Return the Kent State Massacre Commemoration to the Students!
In 2016, former President Beverly Warren approached the May 4 Task Force to discuss the 50th commemoration. Due to the importance of the 50th, and the national attention it would be receiving, the university wished to participate in the planning process; the Task Force agreed in good faith to increase the budget and collaborate to more fully honor the lives and actions of the students killed and wounded on May 4, 1970, but it quickly became clear that the university had no interest in working with the Task Force.
While Task Force meetings had always been open to public participation, the university created a private “invitation-only” committee. The only individuals from the Task Force invited were the President and Faculty Advisor. The university’s plan to sanitize this history was made unmistakable when they decided to unilaterally make executive decisions without the genuine input of students, community members, and stakeholders. The process of this executive decision making has lacked transparency in the areas of budget, committee meetings minutes, and protocol for programming all events.
In February of 2020, a coalition of student activist groups, such as Students for a Democratic Society, Black United Students, and United Students against Sweatshops released a statement outlining four demands; the first of which dealing with student control over the May 4th commemoration. While significant victories have come from this, such as the removal of Aramark and increased student mental health services, the university has shown no interest in working with students to rectify the issues around May 4th. Due to this, we are again making clear our vision for what must happen.
While we are not against the University having a role in the process — after all, it is long-overdue for them to acknowledge the role they played in 1970 — we demand that they establish a genuine working relationship with the student body regarding all commemoration planning and other May 4 related programming. This means that all meetings should be completely transparent and held at a reasonable time to ensure that students, community members, and stakeholders are able to participate in a substantive manner. In keeping with the university’s “students first” attitude, students should have veto power, or some form of final say, on who the university administration appoints to manage future commemorations. There must also be increased transparency regarding the budget, and detailed minutes should be taken at all meetings and made easily accessible. Additionally, the relationship between the administrators and students must be structured in a manner which ensures that neither party can make unilateral decisions on programming initiatives.
Outside of commemoration and planning, we demand that “education initiatives” are developed and implemented in a timely manner which cover: the history of student activism, the anti-war movement, government surveillance at Kent State University, and the unrelenting repression of African-American and other oppressed peoples movements by the United States government. In order to ensure the longevity of these demands, we are calling on the Board of Trustees to pass a resolution which includes these points. The passing of a resolution would demonstrate a solid commitment from the university such that these changes are not to be altered or obfuscated at any later date.
Furthermore, in a recent email from the university they proclaim the advances they have made around mental health services, Aramark, and the Anti-Racism Task Force, but it was not the university that was largely responsible for recent changes. It was a broad coalition of student organizations such as SDS and USAS that pushed and brought the toxic nature of Aramark to light. It was not the university that suddenly decided to expand mental health services, it was demanded by student organizations. It was through the struggle of Black United Students and Undergraduate Student Government that secured the creation of the Anti-racism Task Force. The action of students is what brought progress. These developments were not handed down from a benevolent university bureaucracy, they were the outcomes of nearly two years of action and demanding change.
