BBC HQ occupied in Scotland

[Dissident Junk]

So?

A fair number of these occupiers in one situation are not even students full stop, never mind of the institution in question.

The case I know about, the "occupation" was carried out by a group of older militant protestors, typical swappy types, who walked into a university office building, into staff offices, were rude and awkward, and then refused to leave the building.

Because of this, and because they are not students of the university but members of the public, the entire building has had to be cleared of staff as their presence and actions constitute a security risk.

All that, to me, is not a 'student occupation' at all. It is a group of politicised members of the public walking into a non-public building and taking it over.

You can't just do that. It's akin to a group of militants just walking into a comprehensive school and refusing to leave, so the building has to be evacuated of kids and teachers and they can't return until the "occupiers" decide to leave.

It's one thing when you are connected to the institution in some way -- you work for it, or you pay it for a service, or you are a registered member -- but another when you have bugger all tie to it.

 

[In Bloom]

A fair number of these occupiers in one situation are not even students full stop, never mind of the institution in question.

The case I know about, the "occupation" was carried out by a group of older militant protestors, typical swappy types, who walked into a university office building, into staff offices, were rude and awkward, and then refused to leave the building.

Because of this, and because they are not students of the university but members of the public, the entire building has had to be cleared of staff as their presence and actions constitute a security risk.

All that, to me, is not a 'student occupation' at all. It is a group of politicised members of the public walking into a non-public building and taking it over.

You can't just do that. It's akin to a group of militants just walking into a comprehensive school and refusing to leave, so the building has to be evacuated of kids and teachers and they can't return until the "occupiers" decide to leave.

It's one thing when you are connected to the institution in some way -- you work for it, or you pay it for a service, or you are a registered member -- but another when you have bugger all tie to it.

Well without knowing which example you're referring to, it's hard for me to know if what you're saying is true. However, in my experience, having spoken to the people involved in a few of these occupations, they have been largely initiated by students, with some non-student supporters. Regardless, if a university invests in the arms trade, it's a legitimate target for direct action, from inside or outside.

The comprehensive school example is just fucking silly, and you know it.

 

[Dissident Junk]

Well without knowing which example you're referring to, it's hard for me to know if what you're saying is true. However, in my experience, having spoken to the people involved in a few of these occupations, they have been largely initiated by students, with some non-student supporters. Regardless, if a university invests in the arms trade, it's a legitimate target for direct action, from inside or outside.

The comprehensive school example is just fucking silly, and you know it.

No, not really.

I am talking about educational institution buildings where 18 year olds -- ie. who left secondary school a year ago -- are taught, where they have a right to expect their personal safety is paramount.

For a group that consists of members of the general public to walk into such a building and take it over, to my mind, is extremely awkward. Particularly when said members of that group are obviously not students or staff, and the client base that uses that building for educational purposes are largely teenagers. It does pose a lot of wider awkward questions about security: for example, if a number of private citizens can occupy a university building, then what is to stop other individuals, who may not have such lofty reasons, from doing the same?

I guess I could come at this from a very different angle to you because I have been exposed to some of the ongoing concerns about open campuses and security of staff and students. Unlike other buildings -- a member of the public can't just wander around a school, an office block or a council department office corridor -- most universities are very accessible to almost anyone who wishes to enter, they can have the accessibility of public space, but the people within them do not always take the same precautions they would in public space because they perceive the building to be private.

It is this element of involved parties that are not part of the university community that bothers me. Had they all been students, I would not have a problem at all.