Is Student Activism Good for the SOAS Community?
Adam Habib, Director of SOAS 09/12/2024
Student activism is good for SOAS… and for any university. And this is where most people stop interrogating the truism. This is because it is easy. It makes the case for the right to protest, and the right to mobilise for one’s cause. When building alternative institutions and societies, or managing them, then you cannot stop at the generic abstract statement. You are required to interrogate the practice of protest. This is why most governments, including post colonial governments like Castro’s Cuba, or Mandela’s South Africa - had such tenuous relationships with some activists even though they had all been activists in an earlier life.
So let’s return to the question again: is activism good for universities? The answer is yes, but some forms of activism are more than others. How do we explain this? Simply because students, like all communities, are not a homogeneous category. What happens when one group’s activism conflicts with another’s? Should the majority prevail and the minority be silenced? Is it not the responsibility of a university to enable the exploration of multiple causes and ideas even those that the majority are not comfortable with?
This does not mean that we have to be neutral but we have to be plural, protecting a space in which people are free to express differing viewpoints. Yet what happens when one group of activists attempts to stifle this pluralism, the very lifeblood of a university? Does it need to be managed and how should this be done if the group of activists refuse to comply with the rules?
Plurality is one issue, behaviour is another. We all profess to respect the right to peaceful protest. But where do the parameters of the ‘peaceful’ lie? Again, most activists don’t like to confront this question because it places constraints on their behaviour, raises uncomfortable questions and forces us to confront difficult trade offs.
Let me use my own past experience. There is much talk among some activists about some of my and my fellow executives management of the #FeesMustFall protest at Wits University in South Africa. This protest was undeniably legitimate given that it spoke to the cost and funding of higher education in democratic South Africa. But it was also violent in parts, with more than 10 buildings burnt in multiple universities, often by external individuals. We confronted a choice as an executive to either allow buildings to burn or to bring in the police. Many activists and some commentators suggest that we should not have involved the police, but should we have allowed buildings to burn and students and staff safety and security to be threatened? Hard choices and trade offs and only one answer if you are responsible for managing the safety and security of people and infrastructure.
Let me take another example from #FeesMustFall. In 2016 some student leaders and activists decided that if there was no concession by government on free education, there should be no examinations and the universities should be permanently shut down. The vast majority of students disagreed not because they did not support the cause but simply because they were not in a financial position to be able to afford such a sacrifice. We commissioned an independent audit to democratically poll all students. Just under 80% of students voted to complete the year even if security had to be brought in to guarantee their right to be assessed. Again, these were hard trade offs which most commentators rarely confront when making easy judgements.
The research on social movements and activism categorically demonstrates that they can become violent on two conditions: when police are introduced and when movements factionalise. This factionalisation was the challenge in #FeesMustFall because of the party political affiliation of many of the leaders of the student movement. As the movement factionalised and became violent, we had to confront the issue of whether police should be brought in. Not to do so meant that people could have been hurt. To do so meant that passions would be further inflamed even though we would be able to immediately ensure ‘safety and security’. Hard trade offs which in my view as vice-chancellor only had a single answer.
Mercifully such hard trade-offs don’t exist at SOAS at least at the level of physical violence. But they do exist at other levels. Activists at SOAS, both students and some unionists, have long had a tradition of targeting individuals in the community that they do not agree with. They have particularly held that managers and executives are open game, although some staff have been targeted as have students with whom they have disagreed. In the recent solidarity protests with Gaza and the encampments, we held that these solidarity protests would be allowed provided members of the community were not personally targeted, there was no hate speech or violence and that our operations were not threatened. The first principle was repeatedly violated not only in relation to me, some staff, the Students’ Union CEO, and then even against sabbatical officers with whom some activists disagreed.
When these rules were repeatedly violated, only then were these activists held accountable as per our rules and our policy which all members of our community sign up to. They of course hold that student activism is being constrained; we hold that activism is only being constrained when you violate the rights of others within our community.
So let’s return to the question: is student activism good for the university? I would answer in the affirmative but not without qualification. This is because even resistance politics is governed by ethics. We are defined by our behaviour, not by our rhetoric. One of the pernicious elements of populist politics - on the left and right - is a belief that courtesy and respect are for elites. I am often surprised how such activists in our midst are not called out for speaking about love and human empathy so often and yet hating other human beings with whom they politically disagree.
