On March 9, 2005, a group of San Francisco State University students occupied Jack Adams Hall during a career fair to protest the presence of armed forces recruiters. The students, organized by Students Against War (SAW) and International Socialist Organization (ISO), accused the recruiters of discrimination against homosexuals. They were successful in disrupting the entire fair by shouting military recruiters out of the building and off campus with a bull horn.

But the university, faced with the loss of $20 million in federal funds, threatened to bring disciplinary action and levy fines against individuals and groups who participated in the protest. The threats succeeded in dividing the coalition of student protesters, squashing a walkout planned for the next week.

It was a watershed moment for student activism at SF State, a far cry from the activism of students in 1968 who walked out of classes for five months, the longest student strike in U.S. history. It ousted two university presidents and in the end forced administration officials to meet students' “non-negotiable” demands.

What has happened between then and now? With an unpopular war raging and racial inequalities exposed by recent catastrophes like hurricane Katrina, parallels to the charged '60s atmosphere can be made today. Why are student protesters not as ready to sacrifice for change? Is collective activism by students on campus dead?

“Students seem a little more docile, if I may use that term," says Frank Sheehan, executive dean during the strike. "But I think probably because they're straining to get the job done, and get through school."

“You never knew what was going to happen,” says Helene Whitson, a librarian at SF State at the time of the historic demonstrations.

During the first week in October 1968, the Third World Liberation Front made five demands, which included establishing a school of ethnic studies with bachelor’s and master’s degree programs. George Murray, English instructor and Black Panther minister of education, called for a strike on November 6. Within a week, the Black Student Union’s Central Committee met and officially devised the strike and their 10 demands.

On what Robert Smith, SF State’s president during the strike, refers to as “bloody Wednesday,” November 13, 1968, a major confrontation erupted between students and police. Picketing faculty marched between the two groups to prevent more bloodshed. In the end, student groups claimed victory, establishing the College of Ethnic Studies.

“In the '60s, everybody was ready to throw down, but those tactics aren’t going to work today,” says Educational Opportunity Program (EOP) advisor Bobby Farlice, a student at SF State during the strike.

“The army was drafting 48,000 men a month. SF State was just part of really a global student movement,” he says. “You have to remember one thing; back in those days there was no tuition. You paid incidental fees; that was your student health, ID card and your activity fees. It was $45 and you bought books from the school. You could afford to."

Eric Solomon, president of the local American Federation of Teachers (AFT) during the strike, remembers the events leading up to the strike differently. Administration officials were trying to divert money from a $1 million Carnegie grant away from students who wanted to create their own official college within the University. In May of 1968, students occupied the old administration building for three days and three nights.

Solomon says the AFT went on strike in solidarity with the students. “We wanted to close the campus and we wanted the student strike to end with them being granted much of what they wanted,” he says.

Black Student Union member and current graduate student Derrick Washington says a number of factors account for the lack of activism: poor leadership by student organizations, the realities of living in a post 9/11 world, focus of students to hurry and get their degrees, and outright complacency. “Now what we have is a stealing of the legacy in the ‘60s,” Washington says. “Today our youth are into other things and there’s no larger movement to come grab us up in.”

The weight of administration power pressed upon campus organizations after the bull horn rally in Jack Adams exposed the fragility of political ties between student groups. This is another obstacle students of today must overcome.

Ethnic studies professor and SF State alumni Larry Salomon sees a disconnection between cultural awareness and political action. “I know a lot of the students in these organizations do stuff in the community off campus, and that’s a better measure of progress because campus issues are little issues. But when they get to the organizations, they’re mostly doing cultural celebrations during a specific week or they’re doing things that don’t really connect political issues to the campus and I think that’s a mistake. It doesn’t generate the potential for solidarity between groups,” he says.

But from defeat, SAW and ISO see new opportunities. The groups' actions and the subsequent retaliation of the administration garnered extensive press coverage. Michael Moore featured the groups on his Web site. SAW is organizing another confrontation with military recruiters.

“Across the rest of the nation, they have been cracking down on the anti-recruitment work because [the military] needs people,” says SAW member and international relations student, Kristin Lubbert, 20. “By getting the military off [the campus], it's causing a lot of problems. So I imagine this year, on [October] 26 or 27, they will face a lot of huge problems. But that's not going to stop us because it will mean we're defeated.”

SAW is putting to use the lessons learned from last year’s problems. “For the military recruitment protest, we're trying to prevent what happened last year where SAW and ISO got beat down for this. "We're going to try to take a united front into this next one,” Lubbert says.

They face reluctance from student groups who are afraid they will be targeted by the administration with sanctions. SAW already lost funds for this year. Some members are defending against unspecified charges leveled by the college.

“Many of my teachers have spoken about how we're lacking activism and we're lacking students that are actually taking an active role in trying to make a change for the better in the world. But this administration is making people afraid,” Lubbert said. “Like what happened last year, they didn't defend us as students in our actions.”

Ellen Griffin, director of public affairs and publications, says the university does protect student’s rights to free speech. “Those rights need to be exercised in the context of our mission – we can’t allow disruption of University programs or the educational mission.”
Michael Hoffman, who held the notorious bull horn at the March '05 rally and has become a mentor to new SAW members, believes a movement has begun.

“We’re just in a process of building our confidence. A lot of people agree that things really need to change fundamentally, but it’s about figuring out the best ways to do that,” he says. “Peoples’ ability to mobilize, to stop business as usual, to confront the problems in an open and public way; that’s really how we’re going to see positive change. I think it’s going to take a while, but the ideas are in place.”