From Draft Cards to Hashtags

I was recently asked by reporters from the The Washington Post, NPR and CBS News to describe how today’s campus protests differ from those in the 1960s. I offered some rather sweeping generalizations off the top of my head, but, in the days since, I have tried to think about this topic more systematically.

Here are my more considered thoughts.

1. Since the 1960s, campus activism and protests have become a recognized and expected part of campus life, and the campus radical or activist has become a distinct campus type. The 1960s set a precedent for the visibility and impact of student-led movements, institutionalizing activism as a fixture in campus life and demonstrating that student voices could significantly impact national policies and social values.

Most Popular Stories

Most Popular

Today, the identity of a “campus radical” or “activist” is a recognized role within the university community, often associated with leadership and deep engagement in campus life. Student activism is frequently seen as a rite of passage or a critical component of the college experience, reflecting a student’s commitment to societal issues and personal values.

2. Over time, the issues that student activists have protested have changed sharply. Since the 1960s, the focus of protests has become more diverse, ranging from campus-specific issues to broad, systemic national and international concerns.

Many contemporary protests focus on issues that directly impact the campus community, including concerns over university policies, such as tuition fees, campus safety, the presence of campus police, housing conditions or the handling of sexual assault cases. Protests also target the need for more resources or support for mental health services, or push for changes in the curriculum to include more diverse perspectives.

But many student activists engage with broader societal issues that extend beyond campus borders, from Black Lives Matter to immigration reform, divestment from fossil fuels, human rights and, now, war in the Middle East.

Identity-based activism has also become more common. This can include movements spearheaded by ethnic, racial, gender or LGBTQ+ groups focusing on anti-discrimination, representation and equality. These movements often seek to address systemic inequities both within the university and in wider society.

3. While activism is a prominent feature of campus life, it often involves a smaller, more dedicated group of students rather than mass participation. Despite the broadening of issues and inclusivity of modern student activism, there is a notable fragmentation in terms of participant support and general student body involvement.

There has emerged a distinct activist subculture on many campuses. Students who identify with this subculture often take on the mantle of organizing, leading and participating in protests. While these activists are highly dedicated and vocal, their activities often fail to resonate with the broader student body.

4. Even though most 1960s era college students did not engage in protests, there was greater unity among students than there is today because the issues of concern tended to touch on the lives of almost all students. The 1960s student movements focused on issues that had direct, tangible impacts on the lives of nearly all students, fostering a sense of unity even among those who were not actively protesting. In contrast, the more diverse and specialized nature of contemporary issues, along with the greater diversity of the student population itself, means that while activism remains a significant aspect of student life, it does not engender the same level of universal concern or unity as seen in the past.

The most unifying issue for students in the 1960s was the Vietnam War and the draft. The draft system meant that every male student could potentially be called to serve in a war that was increasingly regarded as a moral and political abomination. This existential threat was a direct and unifying concern for a vast majority of students, regardless of whether they personally protested against it.

The struggle for civil rights was another critical issue that had wide-reaching implications for all students, resonating deeply with the principles of equality and justice. Even on predominantly white campuses, the civil rights movement prompted discussions and reflections on race relations and justice in the United States, affecting the consciousness of the entire student body.

The Free Speech Movement was pivotal in asserting students’ rights to free speech and academic freedom on campus. This movement highlighted issues of administrative control and repression, which were relevant to all students, not just the protesters. The push for greater autonomy and expression at universities spoke to a fundamental aspect of student life—academic freedom and personal expression.

Today’s student activism, while just as passionate, reflects a more segmented approach to activism.

5. While Vietnam War era campus activism prompted a lot of resistance, the protesters’ goals were more pragmatic than those today. The student-led protests of the 1960s and early 1970s were primarily motivated by clear and immediate objectives. A central aim of campus protests during the Vietnam War was to end the military draft. The call to end the draft was a concrete, specific goal that had a direct impact on students’ lives, making the protests highly pragmatic and immediately relevant.

Beyond ending the draft, the broader goal of stopping or withdrawing from the Vietnam War was also a clear and pragmatic objective. This goal was motivated by ethical concerns over the war’s legitimacy and its human costs, both to the Vietnamese people and to American soldiers. The aim was straightforward and achievable: to influence U.S. government policy to end military involvement in Vietnam.

There was a strong push toward promoting peace and nonviolence. This included advocating for peaceful conflict resolution and criticizing the military-industrial complex that many believed was perpetuating the war.

