Students for a Democratic Society Reborn

Students for a Democratic Society (SDS), the left-wing American student activist organization made famous in the 1960s, has been revived. In an interview on an anarchist website, SDS organizer Patrick Korte explains that the new Students for a Democratic Society is meant to be a student-centered organization that is nonetheless open to non-students:

"Over the years, many students have been shafted in the American Left, and we believe it is necessary for students to lead their own organization and to determine the direction of their own movement without isolating themselves from the non-student Left.... The reason we chose to keep the name SDS is because it accurately describes us (we are students for a democratic society), the ideas expressed in the Port Huron Statement, the focus on participatory democracy, and the militancy and radicalism that defined the original SDS are much needed in the 21st century."

As the SDS Wikipedia article indicates, Students for a Democratic Society played a preeminent role in fostering student activism in the 1960s. Areas of concern included civil rights, the Vietnam War, free speech on university campuses, and democratizing academia. However, this organizing work largely took place outside the American student unions. Indeed, SDS didn't think much of them. The Port Huron Statement, the founding document of SDS, described student unions thusly:

"But apathy [among American university students] is not simply an attitude; it is a product of social institutions, and of the structure and organization of higher education itself. The extracurricular life is ordered according to in loco parentis theory, which ratifies the Administration as the moral guardian of the young. The accompanying "let's pretend" theory of student extracurricular affairs validates student government as a training center for those who want to spend their lives in political pretense, and discourages initiative from more articulate, honest, and sensitive students. The bounds and style of controversy are delimited before controversy begins. The university "prepares" the student for "citizenship" through perpetual rehearsals and, usually, through emasculation of what creative spirit there is in the individual." [emphasis added]

SDS had good reason for such a dim view of American student unions - to this day, many of them have little autonomy from their administrations. Consider for example, the University of Florida Student Government. Their Constitution (Article III, Section 8 (c) and (d) to be precise) specifies that any bill passed by the Student Senate may be vetoed by the Student Body President or by the President of the University! Talk about student power....

Canadian student unions may be more autonomous of their institutions, but they are nonetheless quite distinct from groups such as Students for a Democratic Society. A student union's membership consists of all students, regardless of political affiliation, whereas student activist groups such as SDS are controlled solely by those who agree with 'the cause.' A student union executive that sees itself as a kind of vanguard will eventually find itself replaced - witness the victory of "Evolution, Not Revolution" in the 2003 Concordia Students' Union elections following a year of radicalism.

(Hat tip: Caelie Frampton)