Tuesday, November 16, 2010

But What About the Proletariat?

I think that this letter is pretty silly. With that out of the way, here is the open letter from Berkeley Law Organizing Committee (BLOC) to Dean Edley:
No More Futile Discussion With Administrators. Action. Disruption. Reclamation.

Dear Dean Edley,

We sincerely hope that in the moments leading up to tomorrow's UC Regents meeting, you took time to pause and consider the real human impact of the Law School's privatization program. Before we came to Boalt, we considered ourselves to be human beings and were attracted to this school in our capacity as such. Now we know that everything we were told about Boalt is an empty promise and that we are in fact nothing more than biological collateral for federal loan dollars being spilled into ill-conceived expansion projects that have little to do with the quality of our or anyone else's education.

As you write to invite us to another Student Town Hall, we submit that our participation within this institution is now, just as it has been, barely a courteous formality. The one hour meeting offered by the law-school administration, we are told, provides “an opportunity for the community to discuss the overall state of the law school as well as student fees.” At least you are honest enough to concede that nothing we say at the Town Hall will have any effect on how the law school is actually run.

There is nothing to ‘discuss’. If privatization is a certainty, then so is insurmountable student debt, the evisceration of workers’ rights, the subordination of human need to the logic of the market. This is a future we will not accept. Privatization in an economy with rapidly decreasing real wages and insurmountable loan debt is guaranteed student death. We refuse to die. Since the administration has already implemented its project of privatization, our only choice is to halt its progress and work to destroy the process itself. So on November 16 and 17, 2010 we will.

We do appreciate that you are taking the time to tell us ‘how it has to be.’ Yes, we are told, fees have to go up, workers are going to be laid off, and financial aid, a full 50% of it in most cases, must be reduced to fund Capital Projects, the bloated salaries of the rapidly-expanding administrative class, and all the other expenses associated with transforming public education into a branded commodity. Privatization, you never forget to tell us, is not a choice but a certainty.

As you pressure the Regents to approve ever more draconian wealth-extraction policies to fund pet capital projects, please remember that the party will not last forever and that the financial numbers along with public policy are most assuredly going to catch up with public university administrators everywhere. While we know that your lofty salary will permit you to retire well before you have to face any real accountability, our only hope is that your legacy reflects as much as you deserve. We will be sure to think of Boalt every time we make a monthly student loan payment on a public interest salary that we fully expect will only decrease in real terms over the coming decades. For a little background on why we think what we do, please consider two things: 1) that the LRAP program produces the highest benefits for those with the least amount of debt (thus those with the most means) and is increasingly relying on speculative federal subsidies despite gargantuan increases in law school revenue, and 2) this informative letter by Prof. Bob Meister: http://www.cucfa.org/news/2010_nov15.php.

Regardless, our fates as current students are sealed and no platitudes about a “public mission” or “public interest” will dissolve the ridiculous debt that the vast majority of us will labor under for the next 25 years. When state capitalism collapses, we would dance on the ashes of this inane privatization project, but there is every indication that we will be taken down along with the rest.

Students! Stop the fee increases by shutting down the administration and the Regents! Enough is enough! We will see you at California Hall -- Tuesday, 6:30AM; & Noon Rally. We will see you at the Regents’ meeting; Wednesday 8:00AM, UCSF Mission Bay Campus.

Berkeley Law Organizing Committee (BLOC)
This letter employs quite a bit of inflammatory rhetoric. I guess the biggest gap I see in BLOC's reasoning is that it makes sense that law school fees would increase due to the over saturation of the legal market with lawyers. In a normal world, that price increase would reduce demand for legal education, and then go on to remedy the overproduction of lawyers.

I am sure you denizens of Nuts & Boalts have your own opinions an analysis; post them in the comments!

Labels: ,

49 Comments:

Blogger Slam Master A said...

Did they not even sign it? This letter is really no more effective than an anonymous comment on a blog (not that a comment by a named author is particularly effective at accomplishing anything). But honestly, if these people think they want to make a point, sack up and put your name to it.