Campus activism today often involves goals that are perceived as less direct than those of the Vietnam War protests.

6. Many leaders of the campus protests during the 1960s sought not simply to disrupt, but to build public support. That concern with coalition building outside the campus isn’t as apparent today. Coalition building was a goal of many of the leaders of campus activism. They actively sought to extend their influence beyond academic settings to engage broader public support and drive societal change.

The dynamics of coalition building in the 1960s contrast with many of today’s campus protests, which sometimes appear more insular and adversarial—often even hostile to reporters.

Campus activists in the 1960s frequently formed alliances that extended beyond student groups to include various civil rights organizations, religious groups and other progressive entities. This broad-based approach helped to unify a diverse set of stakeholders around common causes such as civil rights and anti-war sentiments.

Leaders of the 1960s protests understood the importance of engaging the general public in their cause. They utilized media effectively and spoke in terms that resonated widely, aiming to educate and influence public opinion.

Influenced by leaders like Martin Luther King Jr., many 1960s activists embraced nonviolent methods of protest, which were effective in appealing to mainstream and moderate audiences. This strategy was crucial in building empathy and support among the broader public, who might otherwise have been alienated by more radical or disruptive actions.

The current wave of campus activism is perceived, with some justification, as more extremist, employing tactics that are perceived as too disruptive, too radical and too confrontational, which hinders broad public support.

7. Although there were faculty who strongly supported campus protests during the 1960s, and who helped shape activists’ ideas and tactics, much of the impetus for protest came from students themselves. Today, students can count on much more direct support from faculty and staff. The role of faculty and staff in supporting student activism has shifted significantly from the 1960s to today. During the 1960s, the impetus for campus protests primarily originated from the students themselves, with faculty involvement, with a few notable exceptions, generally cautious or indirect due to a variety of institutional and cultural pressures. Today, the dynamics have shifted, with faculty and staff frequently playing a more overt and supportive role in student activism.

In the 1960s, faculty who chose to support student protests often faced significant risks, including the possibility of losing tenure, damaging their professional reputation or facing other forms of institutional censure.

Despite these barriers, some faculty members did support student activists, often providing intellectual mentorship and helping to shape their ideas and strategies. This support, however, tended to be more subdued and behind the scenes, focused on guidance, through teach-ins, rather than direct involvement.

Over the decades, there has been a significant shift in the cultural and institutional norms within academia. These changes have fostered an environment where faculty and staff are more empowered and expected to actively support student activism. This shift is partly due to the increased focus on social justice and equity issues within academic institutions themselves.

Today, many universities have positions and departments which support activism as part of their institutional mandate. Faculty and staff in these roles are not only supportive of student activism; they are often actively involved in organizing and leading activist efforts.

Many faculty and staff members are more likely to be directly involved in protests and activist movements, participating in rallies, spearheading petitions and using their classes as platforms to discuss and promote activism.

The tenure system and broader protections for academic freedom have also evolved to better protect faculty who engage in activism. This security enables more open and direct involvement in student-led initiatives without fear of reprisal.

Today, student activists can often count on a supportive network of faculty and staff who not only endorse their efforts but are willing to stand with them in their initiatives, marking a significant evolution in the role of educators in relation to student activism.

8. Over time, 1960s era college administrators found ways to channel, accommodate and co-opt student protests. Whether they can do so today remains to be seen. Student course evaluations. The abolition of parietals and the weakening of in loco parentis regulations. Liberalization of graduation requirements. Consultation with students about policy decisions. Co-ed dorms. All of these represented efforts to defuse or re-direct student protest.

To channel student energy into less disruptive and more constructive forms of engagement, campuses created platforms for dialogue, such as town hall meetings or committee participation where students could express their grievances and engage directly with the administration.

Many universities responded to protests by accommodating certain student demands, such as establishing new academic programs in African American studies and women’s studies or other fields that emerged from the civil rights and women’s liberation movements, thereby integrating more diverse perspectives into the curriculum.

A more subtle and strategic response was co-opting the rhetoric and goals of student movements, integrating them into the university’s official discourse, and diluting their radical edge. This often involved adopting the language of reform and progress while implementing changes that did not alter the underlying power structures or fully satisfy the original demands.

