Amnesty International wasn’t the club to join at my high school. In fact, student organizations weren’t very popular at all. Our “club” existed only as a weekly discussion group, where a half a dozen people and I discussed the plight of prisoners of war, death row inmates, and various other instances of human rights violations. Our group would set up a table in the cafeteria, display our yellow banner, and ask students to sign petitions. After tabling, I remember a friend questioning me as to why I believed Guantánamo prisoners deserved a trial by jury. He insisted, “they aren’t American citizens; they don’t have same rights we do.” I couldn’t think a response, I just stared at him, shocked. I imagined getting into a heated discussion on the UN declaration of human rights and whether or not matters in cases such as this. In the end, I decided to not push the point and eat my lunch.

The difficulty I faced confronting peers with opposing views didn’t stop after high school. As intrepid academics with a plethora of issues to worry about (school work, student loans, papers, heat deaths of the universe etc.), who has time to confront others with their opinions on the Netanyahu administration or South Sudan? Reed’s skeptical tradition will surely lead to a more productive conversation than the ones I had in high school, but one must ask the question: what can current student organizations do to gain relevance on a campus perpetually stuck in a bubble of its academic own-self importance?

Jilli Kenchel ’16 is signator of the latest iteration of Reed’s Amnesty International chapter. Apparently, there have been Amnesty International groups at Reed in the past, but they were disorganized; according to Kenchel they were, “not concentrated in their focus.” The group will be meeting next Friday from 11:30 AM to 2:00 PM for a public introduction to the organization. Kenchel and others will be asking the simple question, “What does human rights mean to you?” Over food and drink, the group will be making a photo collage of various causes to hone their focus for the coming semester. Students have expressed a wide variety of topics to be the focus of Reed’s group. “People have been interested in the death penalty, and women’s rights,” Kenchel says, as well as “prisoners of conscience”, the type of human rights violations in response to which Amnesty International was originally founded in 1961.

Amnesty is as new to Kenchel as it is to most Reedies. Professor Daniel Reisberg (psychology 1986– ), introduced Kenchel to Amnesty’s fight against the death penalty last year and informed her of the Oregon state chapter of Amnesty run out of Lewis and Clark College. When Kenchel contacted Lewis and Clark, they suggested she start a chapter at Reed. Reisberg became the faculty advisor of the group, plays more of a hands off role in the day to day business of running the chapter. Students like Kenchel will be collectively leading the group and deciding the causes on which to focus.

The international NGO provides stickers and banners to its local chapters, including Reed’s group, along with a list of various online resources. Kenchel receives monthly “core action” emails from Amnesty which invite all of the Amnesty chapters from around to world to focus on one particular human rights violation or individual. Currently the organization is focused on Hussain Jawad, a Bahraini human rights activist arrested on the 16th for unknown reasons, most likely related to his work. The goal is sending these action emails is, according to Amnesty, to focus the efforts of the whole organization on pressuring national governments to end their human rights violations.

With all of the concentrated foci of the parent organization, I wonder how Reedies will feel about devoting a portion of their crowded calendar to participating. “People are very busy”, Kenchel says; “it’s hard to unite Reedies.” This job of uniting students will hopefully be made easier by the group’s policies.

The group will not be raising money for the international organization. Amnesty will instead focus on raising awareness of rights violations and writing letters to the offending authorities themselves. The group has already participated in such campaigns, such as the “Write for Rights” campaign that began last semester. Kenchel calls it “direct action instead of direct service.” The idea is that by flooding authorities with letters from all over America and the world, it will pressure governments to act in accordance with the international law. As a bonus to those interested in litigation, Amnesty collaborates with the Legal Studies Consortium, helping to bring professional speakers to Reed. Reisberg, whose work involves helping law enforcement understand memory and its effect on court testimony, is also a member of the Consortium. According to Reisberg, its “mostly an information resource for students.” The Consortium seeks to connect interested students with faculty in specific fields of interest. This is the first year the Consortium is being featured on the Reed website, and community suggestions for the function of this group are still invaluable at this point.

If you’d like to know more about the Amnesty International, go to amnestyusa.org and join Reed’s Amnesty International facebook page. If you’d like to know more about the Legal Studies Consortium or are interested in the legal aspect of social justice, read about it on the Reed’s website or contact Daniel Reisberg.

