Connect with us

News

In Columbia University's protests of 1968 and 2024, what's similar — and different

Published

on

In Columbia University's protests of 1968 and 2024, what's similar — and different

American activist Mark Rudd, center, president of Students for a Democratic Society (SDS), addresses students at Columbia University on May 3, 1968.

Hulton Archive/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Hulton Archive/Getty Images


American activist Mark Rudd, center, president of Students for a Democratic Society (SDS), addresses students at Columbia University on May 3, 1968.

Hulton Archive/Getty Images

A takeover of Columbia University’s South Lawn by pro-Palestinian students last week is drawing comparisons to 1968 — another time when police were called to clear protesting students from the campus.

There are parallels between the two high-profile events, most starkly the proliferation of similar protests around the country, as students call for an end to the war between Israel and Hamas in Gaza.

Advertisement

But there are also differences. Here’s a quick guide:

Several issues were at stake in 1968

For many Columbia students in 1968, their protest was motivated by anger over the Vietnam War — and changes to the military draft that were chipping away at students’ deferments, particularly in graduate schools.

The radical group Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) also opposed Columbia’s links to the Institute for Defense Analyses — a think tank researching and analyzing weapons and strategies to use in Vietnam. They also wanted the CIA and military services barred from on-campus recruiting.

But others, especially the Society of Afro-American Students (SAS), were also upset that Columbia University was moving ahead with plans to take over part of a public park in Harlem, to build a gym that critics said would give only limited and second-class access to the local community.

Advertisement

“They were building it in Morningside Park, one of the few green spaces in Harlem,” former Columbia student and current SUNY law professor Eleanor Stein told NPR’s Michel Martin. “And we felt that it couldn’t be business as usual, that the university itself was engaging in an indefensible takeover of Harlem land and an indefensible participation and complicity with the Vietnam War effort.”

White and Black students coordinated a protest against the gym — and then hundreds of students moved from there to take over office and classroom buildings, enforcing a strike against the school.

The current president cited a “clear and present danger”

Pro-Palestinian students set up tents to hold a demonstration on campus on the same day that Columbia University President Minouche Shafik testified in Congress about reports of antisemitism on Columbia’s campus — a session that school newspaper the Columbia Spectator followed with live coverage.

Her testimony followed months of debate and argument over free speech on campus. The school’s response to antisemitism is the subject of an investigation by the House Education Committee.

One day after the campus protesters took up their position on the South Lawn, Shafik asked police to remove them.

Advertisement

“I have determined that the encampment and related disruptions pose a clear and present danger to the substantial functioning of the University,” Shafik said last week, asking the New York Police Department to remove protesters one day day after.

“All University students participating in the encampment have been informed they are suspended. At this time, the participants in the encampment are not authorized to be on University property and are trespassing,” Shafik said.

Pro-Palestinian protesters gather at an encampment on the Columbia University campus in New York City on April 25, 2024.

Leonardo Munoz/AFP via Getty Images


hide caption

Advertisement

toggle caption

Leonardo Munoz/AFP via Getty Images


Pro-Palestinian protesters gather at an encampment on the Columbia University campus in New York City on April 25, 2024.

Leonardo Munoz/AFP via Getty Images

“With great regret, we request the NYPD’s help to remove these individuals.”

Advertisement

When the police were called onto campus in 1968, officers were blamed for violently arresting hundreds of students, using nightsticks and horses in a chaotic scene.

In contrast police and city officials said last week that the removal of the demonstrators from Columbia’s campus was peaceful, and no injuries were reported.

But after the wave of arrests, many students returned to the campus, setting up tents once again.

The 1968 protest occupied 5 buildings and included a hostage

Reporters for Columbia’s college radio station WKCR (including longtime NPR host Robert Siegel), were present when Henry Coleman, acting dean of Columbia College, sought to confirm his status as he stood among a crowd of students in the lobby of Hamilton Hall.

“Am I to understand then, that I am not allowed to leave this building?” Coleman asked, in an archival recording.

Advertisement

“Let me ask,” a male student replies. He then yells, “Is he to understand that he’s not going to leave this building?”

“Yes!” the crowd roars in response.

Why did the university delay calling police in 1968?

Part of the reason seems to be race.

The morning after students occupied Hamilton Hall, Black students aligned with SAS asked white students led by the SDS to leave.

“SAS leaders later explained that the spontaneous, participatory, and less-defined politics of SDS-led white students interfered” with the Black students’ goals that centered on racial justice and equity, according to an online history exhibit assembled by the Columbia’s library system.

Advertisement

Conditions inside Hamilton Hall were calm and quiet compared to the “boisterous” atmosphere elsewhere, the exhibit states. But university leaders viewed the Black-held hall as a powder keg — fearing that if police were called in against the students there, Harlem’s Black community would mount a violent reaction.

“In fact, when the police entered barricaded Hamilton Hall in the early hours of April 30, the occupying students avoided struggles with the police, calmly marched out the main entrance of the building to the police vans waiting on College Walk,” according to the library’s online exhibit.

What is the legacy of the 1968 campus protest?

“Although the war in Vietnam continued for seven more years, the protesters were, in many ways, successful,” wrote historian Rosalind Rosenberg of Columbia-affiliated Barnard College. “They persuaded Columbia to put an end to classified war research, cancel construction of the Morningside Park gym, ask ROTC to leave, and stop military and CIA recruitment.”

But some divisions emerged among the students: Black protesters asked their white counterparts to leave a building due to their different approach and focus, for instance. And women who were part of both groups cited their disillusionment with being left out of positions of power, spurring their embrace of the feminist movement.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

News

Japan’s ruling party suffers record low result in Tokyo poll

Published

on

Japan’s ruling party suffers record low result in Tokyo poll

Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free

Japan’s ruling party has suffered its worst result in local assembly elections in Tokyo, as residents of the capital used the vote to protest against soaring food prices and low wage growth.

