Places of Change: Colleges, Communities,
and the Logic of Struggle
 

 Corey Dolgon
 
0.1. In the Fall of 1998, after 18 months of conflict, the
administration at Southampton College of Long Island University
terminated their maintenance contract with Laro Service Systems
and rehired the custodial unit whose jobs they had outsourced
just a year and a half earlier.  After countless protests,
sit-ins, educational campaigns, and a variety of strategical
political interventions, the Southampton Coalition for Justice
[CFJ] succeeded in pressuring the administration to cancel the
Laro contract.  Although CFJ discussed other campus and community
issues including organizing adjunct faculty, campus recycling,
the democratization of campus governance, etc., the group
(comprised of college faculty, students, staff, community members
and the custodians themselves) focused mostly on ending the Laro
contract.  And we won.  In September of 1998, the provost
announced to the press that Southampton College was rehiring the
custodial unit intact, and that the campus remained a "caring
community."  He expressed the hope that custodians wouldn't see
the decision as "a victory" per se.  But, in a CFJ meeting
following the announcement, custodians explained, "it feels like
a victory to us." 

0.2. I have written widely about the CFJ (Dolgon, 2001; 2000a;
2000b; 1999; 1998; 1997) and I feel strongly that it stands as an
excellent contemporary model for coalition building on college
campuses.  But what I want to discuss in this article is the
impact that the group's organizing had on the larger, extended
community of the Hamptons.  I contend that the issues raised, the
institutions engaged, and the visions created by the CFJ left a
lasting impression on the area's political landscape.  While this
paper will describe some of the Coalition's history and actions,
I want to focus on the enduring ways in which the group's
campaign for social justice created the necessary political and
social space for continued struggles that are directly and
indirectly related to the initial circumstances of the
outsourcing.  Specifically, I examine how the Coalition's
emphasis on issues of race and community identity became
particularly salient for the Town of Southampton with its unique
history and current demographic changes. 

The College and the Community 

1.1. Administrative decisions to contract out service employees
are now commonplace among university officials, who believe that
the problems of higher education can be solved by downsizing and
privatization.  A 1997 opinion piece in the Chronicle of Higher
Education, written by Richard Maloney--the "Distinguished
Corporate Executive in Residence" at Washington
University--extolled the virtues of applying corporate downsizing
techniques to university management.  He called on universities
to reinvent themselves just as corporations had by privatizing
"non-essential" tasks and terminating "non-productive" people. 
While many have argued that stronger links between higher
education and corporations have evolved steadily since the early
20th century (Geiger, 1997 & 1986; Noble, 1979), the infusion (if
not complete saturation) of educational practices and policies
with corporate, bottom-line mentalities now appears hegemonic
(Soley, 1995; Nelson, 1997; White, 2000). 

1.2. For over a decade before 1996, Southampton College had run a
deficit; its enrollment had dropped steadily and it had no
endowment to speak of.  In response, the administration did what
many institutions do: they conflated education with management
and hired more administrators.  They also initiated regular
breakfast meetings with regional corporate executives to
determine ways in which the institution's curriculum and policies
could address the "educational and training needs of area
businesses."  And when the College was charged with hurting local
business because it sponsored large retail warehouse sales for J.
Crew and the Maslow Group in its gymnasium, the Provost
responded, "[We are] an enormously powerful economic force,
bringing in at least $30 million worth of business to the East
End....  The broader perspective is that we are decidedly
pro-business" (Southampton Press, 1998).  Contracting out
custodial workers, however, was perhaps the most blatant act of
corporate banditry, as even LARO executives admitted they were in
the business of cutting wages and benefits and busting unions. 
LARO Vice President, Lou Vacca Jr., explained to the New York
Times that LARO gets hired because they can do it cheaper and
the only way to do it cheaper is to "take it out of labor." 

1.3. Just as downsizing and privatization are no longer new to
higher education, the exploitation of low level, service workers
(especially people of color) is not new to Eastern Long Island. 
Southampton has been a famous summer resort area for some of New
York City's trendiest elite since the late 1800s.  While many
long-time European American residents either made fortunes by
selling property and starting service companies or established
themselves as well-paid craftspeople and "skilled" service
providers for metropolitan blue-bloods, the local Native American
and African American population took on the jobs of low paying
service work.  Because of the seasonal nature and racial
bifurcation of the summer-colony economy, major unions ignored
the area, few unions formed and workers of color remained
disenfranchised, the last hired and first fired, and concentrated
in the most dirty, difficult and demeaning jobs in town (Breen,
1989; Dolgon, 1999). 