-------------------------------------------

Pro Israeli. Pro Palestinian. Pro peace. This is how the organization J Street U describes itself on its website. Anthony Bencivengo ’18, a member of Reed’s chapter, describes it as “a moderate left-wing organization based on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.” As a forum where students and professionals can voice their thoughts on such issues as Gaza, the occupation of the West Bank, and American involvement in Israeli politics, J Street U is particularly well suited for success at Reed. J Street U is not only composed entirely of young college students, but has proven willing to criticize the Israeli government in its handling of the occupation. This is a departure from many other Jewish-activist organizations in the United States.

Jewish-American organizations in the U.S. face a sort of identity crisis. Engaging both Jewish and non-Jewish college students in discussions of Middle-East politics has proved difficult. Many Israeli advocacy groups lean far to the right of the political spectrum, which discourages many young people from joining. It is for this reason that J Street, a non-profit liberal advocacy group run out of Washington D.C, created their sister organization J Street U. Both organizations seek to open lines of dialogue between Americans on disparate sides of the conflict.

The stated aim of J Street U is to promote American leadership in reaching a permanent, peaceful solution to the conflict in the West Bank. Espousing the two-state solution, J Street U holds conferences around the country aimed at directly affecting policy makers and interest groups such as the National Jewish Federation. Soon, Reed’s J Street U organizers will meet with Portland’s local Jewish Federation to discuss their opinions on America’s involvement with Israel. J Street U is also planning on putting together an event with Reed’s Amnesty International chapter highlighting the human rights and water crisis in Gaza.

Portland State University and Lewis and Clark College have their own J Street U groups, and the individual campus chapters are free to communicate in whichever ways they see fit. “Individual clubs can go their own way,” says Bencivengo, but “there is a lot of interbranch communication” as well.

In October, during the lastest war between Hamas and Israel, J Street U held a vigil for the victims of the conflict. The group has also taught a paideia class, training potential members for leadership positions. There will be more leadership training will be on Feb 26th, and there will be a national convention in Washington D.C. over spring break. J Street U will be providing substantial subsidies for travel and lodging for students who choose to go. “Its an incredible opportunity” says member Austin Weisgrau ’15, “to learn more from a huge spectrum of Israeli, Palestinian, and American politicians and NGOs working to end the conflict.”

Both Bencivengo and Weisgrau are quick to acknowledge the political differences between J Street and J Street U. As Bencivengo puts it “J Street U is slightly more liberal than J Street.” The college campuses out of which J Street U groups are led tend to attract more progressive voices, those ready to diverge from both Israeli and American handling of the conflict. The demographics for J Street U also differ from other similar organizations. Because of the nature of the conflict and the goals of community outreach, the organization draws participants from varied backgrounds and political leanings, often in situations where perspectives wouldn’t normally be shared. “We’re a place where anyone with any background and relationship to the Israeli-Palestinian community can come and talk,” says Bencivengo.

“We're trying to push the big Jewish community institutions to take more progressive stances on the conflict”, says Weisgrau. His opinions seem to mirror those of others on campus, many liberal activists are frustrated with the conservative attitude with which Jewish communities approach the conflict.

Reed’s organizers try to hosts regular meetings where anyone is welcome to voice their opinions in a safe, shared space. As Weisgrau puts it “a lot of us with connections to the conflict have trouble finding spaces where we can talk about it without feeling attacked.” Members hope that students will not only speak frankly to each other about solutions, but attend the annual conference to voice their concerns to policy makers as well.

If you’d like to know more about J Street U, visit their website at http://www.jstreetu.org. If you’re interested in Reed’s group, email Austin Weisgrau and look for upcoming events.

Both Amnesty International and J Street U desperately need the support of freshmen and sophomore members but the question remains; how do these organizations appeal to younger audiences who are already busy with school, work, and other obligations? My high school certainly didn’t have an answer, but Reed’s culture may be more conducive to cooperation among student organizers and students.

Kenchel received flak during her time tabling at activities fair, and J Street U encounters extremist views from many prominent Jewish organizations. It must feel like high school all over again. By focusing on direct action and community outreach, these lean-mean, peace-promoting machines are some of the best internationally-focused groups Reed has to offer. As with the student leaders themselves, it is my hope that Reedies will take time out of their busy day to write a letter to a foreign minister, or voice their opinion on Gaza. Perhaps then we will be on the road to change.