Greetings Troublemakers... welcome to Trouble.

My name is not important.

It’s now been 50 years since the riots of 1968,

a decentralized series of explosive protests

that broke out across multiple countries around the world

and which, to this day, stand as a high-water mark

in the annals of revolutionary history.

But no commemoration of this milestone is complete

without acknowledging that '68 was,

at the end of the day,

a failed revolution.

And just as it was a year of inspiring popular protest,

it was also a year of intense political repression.

In the United States,

just as the civil rights and anti-war movements

were at their peaks,

three high-profile political assassinations occurred

over a span of two months,

claiming the lives of Martin Luther King Jr,

Bobby Hutton

and Robert Kennedy.

These killings helped to cement the shift

from a largely non-violent

and reformist civil rights movement

to the more militant and revolutionary

Black Power movement,

which in turn would soon fall prey

to the FBI's ruthless program

of covert assassination and sabotage

known as COINTELPRO.

In Mexico,

calls for an international boycott managed to

successfully block Apartheid South Africa's participation

in the 1968 Summer Olympics,

and a massive student uprising broke out,

which posed an existential challenge

to the ruling PRI government of Gustavo Díaz Ordaz.

The Mexican state's response to the students

was swift and brutal.

On October 2nd,

just ten days before the Olympic Games were set to begin,

the Mexican army opened fire on 10,000 student protestors

in the Plaza de las Tres Culturas,

in what became known as the Tlatelolco massacre.

Between 300-400 people were killed,

and over 1,500 student organizers arrested

in a wide-ranging crackdown by security forces

that sent shock waves throughout Mexican society

that resonate to this very day.

But while repression ultimately cut short

the revolutionary promise of 1968,

it could never extinguish the desire for freedom

that was its initial spark.

This torch has since been taken up

by new generations of restless youth,

who have used their position as students

to issue calls for a radical transformation of society.

Over the next thirty minutes,

we'll showcase contemporary examples of student struggles

from Mexico, South Africa and the United States,

and speak with current and former student organizers

as they share their experiences of

taking over their campuses,

disrupting the status quo…

and making a whole lot of trouble.

In this country, only 4 out of 10

from each generation can get into university.

There haven’t been public universities created

since the 70’s,

when the UAM (Metropolitan Autonomous University) was created,

and then in 2001, the Autonomous University of Mexico City (UNAM).

None of them have the capacity to take in

more than 5000 students a year; so it’s an elite.

And in this country, with all the poverty,

with all the displacement, who gets into university?

The demand that made the student movement take off

was the regulation of payments

that was implemented in the UNAM.

It intended to establish quotas

to be able to study at the university.

It contemplated the increase of educational services

- for example the study of languages,

the use of laboratories, the use of libraries -

that for all of us who participated in that movement

meant the beginning of the privatization of the university.

And then once the movement exploded,

inside the student organization that we formed,

which was the CGH, we added another 5 demands.

What happened in many schools was that as soon

as the proposed amendment to the regulation came out,

they formed assemblies.

In many cases, or in each school,

they saw that there’s an amendment

to the regulation and whatnot, and they begin to plan.

The only option we had to try to stop the increase in fees

was to paralyze the university.

This is where some older comrades

from the UNAM joined the fray,

and they brought the experience that we did not have.

And through discussions with these comrades

the idea of striking began to form,

as well as the way we were going to do it;

and a date was set.

And that’s where I think the Zapatistas were key as well.

The EZLN, like the commanders,

issued a communiqué

which announced the support of the Zapatistas,

and called on all the people that supported them

to also support the student movement.

On the day that we launched the strike,

which was the night of the 19th of April,

more than half of the university population

was in favour of the strike.

And we were here,

ready to stay in the facilities

so that classes couldn't be held,

and so that the strike could begin.

On the 30th of April, during the strike,

the university halls were overflowing

with workshops, kids, and strikers.

First, (the strike) went through an absolute criminalization.

The media campaign was brutal.

Like, it really was, and we didn’t have the resources

that we have now like Facebook, Twitter

- that allow you to access the masses.

The way to share what was going was to go to the metro.

