Already a student who is generally apathetic towards the student representative body, I have found arguments criticising the occupation demeaning, dismissive and generally wanting in their argument. When asked in a debate whether the University of Birmingham should be more democratic, a senior member of staff said they didn’t think the university should become a ‘Soviet republic’ and that the most important thing is ‘good governance’.

It is clear, therefore, that a democratic, transparent decision-making body is clearly not going to be given to us through simple discussion, and we need to start concentrating on why the demands of this (peaceful) protest are disregarded as so unrealistic. Lost in the ultimate “excitement” of direct action, the University rarely sees, the basis of demands and the key objectives of what the occupiers hope to gain, have been shamelessly overlooked.

I strongly feel that the demands of the Defend Education are not only moderate and reasonable, but also extremely commendable. Those who have fully read the proposals will know that they are straightforward to enact, non-controversial and entirely relatable. The occupation, if nothing else, should mark the beginning of long-awaited empowerment: By focusing on the contentious debate and continuing the discussion the society has raised, despite split opinions, we should now be beginning to focus on key issues that affect all of us on a daily basis, realising that we will no longer accept the quality of our education decreasing and ultimate power over our decisions, concentrated at the top.

Opinion on campus, with regard to the protest, has been noticeably split. Many criticise the group for exacerbating and widening the already extensive gap between the university and its students. Others have expressed anger at the way the occupiers seem to have taken it upon themselves to act ‘in our name’, and a lot of students remain generally apathetic, claiming that the only impact will cause is campus disruption. The general disregard for the actual concrete demands, laid out in the list of proposals given by the group is not only frustrating, but also extremely disheartening to all who are concerned with the progressive, democratic running of our university.

Whether we show solidarity with the activity of the society or not, direct action as we see on campus today, unsurprisingly to those who follow university politics, has been the last resort. Progress through negotiations and meetings has tried and has failed.

Remembering that many of Defend Education’s leading members have had countless meetings with the university, have attempted negotiating through discussion, have calmly talked through their proposals, we should be inspired by what these students are now doing. In a decreasingly apathetic student political world, they have taken action into their own hands in a courageous attempt to progress democratic values that are under threat. We should fully respect the sabbatical officers and students who, in full knowledge of the limited debate, the inability to make any real change and the absence of a proper voting system, take it in their own hands to represent us outside of the university’s discretion.