Rebels Without Applause

Suppose you had a revolution and nobody came? Or worse, suppose you had a revolution that nobody wanted, which is a better fit for students' rejection of the Progressive Undergraduate Council Coalition. Viewed from the vantage point of most "political parties," the Coalition known as PUCC made a respectable showing, fielding 51 candidates in the Undergraduate Council elections and claiming 31 seats.

However, this is Harvard, where the only thing easier than winning election to the council is gaining admission to the Grille. PUCC candidates fared noticeably worse in the general elections than students who boasted of little more than service in their high school government (69% of non-PUCC candidates won, compared to 60% of PUCC). Even more telling, three of PUCC's organizers were soundly defeated in their house elections.

The easy reply is that students did not reject PUCC in itself. In their disdain for the council, students remained ignorant of PUCC's activities and simply voted for the guy on their 1-M team. But this theory ignores the fact that two PUCC leaders lost races that were harder to lose than to win, where students chose five out of six or seven candidates.

PUCC campaigned on a platform of progressive political action and set out to mobilize students in support of the council, yet it failed to even drum up support for its platform. If PUCC is to remain a viable movement to reform the council, its challenge now is to come to terms with what part of its agenda students rejected.

In its campaign to make the Undergraduate Council more representative of the student body, PUCC offered an alternative even more at odds with what students desire. Reforming the council is hardly a bad idea, nor a novel one at that. Council presidential candidates, administrators, and student journalists have all pointed fault at an organization that seems to produce more scandals than anything else.

PUCC should have benefited from this distaste, as have several groups of would-be reformers over the past few years. Students are clearly in favor of a more accountable council and of a greater student role in administrative decisions. It is an ongoing shame that students lack a responsible, elected voice to articulate their interests before the administration on such issues such as the Core and the housing lottery.

PUCC's commitment to revitalizing the council as a student voice is commendable, but in its brief campaign it proved unable to articulate these interests outside of a fairly narrow political agenda. While the leadership took pains to argue for inclusion, PUCC's platform emphasizing "social responsibility," "unionized contractors for University projects," and "permanent faculty members in ...ethnic studies, gay studies, and labor economics," rang hollow before a more moderate student body.

PUCC failed to realize that the council lacks diversity--and credibility--not because of the number of women or minority representatives, but because of the kind of students who have traditionally assumed executive roles. The overwhelming support for direct elections, for instance, is an attempt to prevent the kind of inside bargaining that favors ambitious and sleazy politicos, instead of dedicated and interested leaders.

While students have rejected PUCC's vision of the council as a vanguard for student activism, its 31 council representatives must begin working with other reformers to restore credibility to council. This means supporting measures that will make the council more open and accountable to students: direct elections, internet balloting, and the distribution of regular summaries of council proceedings. A stronger council also means focusing on what the council should do well: student services and social events. While the council may hope to be more than a "glorified dance committee," it must first establish that it can be a successful one.

PUCC was wrong to believe that its activism would answer students' calls for reform, but its new members can, if they choose, go a long way toward cresting a council that is part of the student community, rather than the butt of its jokes.