This article was written before the occupation of the lecture block came to an end on Wednesday evening (02/03)

_{Juliette Guéron-Gabrielle}

The main argument against the occupation seems to be that it will not ‘get anything done’. Rather ironically, a movement protesting the power imbalance between the University and its workers is thus criticised on the grounds that it lacks power or effectiveness. However, if “getting something done” was easy, there would be no need for an occupation. If there was an easy fix to the downward spiral of wages, the cutting of pensions, or the lack of secure contracts, there would be no protests. If negotiation channels between the University and its workers were functional, or between departments and movements like Rename the Seeley library or Decolonise the Curriculum, there would be no protests either.

“The occupation itself is a space of continuous discussion, deliberation, and debate”

There is a protest precisely because it is hard to “get something done”. And “getting something done” about the working conditions of supervisors, PhD students, and university staff, is a moral imperative. The occupation itself is a space of continuous discussion, deliberation, and debate. It breaks with the Cambridge habit of separating spaces of learning and spaces of living. As opposed to most Cambridge socials, entry is free, and there is a zero-tolerance policy towards any form of prejudice. And unlike JCRs, political societies, and other debating spaces, it is non-hierarchical and open to all. This is a refreshing break from a University whose fascination with hierarchy and seniority is written into its traditions , from its ‘high tables’ to lawns only some can walk on to its student rooms balloted according to tripos results. The occupation is a welcoming place for all, a place where people can express themselves freely and engage with each other, all the while imagining an alternative way of living, and thinking, to the one upheld in the mainstream of society.

It is easier to be against the occupation than for it. It is more comfortable to mock it as utopian or revive the spectre of “communism” in attacks reminiscent of the American Red Scare than it is to engage with its ethos of communality, equality, and liberation. The occupation and the time and effort students have put into creating this haven of communality, debate, and free speech, far from university benches where politics is debated in the abstract and from a comfortable distance, demonstrates that what is most comfortable, in this case, is not what is right.

Freddie Poser

People may well know I don’t have a huge amount of time for this year’s round of strikes. I do – however – absolutely believe that every staff member has the right to strike and should do so if they feel it’s warranted. So-called ‘Solidarity College’ however, the ragtag group of students currently playing revolutionary in the Economics faculty, do not deserve our respect nor attention. They need to grow up and learn that petulantly disrupting their peers’ learning will not win them – or their lecturers – any battles.

“That a small group of students have unilaterally decided to inflict further chaos on lecture timetables smacks of pretentious privilege, not principled praxis”

Like most, I had a good laugh at the OG Solidarity College - 2020’s occupation of Old Schools (the University’s central office building). Sure, it was a bit weird, and some of the rooms smelt a bit, but who were they hurting blocking access to the council chamber or the big fellows coffee shop? But today is not 2020: the world, SolCol, and the student body have all moved on. This occupation isn’t stopping the University Administration Service from getting to their desks - it’s blocking access to one of the busiest lecture blocks across the University.

The student body has experienced over two years of disrupted learning, from both strikes and COVID. That a small group of students have unilaterally decided to inflict further chaos on lecture timetables smacks of pretentious privilege, not principled praxis. Economics and English lectures – finally back in person – were moved to zoom whilst Mathmo Marxists and Engling Engels play revolutionary in the temporarily-renamed ‘Angela Davis Building’.

This will do nothing to help lecturers and supervisors make progress on the important fights they are striking over. Complex issues of USS regulation will not be solved by a group of 19-year-olds who regret missing 1968. Structural finance issues in the UK higher education sector will still be there once Faculty Freidrich vacate. The scheduled learning of their peers, however, will be lost.

These words will, of course, fall on deaf ears. These students aren’t interested in the difficult work of solving difficult problems. They want to sloganeer their way through University, winning social cachet for co-opting the struggles of others under the guise of solidarity. We shouldn’t ‘support the occupation’ but instead, demand better than cheap demagogy.