1.4. But the past two decades have produced a shift in political
economy as changes in financial markets, transportation and
telecommunications have allowed more wealthy New Yorkers to enjoy
the Hamptons on a year-round basis.  In part, according to
historian, Stephen Gaines, young Wall Street millionaires wanted
"not only second homes but an arena in which to compete
socially.  And so with pockets stuffed with cash, a generation of
arrivistes invaded the East End" (Gaines, 1997).  But local
planning documents, surveys, and realtors claim that the majority
of new, year-round residents are those wealthy, mid-thirties to
mid-forties couples who want to raise families far from city
decay and the fortress aesthetic that now dominates "downtown"
urban life (Southampton Planning Commission, 1997; SCIRR, 1997;
Interview with Homes and Lands publisher, Linda Miller-Zellner). 
Whatever the primary motivation, this migration has now combined
with an eastward movement of developers' capital pouring into one
of the few areas on Long Island where significant open space
remains.  Meanwhile houses and condominiums, megastores and
outlet centers, are sprouting rapidly throughout the Hamptons. 
The region is quickly becoming not so much a summer resort or a
suburb where people commute from everyday, but more a distant
borough of New York City where executives, attorneys, and
entertainers send faxes, e-mails, and run teleconferences. 

1.5. These changes have also been accompanied by global capital's
new labor relations and migrations, as Latino(a) workers from
Central and South America comprise the fastest growing segment of
the low wage service sector.  The East End is likewise
experiencing another new migratory trend: the immigration of
international workers (predominantly Latino(a) directly to
exurban and suburban areas (Mahler, 1995).  And the evolving
niche for year-round, low wage agricultural (gardening and
landscaping), construction and service work has inspired a
growing population of permanent Latino(a) residents whose local
numbers have increased over 600% since 1980 and now comprise
between 10 and 15% of the Hamptons public school population. 
Even more noticeable is the evolution of an extensive informal
economy of "off-the-book" house cleaners, groundskeepers,
dishwashers, and both skilled and non-skilled day laborers.  One
local paper explained as early as 1990 that, "the Hispanic
community has, for the most part, come here to fill in the gaps
of our service economy ... [and] represents a crucial part of the
workforce" (East Hampton Star, 13/1/90).  Although this "informal
economy" builds on previous seasonal and migratory labor
relations, the rapidly expanding nature and ethnic make-up of the
area's low-wage workforce represents what Portes and Castells
claim is a "realignment of class structure" (Portes and Castells,
1989).  The Hamptons stand as a unique place where the two
extremes of class reformation (the newly wealthy and
disenfranchised immigrants) have begun the process of stabilizing
and solidifying new footholds on the fields of global capitalism. 

1.6. While neither of these trends was directly evidenced on
campus before the outsourcing, both were important in shaping a
new set of dynamics: one for the administration's decision to
outsource, and the other for the cultural and political work of
CFJ.  The administration knew that economic conditions were
driving wages down and, in fact, LARO's own success was based
almost entirely on the use of low wage, non-unionized, Latino
immigrant labor.  But the Coalition's work challenged this
dynamic of service sector rationalization by questioning the
"marketplace" hegemony prevalent among administrators.  In
essence, the group attacked a contradiction that rose from the
College's corporate practices being at odds with its proclaimed
social mission, that of building a "caring and compassionate
community."  As CFJ brought its protests to the wider Hamptons
community, it also challenged the domination of visions of
community and area identity by the older, established white,
middle class and the newly rich.  CFJ not only tried to recast
the political and social segregation of campus relations by
bringing together students, faculty, custodians, and supporters
from the larger community, it also explored a model of democratic
process and practice that countered the increasing bifurcation of
economic and cultural politics in the Hamptons. 

The Coalition 

2.1. While outsourcing was a "trigger event," Southampton College
custodians were angry about the way that they had been treated
for a long time.  They wanted to act in some way, and appreciated
the support from others on campus and in the community.  While
all of the early coalition members (students, faculty, community
members and the custodians) agreed that the outsourcing was
economically motivated, it was the custodians who explained to us
the salient place that racism held within the administration's
mindset.  The custodial unit was the only one on campus comprised
of predominantly people of color.  In fact, under the leadership
of a new shop steward, the custodians had finally started
pressuring the administration to create what they called a
"promotional pipeline."  For 30 years, only two custodians had
ever been promoted to the next highest level--mechanic--within
the Physical Plant Department, and neither of them had been
people of color.  Custodians were sure that this pressure had
inspired the administration to find a private management company
and, in the words of the Physical Plant manager, "Wash our hands
of all of you." 

2.2. CFJ organized a publicity campaign to educate the campus and
community as well as place pressure on the College.  This concern
with publicity was especially salient since the College was
embarking on a campaign to build its endowment by taking
advantage of the local community's staggering wealth.  Another
early CFJ strategy was to involve the Town of Southampton's
Anti-Bias Task Force (ABTF).  During the Coalition's second
meeting, a local community activist and ABTF member suggested
that a couple of custodians attend an ABTF meeting and ask for
assistance in challenging the College's discriminatory employment
practices.  The ABTF initially responded with outrage at the
College's past practices as well as its recent decision to
outsource custodians.  Soon after, however, more conservative
ABTF members met with the College's provost and he assured them
that no racism was involved in employment decisions.  Thus the
ABTF backed off. 

2.3. Over time the ABTF would shift back and forth from a
conservative and defensive position, where some members claimed
no interest in "getting involved with College's business," to an
active, progressive role in trying to negotiate a resolution
around issues of promotion and hiring.  More importantly for the
ABTF (and the Town itself), the groups ultimately recognized that
institutionalized discrimination existed both on campus and in
the larger community.  As the local papers increased their
coverage of the CFJ's charges of racial discrimination, the ABTF
became a more visible agency.  The combined pressure to address
the "College problem" and become a more viable and active group
in the community led to the resignation of many conservative ABTF
members and ushered in a more progressive and activist leadership
for the Task Force. 