Going with a brigade, for me, was the coolest,

to like go to inform people why we were there,

and most importantly,

gauge just how much the people supported you.

There was support,

but that support was also mostly moral support,

or verbally like “yes, I stand with you”.

We also didn’t have a proposal of what they could do.

Of how they could truly support us

and strengthen the movement.

I believe that the movement underwent

a complete offensive of the state.

Yes, they used all the resources of the Mexican state

to attack the student movement.

There were comrades who were even disappeared.

And 9 months later, the UNAM as an institution

decides to host a consultation.

And they put in De La Fuente as Rector.

And De La Fuente seemed like a rector

who wanted to begin a dialogue.

He began to organize a consultation,

in which he included these proposals

to be voted by the university community:

the general payment regulations will be annulled;

we will organize a congress;

and we propose to end the strike.

De La Fuente made this seem like a sensible proposal.

'The movement started with the quotas,

I am proposing that we are going to eliminate them.

The movement asked for a congress. I am proposing that.

We are going to make it happen. What else do you want?'

And then comes the end of this mastermind move

that the rectory and the government made

- which was to invade, with paid thugs,

the Number 3 Preparatory.

There were only 5 colleagues there

resisting and guarding the facilities,

and this proved to be a provocation for the CGH.

When all the comrades who were

in the other facilities of the UNAM learned about it,

our reaction was to go to rescue The Number 3.

Many of us, members of the CGH, arrived.

There was an exchange of blows,

of throwing objects against these people

who were there invading the school.

The media replays these scenes of violence,

and shows it to the population,

and the first contingent of

the Preventive Federal Police arrives

- without weapons.

They enter, they detain, and in less than 72 hours

we're in prison accused of terrorism,

criminal association, sabotage, property damage,

aggravated robbery, riot, attacks on communication channels…

so it was a very violent initial detention.

And that was the beginning

that opened things up to where we are now,

in terms of violence towards women for example.

The type of brutality, how we were attacked…

I mean, a comrade ended up with a pelvic fracture

from a blow.

In other words, now it is the systematic practice

towards the bodies of women in this type of detention.

And at that moment, De La Fuente calls us to a dialogue,

but now under his conditions.

‘You’re going to appoint 10 representatives.

We are going to meet in such and such place,

without radio, without television, without the media.

And what we are going to negotiate

is the end of the strike.'

The representatives who attended this meeting

did not accept that deal.

There, they knew well that the most active

movement organizers were going to be assembled,

and what they decided to do was send a very large group

of unarmed policemen.

And this worked very well,

because before the media,

the force was used in a rational way,

against a ‘rebellious, aimless movement’

- and that was accepted by the population

in quite a drastic manner.

Finally, on February 6, there was

a full-scale military operation

- with helicopters, tanks -

that overtakes all of the university facilities.

This did not provoke any kind of outbreak, or mobilization.

And therefore I believe that the government of Cedillo

and De La Fuente resolved the conflict at a very low cost.

The 1960s are often looked back on

as a golden age of student activism in the United States,

with ground zero being the Berkeley campus

of the University of California.

As the storied home of the Free Speech movement,

a campaign of sit-ins and mass rallies

that by 1965 had won students the right

to hold explicitly political events on campus,

UC Berkeley was an important point of convergence

for the Civil Rights, feminist, environmentalist

and anti-war movements that eventually coalesced

into the so-called New Left.

As part of the larger University of California network,

UC Berkeley is a publicly-funded institution.

For most of its existence,

this meant that students didn't have to pay tuition fees.

Beginning in the late 60's,

however, that began to change,

as a growing popular resentment

towards hippies and godless communists

spurred a conservative voter backlash,

which helped propel Ronald Reagan

to the Governorship of California.

And all of it began the first time

some of you who know better,

and are old enough to know better,

let young people think

that they had the right

to choose the laws they would obey

as long as they were doing it in the name of social protest.

One year after sending in the National Guard

to violently crush Berkeley students in 1969,

Reagan succeeded in imposing tuition fees

across the nine campuses of the University of California.

In the decades that have followed,

tuition costs have shot up by nearly 10,000 percent.

But despite the effects that these changes have had

on the university's demographics,

UC Berkeley continues to occupy

an important role in American politics

as a primary site of student radicalism.