Student activism in my view is good for a university so long as it respects the ethical boundaries where others within our community are not targeted, treated with disdain, and their rights are not being violated. So long as we don’t threaten the right of academic freedom and this university being a free space for debate, deliberation and even robust disagreement. So long as one abides by the ethics of a progressive and inclusive institutional community that we profess we want to build, which are enshrined in the policies that each one of us signed up to when joining SOAS.
Safia Shaikh, Co-President, SOAS Students’ Union
To put it simply- no, but I wish it was, and believe it can and should be.
Building united movements requires meeting people where they are at. To this end, little can be achieved by placing particular forms of activism on a pedestal and disregarding those who don’t conform. It’s no secret that the ‘SOAS Activist Type’ takes a particular form in most people’s imaginations, and I’ve been at SOAS for long enough to recognise that this hyper-political revolutionary-styled image fails to build bridges to other parts of the SOAS community. Rather, the insistence on saying the right words in the right order has only served to alienate the majority of students from the politicising experience that university should be.
If we aim to foster a revolutionary SOAS community, our activism must be sustainable and supportive—not exhausting or exclusive. The academic year is short and intense, and most students simply don’t have the capacity to dedicate endless hours to organising. Therefore, we must anchor our activism in the needs and rhythms of the community we work for and alongside. This means reimagining activism to allow space for everyone to participate in ways that align with their own lives, commitments, and limitations.
Activism is not limited to protests and dramatic actions; it grows from the foundations we build in everyday acts of solidarity, and quiet moments of understanding. Revolution, while punctuated by grand gestures, is ultimately built brick by brick, conversation by conversation. There is a difference in inviting the community to participate, and demanding that they cheer you on.
Harnessing student power also means embracing the reality that while some people are deeply engaged in activism, others are not. University life is demanding. But those of us who do have time and energy to organise, especially those of us paid by the SU, can create spaces that provide for the basic needs of students, whether academic, material, social or spiritual, while also offering them connection to a political community.
Activism doesn’t have to be another burden; it can be woven into the fabric of our lives in ways that are enriching, rewarding, and sustaining. Engaging offers a chance to connect with something bigger than ourselves, to find purpose in community, and to make even the smallest parts of daily life feel meaningful.
We are exhausted—there’s no denying that. But what if we could make space for activism that nourishes instead of draining us? What if we built a flexible movement that lets people show up as they are? Far from avoiding hard work or sidestepping meaningful change this means recognising that real, sustainable power grows from balance, compassion, and inclusivity.
If we could create this kind of movement, what might SOAS become? A place where students feel empowered, where activism is woven into everyday life, where the doors to political engagement are always open. What if, instead of standing on the sidelines or feeling that our contributions aren’t “enough,” each of us could bring what we have to offer, as part of a larger, thriving community effort?
To build a truly powerful movement, we must learn to work together, focusing on our shared goals rather than getting lost in disagreements over tactics or theory. When we spend more time challenging each other than challenging systems of oppression, we fragment our collective power and alienate potential allies. There’s a difference between healthy debate, which can sharpen our understanding, and destructive division, which fractures our unity.
Strategic organising means understanding that no one person or group has a monopoly on “the right way” to pursue change. Effective movements require collaboration, not endless debates over tactics. When we challenge each other more than systems of oppression, we fragment our power. Effective activism respects diverse approaches - direct action, policy, community building, awareness-raising - understanding that all contribute to a common cause. When we eliminate the fear of “getting it wrong” and embrace learning, activism becomes a space for growth.
Our movement’s strength lies in solidarity, empathy, and justice, but we must embody those values in our organising spaces. This means choosing compassion and curiosity over judgement, accepting that everyone comes with different knowledge and experiences, and acknowledging that none of us are done learning and growing. To sustain our energy and drive real, systemic change, we must cultivate a culture of support and resilience. Rather than focusing on ideological purity, we should be building bridges across our differences and rallying around shared goals, Creating lasting, powerful movements that tear down the structures we oppose rather than each other.
A variety of tactics and approaches has always been essential in challenging institutional power structures. From the Civil Rights Movement to anti-colonial struggles and feminist liberation movements, the most successful and transformative efforts have drawn strength from a diversity of tactics. Mass protests, policy advocacy, community organising, mutual aid, educational outreach—all of these methods have been essential at different points and for different groups within each movement. Why, then, should SOAS limit itself to a single model of activism? Institutional power is multi-faceted; our activism should be as well.
We aren’t there yet, but by fostering a culture of inclusivity, sustainability, and mutual support, SOAS could transform activism into a core, unifying aspect of its community life.