11/16/2010 12:40 PM  
Blogger Armen Adzhemyan said...

Slam Master, individuality is a distinct feature of state capitalism.

11/16/2010 12:44 PM  
Blogger Dan said...

I think this letter makes some decent points and expresses legitimate frustration. Unfortunately, all that gets buried under laughable rhetoric too typical of protest groups. This is why you need an editor.

11/16/2010 12:55 PM  
Blogger Carbolic said...

1. Do the authors think anyone will take them seriously from the second sentence onwards? And do we know that the author(s) actually are Boalt students?

2. I simply don't understand the third and fifth paragraphs. What kind of accountability are they talking about? Trials? Violence? A socialist workers' revolution? Um, more silly letters?

3. Hahaha--tuition is called "wealth-extraction policies." You know who else has wealth-extraction policies I don't like? Chipotle. Especially since a veggie burrito costs nearly the same as one with chicken.

11/16/2010 1:28 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yeahhh... I'm not happy right now, but I still believe myself to be a human being.

11/16/2010 1:36 PM  
Blogger Carbolic said...

Hey Dan--Which are the letter's decent points?

- Private school students aren't human?
- Privatization causes student death? (But they refuse to die!)
- Some kind of process should be destroyed at 6:30 am?
- Capital investments are draconian wealth-extraction policies?
- State capitalism will inevitably collapse (because California would otherwise be in robust health)?
- Students should be able to run up massive debts and then have someone else pay it?

11/16/2010 1:39 PM  
Blogger Dan said...

Oh, there are a few. Aside from the general sense of frustration over fee hikes amidst a diminishing job market, I find the following truths:

-Nothing we say at the Town Hall will have any effect on how the law school is actually run.

-We will be sure to think of Boalt every time we make a monthly student loan payment on a public interest salary that we fully expect will only decrease in real terms over the coming decades.

-Regardless, our fates as current students are sealed and no platitudes about a “public mission” or “public interest” will dissolve the ridiculous debt that the vast majority of us will labor under for the next 25 years.

Other than that, it's hard to find full setences that aren't polluted by masturbatory insurrectionist rhetoric, but you do get the general sense that students are running out of options--and that's no lie.

11/16/2010 2:07 PM  
Blogger Carbolic said...

DE has always been honest that he/the regents/basic economic realities will decide the direction of the law school. And it's not like Berkeley Law is responsible for stagnating public interest salaries.

By "us," do you mean Boalt students generally or only those who expect to participate in the LRAP?

11/16/2010 2:21 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey Carbolic, not Dan, but heck!, lets go through your points:

1. it seems like “student death” refers not to any individuals dying, but to the end of our traditional conception of students here: individuals who pay manageable fees for an education which will more than enable them to pay back those fees and make decent living wages, without this being the major focus of their post-school lives. This may not be totally obvious, but surely you didn’t actually think it referred to literal death, right?

2. Meetings at 6:30am and other times refer to the process of meeting and considerations supposedly taking place today and tomorrow, Edley’s townhall, regents in sacramento, UCB administrators. These processes are really the formal meetings to ratify policies that have already been set in stone, prior to their announcement for “student input”

3. Capital investments, if done through further “extraction” of our money through fee/tuition increases, can be described literally, true to the definition of the terms, as wealth-extraction policies. Why would you have a problem with a literal reading? You didn’t seem to mind employing such a reading regarding “student death” above…

4. You don’t think state capitalism will ever collapse? Ever? It is inevitable, if only for rising probability with time.

5. No. The letter didn’t claim this point. I think what you misread is one of the larger themes of the letter: that there is a certain institutional integrity lacking, whether there was small print or emailed announcements or townhalls scheduled to coincide with protests, in continually raising fees for purposes unrelated to gains for the paying students, after same students have make a hefty financial commitment to continued attendance, as well as operating an institution that will financially obligate students into payments well into the majority of the remainder of their lives.
Gosh though, we at boalt really appreciate your coming out to bash the only student comment in writing, as far as I’ve seen, to even discuss the fees. Your constructive feedback is likewise noted

11/16/2010 2:26 PM  
Blogger Armen Adzhemyan said...