Four decades after Reagan sent in the army to crush dissent,

students at UC Berkeley participated in a series

of statewide university occupations,

carried out under the banner Occupy Everything.

This is Berkeley on Telegraph. That’s how we do it.

Some of the motivating factors

for the student movement of 2009 to 2010

really were unfortunately based on the budget cuts

in the state of California to public higher education.

Now this actually sprawled across

all different sectors of the education community.

So after the financial crisis in 2007-2008,

a lot of states were forced to implement austerity programs

cutting public spending and laying off state employees.

Not only were student tuition fees

suggested to be increased, but also

there were forced faculty and staff furlough days.

So this actually did help us ultimately in the movement

because it affected so many different aspects

of the campus community

that we were able to bind together and work together.

UC’s system in particular had a large budget deficit

and so administrators resorted to tuition hikes

to make up for the budget shortfall.

But that was only half the story.

As it was discovered later

the UC administration had resorted to

taking out bonds for construction projects

to generate revenue.

And in this instance,

student tuition was closely tied

to the bond ratings of the UCs.

Increasing student tuition was a signal to

credit rating agencies that the UC

could pay back their bonds

and thus secure more funding.

This ended up being one of the pivots

for the student movement as a whole;

the relationship between the university

and financial capital

- higher education and Wall Street.

So the story really does begin in early May,

where the proposed tuition fee increases were made

by the UC regents as well as the CSU trustees.

Over the summer,

of course student organizing is quite difficult

... but there were coalitions of students, staff,

and faculty that had been formed in late spring

that were in fact meeting and trying to gain momentum

to prepare for the very beginning

of the fall semester in 2009.

There were a series of smaller actions

and coordination among students at UC

and Cal State campuses

which pretty much set the tone for the months to come:

study-ins, sit-ins, and occupations of school spaces.

We were influenced by the occupations

specifically at the New School,

where the tactic of occupation itself

was becoming popularized.

Occupations were seen as a viable tactic

and was a way to bypass

the routines of marches and rallies.

This action is in solidarity with occupations

that have occurred so far at UC Davis, UCLA,

UC Santa Cruz, SF State.

Using the tactic of occupation

really did mark a departure

from the typical tactics

known and seen in the student movement.

So the occupations were a major contrast to

marches and rallies, which,

you know, are pretty routine.

Everyone gets together for a few hours,

then they go home.

In the occupations, people could meet each other

and have longer conversations.

And more importantly, there was a continuous

and visible presence of people

that made the student movement feel more tangible.

Not just a series of actions,

but also a materially enduring place.

It took on more of a direct action approach

at trying to take space.

This is something that allowed us to

try to manifest what we were actually dreaming of.

As opposed to simply asking that

the "authorities that be" give us what we want.

This really gave us a huge motivation

and showed the students that they had great power.

We have a 32% fee increase

that we want immediately repealed.

But you know what?

We want a whole lot more than that.

We want public education that is free!

So in mid-November

there was a three-day strike in response to

the UC administrators increasing the tuition by 32%.

There was an occupation at UC Santa Cruz,

while at UC Berkeley there was a march

attended by well over several thousand people.

Also walk-outs and sit-ins at various

Cal States in the Bay Area.

November 19th UCSC, UC Davis, and UCLA

occupied administrative buildings.

And on November 20th, Wheeler Hall,

at UC Berkeley was occupied

with clashes with police

and other Cal States has sit-ins.

From that point forward

there was a series of smaller actions,

marches to the chancellor’s house,

sit-ins, more occupations

happening at the UCs and other Cal States.

During that time there was a lot of networking

among students and militants

and this was a period of time where a lot of the students

from different campuses were able to

kind of coordinate and talk about what to do next.

The students who were participating

in the occupation movement faced repression

from both the state and the university.

University administrators were caught off guard

by the occupations and seemed kind of

unsure as to what to do.

But as the movement continued,

the UC administration resorted to calling in the police

both from on and off campus.

Guys they’re at this door!

This is the police department, unlock the door!

And of course this is trying to prevent students

from participating in any student activities.

