Britain Boycott your graduation ceremony if you really care about class divide

The following piece has been submitted to us from Rachel E. Brown, and while not a member 
we are posting this piece in order to open up a discussion on the matters raised. To that 
end one of our members has added their reply underneath (with Rachel's blessing). ---- 
This summer, thousands of students will attend their graduation ceremony which 
traditionally marks the completion of an undergraduate degree at university. But this 
ceremony is not just some innocent celebration of achievement. Finalists seem to regard it 
a "must do" event, something you can't afford not to do. But with gown hire around £40, 
Champagne costs and eye-watering professional photography charges, many students can't 
afford it, literally. Student journalists have long complained these costs could mean 
students "miss out on such an important day". Yet all this grumbling about prohibitive 
costs for an essentially self-congratulatory event is hardly compelling in a society 
facing £12bn in welfare cuts and more Foodbanks than ever.

That doesn't mean the grievances of less advantaged graduates should be disregarded. The 
sacrifices made to attend the graduation ceremony - despite the costs - indicates the 
importance of the occasion. But why is it "such an important day" to them? Students and 
parents tell themselves it's about the acknowledgment of three years' hard work. Yet 
students aren't the only ones to work hard. The worker collecting dustbins in all weathers 
on minimum wage doesn't get an audience applaud or to wear the prestigious black robe and 
cap after three years' labour. We seem to let this differential treatment go unnoticed 
even though we would notice the loss of refuse workers far sooner than fewer graduates! 
The graduation ceremony is not simply about achievement. It tells the world your educated 
work is worthy of a special occasion. But there is no ceremony for the refuse worker. What 
is presented as acknowledging achievement is actually a ceremony dividing the worthy 
educated from the unworthy - that's the real reason why students are so keen to attend. 
It's a rite of passage into worthiness.

The real importance and, the real problem of the graduation ceremony is how it reinforces 
the class divide. Graduates and parents want it so badly, not as an acknowledgement of 
achievement, but because attendance is about admittance. For parents, their dear child 
graduate crowns the family mantel of social mobility - along with shopping at Sainsbury's 
and having a second car. For the established middle-class, it merely cements their social 
position. The graduation ceremony is a secular Confirmation ritual for the established 
middle-class and a symbolic rite of passage for the aspirational.

The effects of the problem were shown recently on my campus, the University of Exeter. 
Organise Exeter (facebook) - a new activist group responding to the disappointing general 
election - held their first meeting in the grandly named, University "Alumni Auditorium". 
Attended by students and locals, the meeting marked a juncture between town and gown. 
During the discussion, a local made a striking request. She asked for future meetings not 
to be held at the University because "she had never been to university herself" and found 
just the act of walking onto campus intimidating. Her experience should compel us to 
identify what makes the university an intimidating place for those without a degree and to 
do something about it. If we continue to associate education with class, prestige and 
worthiness, we will simply reproduce education as an instrument of class divide.

A meaningful step is to resist the signifiers of prestige associated with university 
education. The most flagrant display of prestige is found at the graduation ceremony. 
Prestige symbolism in drinking Champagne, wearing black gowns and the general formality of 
the occasion - what we know as "pomp and circumstance" - all contribute to the problem. 
It's no coincidence that similar robes are donned by lawyers and judges who are probably 
the longest standing prestigious power-holders in the country.

For the working class like myself, there's a further reason not to attend. In my four 
years at university, I have seen the campus population diversify beyond the private school 
"Exetah" (as they are known here) crowd. But there is a difference between inclusion and 
assimilation. It's not genuine inclusion if we less privileged merely assimilate to 
ceremonies designed by and for the elite, to the exclusion of the workers. Inclusion means 
changing things so you accommodate rather than culturally transform and homogenise the 
once marginalised. If we simply assimilate to the practices of the elite, we only become 
one of them. We become part of the problem.

Social equality demands us to release education from these class ties. Education is not 
working when - rather than emancipation - it's an instrument of intimidation and division. 
We cannot have the upward mobility of the educated few at the expense of all those who did 
not go to university. I'm seizing my chance to resist the prestigious rituals of the elite 
that continue to make groups in our society feel unworthy or intimidated by "the 
educated". I'm boycotting my graduation ceremony. It's an individual act of solidarity 
with the refuse worker, the intimidated local activist and the cause for the inclusion, 
not assimilation, of the marginalised. Ceremonies are made for the worthy, don't pretend 
you are more worthy or work harder than others. Boycott, refuse to wear the robe - 
whatever you do, resist this elitist ritual. If you're an egalitarian, you will join me in 
this statement against education as worthiness, prestige and ultimately, class divide.

A reply from a member of the Anarchist Federation

This piece is certainly thought-provoking, acknowledging the education system as 
reinforcing the existing stratification of society into class lines. While it is admirable 
that certain overt aspects of this division are rejected, it has to be accepted that power 
does not renounce itself - for which it is necessary to make explicit the form of class 
rule which we experience. That is, one in which the course of our lives are largely 
determined by those with the power to hire, fire, evict and convict, powers primarily 
exercised over those without such powers. The group without these powers are often 
referred to as the "working class" (regardless of whether they are receiving unemployment 
benefits, studying, retired, hospitalised, or finding other means of supporting 
themselves). We can also expect that financial capitalists, those with large investments, 
though no direct means to hire or fire, will ally themselves with the industrial 
capitalists. A boycott of graduation ceremonies does not substitute a positive program of 
working class organisation or self-education, nor do working class organisations seem to 
have clamoured for it. Only the beneficiaries of a tertiary education can boycott their 
graduation. Of course, while agitating for such a boycott and referring to the nature of 
class society, valuable contacts can be made.

It is worthwhile to consider the form of education we would like to see in a free society 
of equals (as lavishly described by Kropotkin in "Fields, Factories and Workshops" for 
instance, involving joint discovery to a greater degree than pedagogy) and consider the 
obstacles we face in approaching such a society. Among the impediments are the 
inaffordability of journals and software, which there are current campaigns to ameliorate, 
such as with the Open Access movement and the Free Software Foundation. Likewise, there 
are platforms such as Khan Academy which make tutorials for subjects available for free 
(though this has notable criticisms, such as the requirement to associate an online 
account in order to access the content, increasing the capacity for surveillance). 
Inspiration can be drawn from examples such as Perelman's "Physics can be Fun", Hogben's 
"Mathematics for the Million" and Voline's engagement in Prolecult - each was an attempt 
to anticipate the future society and diffuse the privileges endowed by education.

Ultimately, a social revolution will be required to alter the mode of production in order 
to achieve an emancipatory education, however we should not ignore the role of education 
in achieving this revolution. Our ends will be reflected in the means we use here and now. 
It is for this reason that the symbolic actions (as discussed above) need to go 
hand-in-hand with solidarity through collective direct action. Students may be able to act 
in ways that would be too risky to other staff, such as bolstering picket lines or helping 
confront the bosses. It is these manifestations of solidarity and mutual aid, taking place 
through participation in shared struggles, that will meet the task of destroying the class 
divide.

https://afed.org.uk/boycott-your-graduation-ceremony-if-you-really-care-about-class-divide/