“A political and democratic UvA is now more necessary than ever”
The UvA feels too much like a company run by three managers, write Mic van der Burgt and Freddie Kiel. According to them, it is high time that democratic reform of the UvA is tackled. “It is undesirable that the UvA community is only allowed to engage in politics if the Board agrees.”
The decades-old demand for a democratic university still appears to be inextricably linked to the UvA. In 1969, students occupied the Maagdenhuis to demand more say in the university governance. In 2015, the building was occupied again, once more with the demand that the UvA democratise. Now there is a new democratisation campaign, which began with history student Carlos van Eck applying for the position of chair of the Executive Board (CvB).
A petition has also been started, demanding, among other things, a transparent and democratically elected Executive Board. We support this movement. We want not only a more equitable administration, but also a university that is more resilient to the challenges that will increase in the coming years, because the current style of governance is not as self-evident as it seems.
Reorientation
The student protests of the 1960s were successful in enforcing a more democratic University Council (the then UR, replaced in 1997 by the Central Student Council and the Central Works Council, ed.), which was given a say in decision-making. However, this changed in the 1980s with the emergence of New Public Management. For universities, this meant a reorientation towards the market, an increase in tuition fees, extensive performance measurements and strongly managerial and hierarchical management. Instead of being a serious decision-making body, the councils now almost exclusively provided advice.
Business
The result is a university that feels like a business, where achieving certain performance targets is considered more important than the work itself and where students are expected to obtain their degrees as quickly as possible. The Executive Board no longer represents the interests of the UvA community, but is only responsible “for efficient administration”. The university is no longer a place where knowledge and creativity are central, but is simply a gateway to the labour market.
The result is a depoliticised university (just look at the low turnout in the student council elections) where the most important decisions are imposed from above by three managers. However, the Maagdenhuis occupation in 2015, the protests against the collaboration with Shell in 2023 and the occupations against the collaboration with Israeli institutions in 2024-2025 show that many students and staff regularly disagree fundamentally with the decisions of the Executive Board and that there is a broad desire for more participation.
In our opinion, this democratisation is not only necessary because the UvA community itself should have a say in matters that are important to it, but also because we need a resilient and connected university, especially at this moment in time.
Defence
In recent years, we have seen how (far) right-wing parties have become increasingly hostile towards the university and science. Our academic freedom is under pressure and must be defended. Despite the PVV’s loss in the recent general election, the total number of seats held by the far-right parties PVV, JA21 and FvD increased. One need only look across the ocean to see how quickly academic freedom can die a quiet death. And with €1.2 billion already cut from higher education, we can only expect more of the same with the coming militarisation of the economy, now that a large amount of money will be going to defence. We, as an academic community, will therefore have to be ready to defend our university.
Politicisation
This readiness requires a political climate at the university. The number of higher professional education and university students is approaching almost 800,000, not to mention all the lecturers and researchers. By engaging and mobilising them, we can resist the coming cuts. However, this requires a permanent place for political expression on campuses where students and staff can engage with important issues and, perhaps most importantly, potential solutions.
And while academic freedom is crucial to the social role that the university fulfils, this should not mean that our university becomes a thoroughly neutral institution. Positioning is not only necessary to defend education and science, but also to be a positive force in society.
However, the politicisation of students, lecturers and researchers at the UvA is being held back by restrictive rules of conduct and house rules. This led to the ironic situation in which posters from WO in Actie (WO in Action) against the cutbacks were removed by Facility Services, even though the university Board actually supported the actions. But it is equally undesirable for the UvA community to be allowed to engage in politics only if the Board agrees with it. A resilient university requires an open university.
Democratisation
A politicised university must be kept on the right track. However, it is not enough for students and staff to simply be given the opportunity to explain their views. More importantly, these views must actually be translated into policy.
For those who still cling to the idea that the Executive Board is only there to manage the UvA as efficiently as possible, we propose the following. Demonstrating against budget cuts, expressing support for Ukraine, maintaining ties with the fossil fuel industry or not: these are all political choices. The limits of academic freedom are also a political choice. The university therefore cannot avoid making political choices from time to time. The question is how these choices are made.
Sluggish
At present, this is essentially done by three people: the members of the Executive Board. It is therefore logical that some decisions are not supported by a large part of the UvA community, resulting in the necessary resistance. Think, for example, of the scrapping of the English-language psychology track, the sluggish policy on Palestine/Israel or the ever-increasing workload experienced by many fellow students and staff.
Democratic decision-making will not only take the different views and opinions within the UvA community seriously. It will also lead to broader support for the difficult choices that have to be made. A connected university requires a democratic university.
A political and democratic UvA is a university that stands together and can fight for itself. With the current challenges, the new democratisation campaign is therefore more necessary than ever.
Mic van der Burgt is a master’s student in political theory and Freddie Kiel is a bachelor’s student in biology.