Hi BLOC!!!

11/16/2010 2:29 PM  
Blogger Carbolic said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

11/16/2010 3:01 PM  
Blogger Carbolic said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

11/16/2010 3:01 PM  
Blogger Carbolic said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

11/16/2010 3:01 PM  
Blogger Dan said...

Shit, somebody cloned Carbolic!

Carbolic, I'll leave it to you and Anon to debate these issues (and I give it 8 comments before the word "douchebag" is used).

As for you and I, I think our fundamental disagreement stems from your rosy view of a job market that keeps shitting and getting a legal all over me. You benefited by graduating a little ahead of the shitstorm, but the reality for me and most students still at Boalt is that we will NOT get high paying firm jobs. Not now, and probably not for years. Oh, sure, some of us might be able to be successful enough to claw our way up in time to pay off our debt before it cripples us, but who knows? For now, we are facing a very different world from the one you inhabit. A little perspective would be nice.

11/16/2010 3:14 PM  
Blogger Carbolic said...

1. I honestly had no idea of what "student death" meant. Hyperbole should at least be understandable! Anyway, I don't agree that Boalt students will be forever unable to pay down their debts.

Look, the kind of education offered by Berkeley--with a low student-faculty ratio and lots of seminars--is expensive. Fortunately, it's often rewarded with a high-paying job. (Not right now, but he economy is improving; those jobs will be back soon.)

You can pay off HLS-level debt by working at a firm for about 2 years, if you're serious about it. I see nothing wrong with doing so before devoting the whole rest of your career to the public interest. You can be both idealistic and financially responsible--how about that!

2. So I guess the process won't be destroyed after all.

3. Oh, I read the term literally. Chipotle also has a wealth-extraction policy. They extract (my) wealth in exchange for burritos. Don't you agree?

4. I don't know what you mean by "state capitalism" or the alternative. The California fisc is collapsing because of (1) a bad economy and (2) Prop 13 and all the other referendums that constrict the state's ability to collect and allocate revenue.

5. So I guess capital investments and hiring new faculty don't benefit students. Does DE run a construction company I don't know about? If Berkeley students don't benefit from the law school preserving its position as one of the best in the country, then why are they there in the first place? They should have taken their scholarships to Golden Gate.

6. I'm happy to provide constructive feedback, both now and in the future.

11/16/2010 3:17 PM  
Blogger Dan said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

11/16/2010 3:25 PM  
Blogger Carbolic said...

Sorry, technical problems.

I agree that I lucked out and graduated at the right time. I know it sucks right now, especially for current students. But frankly, I don't expect ITE to last more than 1-2 years. Certainly not the rest of your career. Those jobs will come back; you just have to hang on for now.

In the meantime, there's no practical way to make an expensive legal education suddenly cheaper, especially when the public subsidization falls through. Unless we fire 1/2 the professors and go back to only having 130-person, bar-subject lectures.

11/16/2010 3:32 PM  
Blogger Dan said...

I don't disagree on any particular point. I worry, however, that even if the market comes levels out in a couple of years, it will be too late for many of us who have fallen into this gap. When firms start hiring again (as some are beginning to do), they will do so first from their summer classes, then from the ranks of unemployed lawyers with biglaw experience, then from unemployed lawyers with ANY experience. Those of us graduating soon or recently are at the very bottom of the list, and our resumes will only become less impressive with time.

I think the best case scenario for us is to find some job--any job--and try to claw our way up from there. That process, unfortunately, will take a long longer than a couple of years.

11/16/2010 4:23 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Actually I don't find line after the second line that hard to take. It's true that from being about education of the California community (which did underlie the formation of this school, and is the basis for its land grant, right?), the university's priorities have shifted to capital investment projects, as well as speculation (with a pretty poor rate of return).

