Opinion: Consider activism as a vital element of free speech

Activism exists to challenge the status quo, systems of oppression and complacency. It raises uncomfortable questions about community values and the history of its institutions. And it empowers populations whose concerns are well-founded but overlooked.

Dismissing activism as a constructive form of political speech is ignorant to the history and future of the University and its town.

At the administration’s Town Hall meeting on race and inclusion, black activists came forward with a list of demands. They overpowered the moderator, a befuddled columnist with no obvious connection to UNC and made headlines in regional media. They accomplished their goal of being heard.

Regardless of the individual demands’ merits, the fact they exist indicates a culture of activism at UNC that is alive and well. The activism behind the demands honors the forebears of this University’s progressive movements, as well as the slaves who built parts of this campus in its first century.

Many black folks on this campus have made their concerns clear. In past weeks, black students have organized to protest racism at UNC. They mentioned the administration’s inaction at the Confederate rally. They decried the Board of Trustees half-measure in naming Carolina Hall.

The University’s administration cannot expect black students to be silent when people wielding the Confederate battle flag show up to rally on campus. The Confederate sympathizers have a right to assemble, and black students have a right to not be terrorized at the university they pay to attend.

Yet The Carolina Review’s blog charges that these activists are “a small minority of students terrorizing this campus that like to cry and make a scene when they aren’t given what they want.”

We suppose the same charge could be levied against the College Republicans in their support of a Review writer who lobbied the administration to denounce a perfectly legitimate class covering the literature of 9/11.

But this board did not condemn the writer or his counterparts for their form of activism. We condemned their idea. There is nothing inherently wrong with activism.

When the politically inclined have exhausted all other avenues of free speech, they turn to making themselves heard through protest.

It happened in the 1960s when Chapel Hill High School students staged sit-ins at the town’s segregated lunch counters. It happened in the 1980s when the Anti-Apartheid Support Group erected shanties in front of South Building, prompting the divestment of the University endowment from companies operating in South Africa.

One of the most valiant parts of activism is its concentration on representing and advocating for the marginalized. The activists behind this latest list of demands focus on advocating for enhanced opportunities for low-income students, those priced out of Chapel Hill and Carrboro’s gentrifying neighborhoods and student athletes.

Those who decry activism as a form of speech are often the beneficiaries to the systems of oppression. If you have a problem with the demands of activists, address the demands. But our community cannot decry the act of peaceful, non-violent direct action given its roots in the Bill of Rights this country is built on.