The results of Sunday’s poll underscored the challenge Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba could face next month in elections for the upper house of Japan’s national parliament.

The Liberal Democratic party, which governs at the national level in a fragile coalition, won just 22 seats in Tokyo’s 127-member metropolitan assembly. That marked a record low for the party, which entered the contest with 30 seats, and included three seats won by candidates who were previously affiliated with the party but not officially endorsed by it.

Advertisement

Analysts suggested that a sizeable loss for the LDP in the upper house vote on July 20 could dent its ability to govern, hand significant bargaining power to the numerous small opposition parties and even force Ishiba’s resignation.

The poll comes as Ishiba, who is battling low approval ratings, has been mired in trade talks with the US after President Donald Trump’s threat to impose steep tariffs on imports from Japan. The economy has also registered record price rises, including for staples such as rice.

The Tokyo assembly election highlighted the fragmentation of Japanese politics and the rise of smaller opposition parties, analysts said.

Among the beneficiaries was the populist rightwing Sanseito party, which secured three seats for the first time. The party, which was founded in 2020, campaigned on slogans including “Don’t destroy Japan any more!”

The LDP lost its leading position in the assembly to the Tomin First no Kai — a “Tokyo-ites” party that was founded by Tokyo region governor Yuriko Koike and works in loose co-operation with the LDP. 

Advertisement

Koike, Japan’s most powerful local government official for the past nine years, has pushed a range of policies aimed at raising the birth rate and improving welfare. Her party secured 32 seats, including one affiliated independent.

But Tobias Harris, a political analyst at Japan Foresight, cautioned against interpreting the Tokyo assembly vote as a precursor to the contest in the upper house, which has no equivalent to Koike or her party.

However he said Tokyo’s size made it a useful gauge of the wider mood.

Tokyo’s 11.5mn voters will elect six members to the upper house and represent a large chunk of votes for candidates elected via proportional representation.

There may even be silver linings for Ishiba, added Harris, as momentum appeared to be fading from what were previously a few promising newcomers.

Advertisement

Sunday’s vote in Tokyo was disastrous for the populist Path to Rebirth party, led by Shinji Ishimaru, who finished second to Koike in last year’s gubernatorial election. None of the party’s 42 candidates for the assembly won a seat.

Continue Reading

News

Trump calls 'obliteration' an accurate description of damage to Iran's nuclear facilities

Published

on

Trump calls 'obliteration' an accurate description of damage to Iran's nuclear facilities

A satellite image shows the Fordo nuclear facility in Iran in this handout image dated June 14, 2025.

Maxar Technologies | Via Reuters

U.S. President Donald Trump on Sunday disputed Iranian attempts to downplay the strikes on its nuclear facilities, stressing that “obliteration” was an accurate description, even though the full extent of the damage to Iran’s nuclear capabilities was not immediately clear.

“Monumental Damage was done to all Nuclear sites in Iran, as shown by satellite images. Obliteration is an accurate term! The white structure shown is deeply imbedded into the rock, with even its roof well below ground level, and completely shielded from flame. The biggest damage took place far below ground level. Bullseye!!!” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

Advertisement

Damaged or destroyed?

The U.S. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine said Sunday that there was “severe damage and destruction” to the facilities at Fordo, Natanz and Isfahan, but did not go so far as to say that Iran’s nuclear capacities had been “obliterated.”

“Final battle damage will take some time, but initial battle damage assessments indicate that all three sites sustained extremely severe damage and destruction,” Caine said.

A satellite image shows the Fordo nuclear facility in Iran in this handout image dated June 14, 2025.

Maxar Technologies | Via Reuters

Meanwhile, the U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth said Sunday that while the damage assessment is ongoing, “all of our precision munitions struck where we wanted them to strike and had the desired effect.”

Advertisement

When asked if Iran still retains any nuclear capability, Caine said that “BDA is still pending, and it would be way too early for me to comment on what may or may not still be there.”

Battle Damage Assessment, or BDA, is a military term that refers to the process of evaluating the effects of military operations on a target.

It usually involves a physical or functional check on the extent of damage, beyond visual signs, and whether the target remains operable.

These assessments are usually conducted by intelligence analysts and reconnaissance teams, using data from drones, satellites, radar, or ground reports. It helps commanders decide if the mission achieved its objectives and if follow-up strikes are needed.

The UN nuclear watchdog chief Rafael Grossi also struck a cautious tone, saying that it was not yet possible to assess the damage done at the Fordo nuclear facility.

Advertisement

Adding to the uncertainty, Reuters reported, citing a senior Iranian source, that most of the highly enriched uranium at Fordo had been moved to an undisclosed location ahead of the U.S. strikes on the enrichment site.

The strikes began early on Saturday, when six U.S. Air Force B-2 stealth bombers dropped six GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP) – a 30,000-pound bomb known as the “bunker buster,” – on Iran’s Fordo nuclear facility, which is built into the side of a mountain.

A seventh U.S. B‑2 bomber released two GBU‑57 bombs on the Natanz Nuclear Facility, while a U.S. Navy submarine also launched a volley of 30 Tomahawk missiles, targeting Natanz and a third site, Isfahan.

The mission, code named Operation Midnight Hammer, involved more than 125 aircraft in total.

— Erin Doherty contributed to this report

Advertisement

Read more CNBC politics coverage

Continue Reading

News

Missteps, Confusion and ‘Viral Waste’: The 14 Days That Doomed U.S.A.I.D.

Published

on

The rapid dismantling of the global aid agency remains one of the most consequential outcomes of President Trump’s efforts to overhaul the federal government, showing his willingness to tear down institutions in defiance of the courts.

Continue Reading

Trending