And it's "wealth-extraction" because the exchange part of the payment process (unlike chipotle) is broken. Because the costs go up and up and what you get for it is receding into the distance. People are being surprisingly sanguine about their debt load and the unemployment or underemployement they face coming out of Boalt. I's breakdown of the bargain that makes it wealth-extraction. Also the breakdown of any relationship between what you pay and what you get, not just at the end - but because all along fees have so little to do with the cost of educating you - they mostly go for the aforementioned projects and bad deals. Bob Samuels and Bob Meister talk about this w/r/t undergraduate fees, but I don't doubt it's happening at the law school too.

11/16/2010 5:09 PM  
Blogger Carbolic said...

You may not think so, but I bet most people would give little credence to anything you say after reading your second and third sentences. Assuming they bothered to continue reading at all.

New research centers. More classrooms. Seminar rooms (which we didn't have until a few years ago). New faculty offices (without which you can't expand the faculty). An expanded library space. More carrels and work areas. Office space for journals and student organizations.

All these capital improvements were absolutely necessary to provide new research areas, a broader and stronger range of specializations, a diverse range of classes, and a strong and accessible faculty. And I'm not even talking about the joy of trying to focus in class while sitting on a broken spike chair.

As a result of this investment, Berkeley Law students are getting a significantly better and broader education. They have greater opportunities to focus their studies and build their careers. Berkeley's reputation has not only stopped its decline (which was the reason DE was hired in the first place), but is at it's strongest point in its history.

I think it's notable that the letter and comments are big on rhetoric and abstract accusations, but has very little to say about Boalt in particular and the education it is providing.

11/16/2010 5:53 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Who cares about the education when your job opportunities pay minimum wage?

11/16/2010 6:20 PM  
Blogger McTwo said...

Boalt is a Law School, not a magical job factory.

11/16/2010 7:26 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

But I was promised jobs! Magical dream job jobs!

11/16/2010 7:27 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Rise up fellow students, Rise up! Now is the time for becoming aware of our struggle for awareness of struggling with awareness. Counting down the days with me until we can scavenge the earth for it's fruits, and also old cans that people have left. Rise up! Rise up! Hope for a time where we live in little huts made of the earth! Fear not, I have enough money in my trust fund to help fund us, or at least to get us enough weed to write another letter. Join me in my descent into silliness! (ps, let's keep our names secret 'cuz it's fun!)

11/16/2010 10:06 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

yo Carbolic, "a significantly better and broader education" really? from a few years ago? significantly? are you actually trying to shift the terms of this discussion to claiming that we are CURRENTLY reaping the benefits? with the on-going construction? and the economy/job situation? and the bulk of the fee increases occurring during our 3 years here?

not that i've agreed with you so far (you are, actually, the one for whom i find the urge to cease taking seriously after the first 1-2 sentences), but this, above, is a poor argumentative maneuver for you.

now i'd just like to give a couple of shout-outs:
mctwo, you do realize that the side of this discussion you have apparently entered on is simultaneously insinuating that boalt is a professional school geared towards professional careers and thus we need to keep in mind how these changes benefit that goal, while also (with your addition) claiming that boalt is a law school, for the learning of law, not a job factory. its contradictory in its implications

and to the poster above: your post failed to be humorous. did you attempt to make a point at the end though, about anonymity? besides the obvious hypocrisy, you are also committing the fallacy (i suspect neither the first nor last we'll see of it) of criticizing the validity of an argument through comment on its author/identity

11/16/2010 10:37 PM  
Anonymous Publius said...

I assume that the letter was published anonymously to avoid ad hominem attacks, which seems like a well founded fear in light of the considerable attention devoted to the irrelevant issue of the letter's authorship. Nuts & Boalts should publish a resource guide that explains what forms of public speech are acceptable, and which ones are no longer part of the nation's long public traditions. This sort of information is much needed.

11/16/2010 11:32 PM  
Anonymous Berkeley Law Organizing Com. said...

i want the taxpayers to pay for me to be a guilt- and debt-free public interest lawyer. is it really too much to ask for me to attend a top professional school for free? i mean, come on, i'm really pious.