Definitely the anarchists focused more on trying to

bring the issues outside of just the university campuses.

We were trying to relate this struggle now

to problems and issues with capitalism

and class struggle... because it is entirely related.

In the Global North,

the struggle against the colonial Apartheid regime

in so-called South Africa is often presented

as a feel-good example of the merits

of pursuing a patient strategy of non-violence,

and the effectiveness of international solidarity

and boycott campaigns.

When addressing seemingly intractable conflicts,

such as the decades-long Palestinian resistance

to Israeli occupation,

Western liberals are fond of lamenting

the lack of a so-called “Nelson Mandela figure”

who could unite divided populations

and galvanize world opinion behind a peaceful

and dignified demand for national self-determination.

Not only does this wholesome and incredibly racist narrative

ignore the fact that Mandela himself

was an active proponent of armed struggle,

There are many people who feel

that it is useless and futile

for us to continue talking peace and non-violence

against a government whose reply

is only savage attacks.

but it also hides the essential role

that militant youth movements played

in toppling the Apartheid regime,

and the important role

that struggles around education

played in this process.

One of the catalysing events

that marked a turning point

in the struggle against Apartheid

took place on June 16th, 1976,

when 10,000 high school students

marched in Soweto

to protest the forced introduction of Afrikaner language

into their school curriculum.

The state's response was to open fire

on the crowd of children,

killing at least 176,

and wounding over a thousand.

In the wake of this tragedy,

many youth joined the armed wing

of the African National Congress, or ANC,

who eventually assumed power

following open elections in 1994.

Yet the rosy picture of post-Apartheid South Africa

also ignores the reality that

despite more than two decades of ANC rule,

the country still possesses the highest rates

of inequality in the world,

with an overwhelming majority of the nation's wealth

remaining in the hands of white settlers.

In 2015, a struggle began to take shape

demanding a long-overdue reckoning

of the country's colonial legacy.

Beginning with a symbolic protest

at the University of Cape Town

against the statue of South Africa's colonial founder,

Cecil Rhodes,

the movement quickly spread across the country,

and has since taken up militant calls

for free, decolonized education.

The university struggle

and the university space is a microcosm

of the struggle and the problems

within broader society.

And so, the struggles that we have at the university

- whether it be economic issues around fees,

the political issues around liberation and injustice, etc -

that feed into the broader discussion about

where we are as a country in South Africa post-1994.

And I would say we currently exist in a post-Apartheid,

apartheid South Africa

where there is many continued injustices

and we still are fighting for liberation and equality.

The statue at the University of Cape Town,

one of Africa’s top academic institutions,

has been covered up for the past few weeks.

As both white and Black students regularly marched past

with the hashtag #RhodesMustFall placards

calling for its removal.

Prior to 2015, there had been a lot of talk

around how young people in South Africa are apathetic,

apolitical, they aren’t engaged citizens etc,

all of those things.

Because of the history that young people

have played in South Africa, like 1976,

and the youth movements of 1968,

SASO and the Black Consciousness movement

were largely spearheaded by young people.

In a historical sense, there is this,

I guess historic role, or obligation in some sense,

or duty that young people have played

in shaping the national destiny

of South African politics.

And so after 1994 there was a very sharp decline

of youth participation in critiquing government policies,

in critiquing, you know, the neoliberal settlement,

against colonialism,

against undoing all those historic injustices of the past.

So, the significance of Rhodes Must Fall

was that it re-energized that aspect of youth involvement.

So Rhodes Must Fall was a decolonial student movement

that formed that the beginning of 2015

in response to structural and institutional racism

at the university, and in society.

And structural and institutional patriarchy

and just general inequality that Black students,

workers, and staff were facing at the university.

It’s based on three pillars,

ideological pillars of Black Consciousness,

Black radical feminism through intersectionality,

and pan-Africanism.

In 2015 there was a campaign to remove the statue

of Cecil John Rhodes

which was located here on campus.

So that sparked, it was like a catalyst,

the symbolic act of the fall of the statue.

I think that's where one can begin to trace ideas

of what fallism is.

The relationship between Rhodes Must Fall

and Fees Must Fall,

I think one must understand Rhodes Must Fall

as a catalytic moment

and then Fees Must Fall as a subsequent action

of that initial event that happened.