Contemporary campuses operate under greater scrutiny, with actions and decisions quickly broadcast and critiqued in public forums. This transparency limits administrators' ability to redirect or co-opt movements without facing backlash or accusations of insincerity. Also, today’s universities often feel more pressure from various stakeholders, including students, alumni, donors and the public. The financial and reputational stakes involved can make administrators cautious in how they respond to protests, fearing backlash no matter what actions they take.

While the strategies developed in the 1960s provided a framework for managing student protests, their effectiveness today is less certain due to the changed nature of student activism and the different social, technological and political environments. The challenge now lies in genuinely addressing the issues at the heart of modern student activism in ways that respect both institutional goals and student demands.

9. As in the 1960s, campus protests contributed to a broader critique of American society and foreign policy and a reconsideration of American history. Campus protests have historically served as powerful catalysts for broader societal introspection and change. As in the 1960s, contemporary campus protests continue to influence public discourse, critique societal norms, and challenge the status quo in foreign and domestic policy as well as the dominant interpretations of American history. The result was to promote a broader reassessment of race relations in the United States and a significant shift in how foreign interventions were viewed by the American public.

The more recent protests include demands for “decolonizing” the curriculum, which involves critically reassessing Western-centric perspectives and integrating more diverse viewpoints.

The resurgence of justice movements, prominently represented by Black Lives Matter and #MeToo, pushes for comprehensive changes in criminal justice and institutional policies across the board and introduced a vocabulary rooted in Critical Theory and postcolonial theory, much as the 1960s radicalism popularized ideas associated with the Frankfurt School.

Campus protests have consistently played a critical role in challenging prevailing societal norms and serving as a dynamic interface between academic thought and broader societal issues.

10. 1960s campus protests played a crucial role in sparking a backlash against liberalism and the rise of a resurgent conservatism that dominated U.S. politics for four decades. There is a real risk that something similar will happen today. While the campus protests of the 1960s aimed to address and rectify societal injustices and bring about progressive change, they also sparked a significant backlash and inadvertently set the stage for a conservative reaction that reshaped the country’s political discourse.

For many Americans, campus disruptions signified a breakdown of traditional values. The protests were largely seen as a manifestation of liberal policies and ideologies. The widespread media coverage of the more extreme elements of the protests painted a picture of liberalism as permissive and chaotic, which alarmed many conservatives and moderates.

Richard Nixon’s election in 1968 marked the beginning of a significant shift toward conservative governance, focusing on a firm stance against what were perceived as the excesses of liberal policies. By the late 1970s and into the 1980s, conservative leaders capitalized on ongoing cultural wars, including those sparked by campus protests. Organizations like the Moral Majority marshaled conservative Christian sentiments against the perceived moral and cultural decline, further solidifying conservative gains in American politics.

Alongside social issues, economic arguments made by neoconservatives began to resonate more amid economic troubles in the 1970s. The push for deregulation, reduced taxes and smaller government appealed to voters disillusioned with what they saw as the failures of liberal economic policies.

The emphasis on conservative social policies, a hawkish foreign policy stance, and neoliberal economic principles can be traced back to the reaction against the liberalism and the protest movements of the 1960s.

Today’s campus protests are taking place in a very different political context than those six decades ago. Public support for higher education has weakened, and colleges and universities, including many of the most elite, are quite vulnerable in terms of public perception and financial stability. A political backlash today could be devastating.

In addition to the long-term challenges of rising costs, shrinking public funding, increasing regulatory and compliance burdens, and enrollment declines, colleges face a variety of other political threats. These include:

• Proposals from both the left and the right to tax endowments, university-owned property and university-generated income.
• Threats to cut public funding, placing additional financial pressure on institutions.
• Calls to redirect federal research funding away from elite private research universities.
• Proposals for legislative interference in university affairs, ranging from restrictions on curricular content to mandates about campus policies, which can stifle academic freedom and institutional autonomy.
• A sharp decline in alumni donations.

In today’s highly polarized political landscape, universities are uniquely vulnerable. Insofar as colleges are regarded as bastions of indoctrination and intolerance, bipartisan support for higher education has diminished.

In contrast to the 1960s, when higher education was more robustly supported by public funding and generally held in high regard by the public and politicians alike, today’s institutions operate in a more hostile and precarious environment. This context makes them more vulnerable to the repercussions of campus protests.

While today’s protests echo the past, the stakes today may be even higher than in the 1960s. The current wave of campus activism carries a potentially high cost. The shadows of a backlash are already looming.