11/16/2010 11:41 PM  
Blogger Jackie O said...

Hmmm I'm going to disagree strongly with 10:37 and advocate that 10:06's post was really, very, quite humorous.

BLOC could really use a lesson in pragmatism and effectiveness. I probably agree with some of their positions, but it's really hard to sift through all their bullshit. What is the best method to accomplish what you want, BLOC? Is it this letter? Really?

11/16/2010 11:55 PM  
Blogger Slam Master A said...

Publius = best name for a poster yet. I am ashamed to have not thought of it.

11/17/2010 8:19 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Publius isn't an original handle. John Blevins was a great blogger when he was at it though.

And more on the subject, this BLOC letter is a prank, right?

11/17/2010 9:45 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

BLOC = The Gun Club

11/17/2010 10:21 AM  
Blogger McTwo said...

My point, 10:37, is not that jobs are unimportant, but rather Boalt is not to blame for the general lack of jobs since it is not the magical factory which creates them. Saying Boalt is a law school is to say it prepares people to enter the practice of law, but does not ensure that there is law to be practiced. Does not seem contradictory to me. The school has to charge tuition to fund teaching law, whether or not the job market is strong.

11/17/2010 1:22 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

We have the worst OCI placement of any top14 school other than maybe Gtown. Boalt may not be to blame for lack of jobs, but what about its weak placement compared to its "peer schools".

11/17/2010 2:03 PM  
Blogger Armen Adzhemyan said...

2:03, that's a very serious statement, and if I had to guess an inaccurate one. What is it based on?

11/17/2010 2:08 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well Armen, 2:03 didn't get a job. Therefore someone ELSE must have gotten them all. Must be one of those pricks from Northwestern or Vanderbilt stealing all the jobs in SF.

11/17/2010 3:13 PM  
Anonymous Publius said...

I think Publius is a reference to the Federalist Papers, which were published anonymously under the pseudonym Publius.

11/17/2010 3:52 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Vanderbilt isn't T14, dick.

11/17/2010 3:54 PM  
Blogger Patrick Bageant said...

Yippee! An opportunity to displace my bar anxiety by griping about language!

Yes, people say the Federalist Papers were written anonymously, by various authors, under the name Publis. But that is the wrong use of the word. "Anonymous” means 'not-named' which is to say “having no known name or identity or known source.” Publis does have a name. And it’s known.

What people mean, I think, is that the Federalist papers were written *pseudonymously* by various authors, under the *pseudonym* Publis. A pseudonym is a fictitious name used by a person, or sometimes, a group. I.e., by the Hamilton, Madison, and Jay, in writing the Federalist Papers.

/rant

11/17/2010 4:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's a fallacy to paint this in terms of now private/once public. You'd have to go back to pre-WWII to find a Cal that wasn't swimming in private research funding.

Even at $30k, this education could hardly be considered "more public" than it is at $44k.

This is actually a middle class protest, which is interesting- students from the poorest backgrounds receive size able grants (especially recognized minorities) and, as has been stated, the wealthy can pay for it.

It's a mistake to try and rope in a legitimate worker's struggle with the issue of fees. Resistance to fees is actively hurting workers. I know you'll respond by pointing to administrator salaries, but all three of these things are connected.

Again, I want to ask BLOC why they came to Boalt and didn't take sizeable grants from any of the other UC law schools?

Advanced capitalism is certainly not the end point of human history, but fighting the fight of the middle class certainly won't build substantial change. It's sad that this is the issue BLOC gets the most passionate about.

Someone needs to proofread your shit.

11/17/2010 4:07 PM  
Blogger tyler said...

4:07, I think those of us that have been trying to engage BLOC on the substance of the local issues or point out fallacies in their logic are barking up the wrong tree. Was Cal really "public" until now? Why should we lay off more workers or wealth extract more from taxpayers to help law students?

