If you were unhappy with something at this fine institution of higher learning, how would you go about seeking change?
Maybe instigate a public rally in which you could ensure the support of your peers? Perhaps draw up a well-thought-out petition to send to the administration? And if you were really serious, even draft a letter and send it to Binghamton University parents and alumni?
Or would you starve yourself? While we wouldn’t suggest it, that’s the less-than advisable route being taken by a self-proclaimed “hunger striker.” His cause? He doesn’t want a meal plan from Sodexho, the on-campus food-service provider (see Page 1). He says it’s based upon Rastafarian religious dietary regulations, and the ideological idea that he shouldn’t have to buy into the corporate machine.
Quite frankly, we think his hunger strike is a half-baked (not to mention malnourished) idea.
At its best, activism is meant to be a legitimate course for bringing about change. Not to mention, the typical goal of most activists is to better a situation for the community as a whole, or at the very least a portion of that community.
But from where we sit, this latest bout of BU “activism” is merely one student using any means necessary to save himself a few bucks by not purchasing an on-campus meal plan, and attract as much attention as possible.
Sure, there are probably a number of students here, libertarian or otherwise, who would rather survive on ramen noodles than pay Sodexho for a meal plan (but we can save the debate of whether or not they should have to buy one for another day), but Aaron Aaron Akaberi doesn’t seem to be recruiting them for his cause beyond the creation of a Facebook group — or even to care about whether or not his actions will affect them.
And speaking of Facebook: at the time of this writing, his Facebook group — which we won’t advertise here — mentions nothing about his Rastafarian requirements, which are the only reason he’s gotten so much attention up until this point.
The statements he’s made in his Facebook profile, coupled with the fact that he originally attempted to exempt himself from the meal-plan mandate on religious grounds before appearing to abandon that argument when Sodexho came up with a viable solution, seem to point to self-serving motivations.
And going on a hunger strike for something as trivial as a campus meal plan ridicules the many noble causes that have merited so extreme an action. This meaningful, powerful form of civil disobedience has been used to fight against myriad forms of oppression — the very phrase “hunger strike” should be a reminder of people’s right to freedom, not their right to pass on the dining hall’s Salisbury steak. This whole hare-brained scheme is indicative of the problem with recent BU activists. Grassroots activism should start from the bottom up, pulling strength from the community and working toward legitimately bettering people’s lives.
So next time you want to go on a diet, don’t pick a cause and start to think of yourself as the next Ghandi — it’s not the way to accomplish anything.