assault faced by women on our campus.”  Finally they exited chanting, “No democracy, no authority.” 

In April 2013 the Board of Trustees meeting will again be the focal point of student discontent.  Riding perceived momentum from a year ago, students now propose a universal strike at Indiana University on April 11 and 12.  Students, teachers, and staff members have been called on to stay home on those days.  In response to crushing student debt, rising tuition costs in relationship to total funding, the lack of minorities on campus, homophobia, the prevalence of date rape, the wages of staff, and the corporatization of education the campus will stop. 

While a year ago these students were effective at expressing their discontent, it remains to be seen whether students can advance a specific agenda.  Students who protest at IU are a minority group.  Often they are brushed aside and ridiculed.  Their adherence to Occupy inspired tactics and a radically democratic hierarchy often fail to resonate with rank and file student body.  Banners hung from Ballantine and noise demonstrations outside Woodburn are viewed as bizarre entertainment. 

However, just because student protest is a fringe segment of IU culture, the issues they propose are not theirs alone.  For starters, student debt and rising tuition are not niche concerns. Indeed, they affect the overwhelming majority of students on campus.  Instead of fixating on how IU basketball is rising in the rankings we should instead be incensed at rising student tuition.  Today, tuition comprises 51 percent of funding, while state funding is only 18 percent.  Given this rise we should feel the weight of our impending loans, especially considering the uncertain likelihood of being hired after graduation. Furthermore, we should feel both empowered that we have a say in this equation and compelled to hold the administration accountable.

The status quo is only a product of push and shove.  The students who have proposed this strike merely feel that it is time students again start shoving.  This spring, Indiana University will become the epicenter of the future of student and worker’s rights.  I sincerely hope that at the very least the strike will inspire IU students to think critically and to take part in a discussion the future of IU.  At the very least this movement has created the space for dissent and challenged traditional complacency. 

Further information about the campus strike including the specific demands can be found at this website:  iuonstrike.tumblr.com