Irrelevant. This letter isn’t about capital investment, any more than their “strike” last year was about layoffs. It’s about The Longing for Total Revolution. Sure, BLOC would say you can't separate the local from the global, because the breezy “everything is connected!” logic of the Leftism they represent means an innocent student town hall meeting is always just a few subordinate clauses away from the fundamental ailment of modern society: “If privatization is a certainty, then so is insurmountable student debt, the evisceration of workers’ rights, the subordination of human need to the logic of the market.” But I think what really gets them out of bed in the morning isn't Dean Edley, but their hatred of the System, of the Way the Whole World Works.

I get the Longing sometimes too. I guess whenever I do though I always get hung up by some old bourgeious scruples, start thinking about how complex stuff is, about how I've never really understood how tangible people can get crushed by an abstract noun like "the market," about stories I heard in Guatemala or Afghanistan, about the humility of Burke and Hayek, their doubts about the ability of a rational revolutionary to improve on an organic social organization that is beyond the comprehension of a single mind, whatever. In the end something usually comes up that busies me with participating in our society rather than trying to overthrow it. And the Longing goes away.

BLOC, maybe you'll dance on my ashes someday.

11/18/2010 10:14 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Tyler = pwnasaurus rex.

11/18/2010 10:30 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

pwntang

11/18/2010 12:02 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

pretty pretty pwny

11/18/2010 12:24 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Zorro and his trusty sidekick Pwnto.

11/18/2010 6:06 PM  
Anonymous JR said...

Of course, the indefatigable CHEZ PWNISSE

11/18/2010 6:59 PM  
Blogger Dan said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

11/19/2010 12:43 AM  
Blogger Dan said...

pwnky brewster

11/19/2010 12:44 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

that was a cute little pwn circlejerk, all, but nobody seemed to have any response to 10:37's point that:
- the administration argues that tuition increases aren't a problem because people who graduate boalt get great jobs that pay so much! stop whining! (see DE's townhall post above for an example of this)
- fewer and fewer students are actually getting these high-paying jobs.

what 10:37 seemed to be saying was that the latter never seems to make people reconsider the former. instead, it makes them spout jagoff lines about how the school isn't a job factory and pat each other on the back over overwrought, poorly written parodies of the bloc email.

it's just as easy to mock atlas shrugged as it is to mock das kapital (and more justified), but i assume the fact that you don't see many people in the comments doing it indicates that they find it more productive to actually discuss the topic at hand than demean the other side's perceived library records. you guys almost don't seem to notice that the latter activity is gauche and suggests (to those of us approaching the discussion from outside your buddysphere) some kind of insecurity-driven need to demean those who disagree.

now i'm going to drive my fuel-inefficient car to ikea and exchange money for goods made by kid laborers somewhere without access to clean water, so you can skip the ad hominem retorts about whatever motivations or characteristics of mine you presume to know based on whether or not i laughed at the mediocre parodies of misguided earnest kids in these comments. (i will accept jokes about runon sentences)

11/20/2010 4:17 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

4:17 here. other worthwhile topics of discussion which occurred to me while pooping:
- DE mentioned that an increasingly large portion of tuition is going towards LRAP. this is contributing to tuition increases, which means that the amount of money necessary to fund LRAP is increasing as well. combined with the fact that the awful job market is driving an increasing number of students to jobs that pay so little that they depend upon LRAP to pay back their loans, is there anything to control spiraling LRAP costs? other than default on existing LRAP obligations?
- not boalt-specific: the state reduced university funding in 2008-2009 to the tune of $600 million. over the same period, UC investments lost over $23 billion. has the UC system made any changes to its investment strategy? i'm no i-banker, but my 401(k) lost money for two quarters around the crash before it started recovering, and i'm young enough to be invested in risky funds. should this public school system move to safer investments? should they look into some form of insurance or hedging? should they fire whoever was managing their investments for the past two years? have they done any of this already?
- assuming you DO get a job at a firm paying $150K a year, how in the fuck does carbolic imagine that you can pay off $120K of debt in two years? subtract taxes, modest retirement savings, health insurance, and reasonable food and rent costs. follow-up question: where does carbolic get that nasty shit he obviously smoked?

11/20/2010 4:42 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home