Let go of her!

Leave me alone!

I think fallism applies broadly as an arsenal

or a canon of protest tactics.

In the sense of disruptions, shutdowns, occupations.

Those were some of the defining features

of protest movements in 2015 and early 2016

which came to characterize fallism.

Disrupting the space so that you can highlight

some of the injustices which exist.

But not only around specific occasions,

but as a daily thing.

Rhodes Must Fall and then Fees Must Fall

was organized as a non-partisan student movement,

on a flat structure,

where there was no, you know, recognized leadership.

Because I think one of the issues that we had had

in previous organizations and organizing

was that the kind of hierarchical structure

didn’t always work and it caused a lot of factionalism

and, you know... party politics.

What would happen was that,

organization was basically set-up

to coordinate different tasks.

The public in particular was very curious about

how the movement was organized

because there was this question of

'who do you hold accountable?'

Initially it was a tactic,

especially in the early days of the movement, to say:

'we don’t have any leaders.'

So that if you want to victimize someone in particular,

it would be harder for the authorities to do that.

From my thinking it was both a strategic

and ideological decision.

We wanted to avoid the pitfalls

of having like one or two iconic leaders

and then you know, everything kind of

is hinged around them.

So we can say we are a flat structure

in trying to embody this ideal democratic structure

of participation,

where everyone's advice has got equal weight

and people’s politics are given equal room

to be expressed in a space.

The idea of, you know, Mandela’s rainbowism

and this rainbow nation mythology that exists

where, you know, we are all 'kumbaya',

'hold hands', 'we are one' type of thing does not exist.

And the Truth and Reconciliation Commission

that existed in this country

didn’t do anything to really solve

the material reasons for why

there is this inequality and deep-seated anger

and hurt and pain caused

by colonialism and Apartheid.

State education systems,

and particularly colleges and universities,

play a vital role in the reproduction of social control.

Not only are they the physical sites

where millions of future workers are trained

to participate in the capitalist economy, generally,

but increasingly these institutions serve

as corporate incubators,

providing cheap labour

and cutting edge research and development facilities

for the IT, Nanotech, genetics, engineering,

extraction and weapons manufacturing industries.

As a result,

students occupy a uniquely strategic choke point

in the maintenance and development

of the global economy.

But beyond their potential utility

as atomized cogs in the capitalist machine,

when students come together around shared demands,

they can also serve as a catalysing spark

for broader movements seeking wide-ranging social change.

Youth movements can inject a well-needed shot

of idealism, dynamism, and militancy

into more long-standing and complacent social movements

that may otherwise remained focused

on defending past gains,

and reliant on outdated tactics and strategies.

Before a new world can be built

... the old one must be torn down.

The student movement of 2009

was so significant to me personally.

Prior to this movement I wasn’t really an anarchist

or even politically active,

so this movement really was something

that radicalized me.

For many students,

the student movement was not only about

the socio-economic conditions

they were confronting,

but also about the possibilities

of a different kind of future.

So there was a positive vision

behind this movement as well.

Because the students are young people,

there's a lot of growing and growth

that still needs to happen.

People still are finding themselves, or whatever.

But that becomes even more accentuated in that space.

Which often tends to be like

a very tense, emotionally-charged space.

I understands that some radicals

may view students with a bit of suspicion.

While students occupy an ambiguous social position

since the university maintains and reproduces

the division of intellectual and manual work.

I think it’s still important for radicals

to maintain a presence on campuses

in some kind of way.

Whether it’s through more postering campaigns,

or tabling literature,

or setting up events that explicitly address

alternatives to capitalism,

there needs to be some sort of continuous

and visible presence on campuses

that are able to make counter messages clear.

In addition to having organizing spaces

that are specifically for anarchists

and anti-authoritarians,

we really need to work in coalition

with other members of the student body,

faculty, and staff

- ultimately to gain widespread support.

We need to learn how to work

and mobilize within our communities

and how to build consistently throughout the year

so that we’re not just protesting

at a particular time of the year.

But that we’re consistently working

and building the movement.

I think popular education was

significantly under-emphasized in the movement space.

Especially in the last few years

it has lead to a significantly impoverished articulation

of what the demands are.

It would be nice to build character

which can withstand some of those trappings

and pitfalls in particular.

Which tend to see movements disintegrating.

I think there’s value in just

trying to always be consistent.

To answer what it is

you’re committing yourself to.

I believe that the occupations carried out

in the student movement really expanded

the vocabulary of what is possible

in terms of direct action.

And now direct action tactics are

actually much more accepted on university campuses

than they once were.

And this happened as a gradual process

but I believe that the students and faculty

and staff really did see the value

in taking action themselves.

I know that there is risk involved.

But you never gain anything

without a little bit of sacrifice.

The UC campuses have continued

with the legacy of militant direct action.

Recent confrontations with Milo and the Alt Right

are definitely a part of this legacy.

Some of the tactics that we used to deploy

- some of those tactics ended up becoming signs

and tactics for people in the movement,

so it reached a point that you couldn’t critique.

I think that you also have to learn when to face the state.

And when to not.

You have to learn that... because they broke us.

I really think that the rupture occurred

under the logic of the state,

which relies on the burn-out of social movements.

Like, the co-optation didn’t work, or worked afterwards,

the repression didn’t either

... but we’re going to burn them out.

When the state and the university

becomes increasingly authoritarian and repressive,

instead of looking out at what the issues are

that are causing these things, we look inward.

And so I would say that too much of an inward focus

can really make the movement

very small and very difficult.

We need to set out a vision

that's able to speak to

what the society is unable to provide,

and not just be against some issue or another.

If, as a student,

as a person who has university education,

you want to make social changes - political changes -

you have to do them concretely.

Bring your knowledge,

activate yourself with other people

to generate productive projects.

Educational projects that improve conditions for people,

even if it’s on a very small scale. But make it real.

Something concrete.

And not so abstract, like all this around generating

a massive movement with huge masses

that are going to bring down a regime.

We need to give support to other countries

the world is not focusing on.

The narrative is just around what’s happening

in the United States of America

when there are many struggles across the world

that we need to focus on and need to learn from.

And so what I would encourage is that we meet

as young people

- as students from these student movements.

So that we can organize together and build together.

Because that’s the only way we are going to defeat

a white supremacist, capitalist, patriarchal,

and ableist system.

While students have historically served

as active participants

in broader struggles for social change,

it's important to remember that

there's nothing inherently revolutionary about them.

University campuses can just as easily serve

as the breeding grounds for fascism

and other toxic forms of political reaction.

This threat is particularly acute today,

from campuses across the United States,

where alt-right and white nationalist groups

are aggressively targeting students

for recruitment and indoctrination,

to those in China,

where organized student groups form

an important bulwark of an emergent

hyper-nationalist state ethos.

These spaces are contested territories,

meaning that revolutionaries need to actively engage

and organize with their peers in order to build movements

capable of waging effective resistance.

So at this point,

we’d like to remind you that Trouble is

intended to be watched in groups,

and to be used as a resource to promote discussion

and collective organizing.

Are you a student that's interested in

carrying out revolutionary anti-capitalist organizing

in your university or college campus,

or even in your high school?

Consider getting together with some comrades,

organizing a screening of this film,

and discussing a strategy

for where you might get started.

Interested in running regular screenings of Trouble

at your campus, infoshop, community center,

or even just at home with friends?

Become a Trouble-Maker!

For 10 bucks a month,

we’ll hook you up with an advanced copy of the show,

and a screening kit featuring additional resources

and some questions you can use to get a discussion going.

If you can’t afford to support us financially,

no worries!

You can stream and/or download all our content

for free off our website:

If you’ve got any suggestions for show topics,

or just want to get in touch, drop us a line at:

In case you missed it,

we're pleased to announce the return of the Stimulator

with his brand new show: The Fuckin' News.

If you haven't checked out his pilot episode,

you can find it on our website,

along with past episodes of

It's the End of the World as We Know it And I Feel Fine, at:

This episode would not have been possible

without the generous support of Jose,

Simone, Tannie and Chloe.

Now get out there, and make some trouble!