2.4. CFJ's most successful strategy involved challenging the
College's attempt to raise funds from the Town of Southampton for
a swimming pool.  The College proposed to make the pool available
for public use (with a $500/year family membership) but it would
be located at, and operated by, the College.  CFJ informed the
College that it would publicly oppose the pool project because
the College had acted as poor local citizens by negatively
affecting the employment conditions of residents.  In fact, we
argued that the College's policies could influence a downward
spiral for employment conditions throughout the region if the
wages and benefits fell for unionized workers in maintenance and
service positions.  In response, the College offered numerous
concessions to the custodians: 1) restoring tuition remission; 2)
revisiting the promotional pipeline issue; and 3) incorporating
the Coalition in the College's evaluation of LARO's performance. 
The Coalition accepted these concessions and decided not to
publicly oppose the pool project.  This decision was difficult,
however, as some members of the group believed the issue
represented a very important opportunity to expose the
administration's duplicity.  While administrators claimed to be
"good citizens" and part of a "caring community" on the one hand,
they were treating custodians (as one said) "like slaves on the
auction block."  In the end, however, it was the custodians
themselves who swayed the rest of the Coalition to accept the
concessions and back off of the pool project.  The workers
believed that students and faculty wanted the pool and that
public opposition would damage the Coalition's support on campus. 

2.5. One of the first major impacts of the struggle was the
demand of student CFJ members (many of whom were enrolled in
College's Friends World Program) for a course in social
activism.  The Program responded by hiring Bob Zellner, a
long-time Civil Rights activist who had begun his political work
as the first white field secretary for the Student Non-Violent
Coordinating Committee in the early 1960s.  Zellner had moved to
the Hamptons about 16 months earlier, and had gotten involved in
local issues including CFJ and the ABTF.  In constructing a
course on activism, Zellner wanted to introduce students to a
variety of social and political movements and how they shaped the
contours of American life.  He also had an important action
component that required students to engage in some form of
community activism.  According to Zellner, this element addressed
the FWP emphasis on experiential education and forced students to
contemplate the practical and emotional dynamics of political
work.  Many of the students in his Fall 1997 course ended up
getting involved with the Coalition, thus refueling its efforts. 

2.6. Maggie King, a first year student from Texas, went to a
Coalition meeting and said that she was "really upset and
disgusted" at the way custodians were treated by the College. 
She was inspired to take action and join the Coalition.  Another
student who attended wrote in her journal that the custodians'
situation was part of a larger problem with racism and
segregation on campus.  She explained: 

Since my first days at LIU I have been aware of the lack of
minorities within the student body and the faculty and the
segregation within the dorms.  I have seen rent-a-cops [campus security], and I have yet to see one of them be a minority.  Onmore than one occasion I have seen them pull aside an African American man from a group to check for ID with no apparent reason. 
2.7. The Coalition agreed that students should form a separate
"task force" to take on particular actions that the Coalition
could support but might be too risky for custodians and other
employees to participate in directly.  The desire to be more
active would be a growing source of frustration for students,
especially new ones.  Some custodians had "settled" into their
new roles as LARO employees, since CFJ maintained a presence to
protect them from LARO's intimidation tactics.  Many students,
though, wanted the College to terminate the LARO contract
immediately and were impatient to organize direct actions that
might force the administration's hand. 

2.8. In essence, CFJ activity had inspired students to think
critically about larger issues of campus democracy.  While
students were still focused on the custodial situation, they also
questioned status quo power relationships and the lack of real
participation in making important campus decisions.  Students
were not only recognizing their own responsibility as local
citizens, but developing what Francis Moore Lappe and Paul Martin
Dubois call a "relational self-interest" (Lappe and Dubois,
1994).  The connection between the custodians' own self-interests
and the students' raised larger questions of social justice such
as: who should have power and authority to make decisions in a
democratic society, and how might we actually democratize our own
community to raise the level of control and dignity in peoples'
lives?  Environmentally conscious students theorized that any
effective campus recycling program would have to include
custodians from design to implementation process.  The college's
womens' issues collective recognized that the lack of student and
staff power in policy making stood in the way of adequately
addressing sexual harassment issues.  The entire campus community
was developing a critical consciousness about power and
democracy. 

2.9. The CFJ struggle continued throughout the Winter and Spring
of 1998 with little movement, but much angst on the part of the
College's administration.  It did, however, promote the first
African American custodian to mechanic.  It also tentatively
agreed to establish a system for promotion that included stipends
for training and licensing courses.  In the summer of 1998, the
custodians affiliated with the Teamsters Union.  This decision
represented a new level of solidarity among custodians, who
had never been able to replace their union, despite much
discontent with the way they were represented by the
organization.  Meanwhile, the Coalition held meetings to plan for
Fall demonstrations and publicity.  Intimidated by the prospect
of another barrage of bad press and keen on renewing their local
fundraising drive which would undoubtedly demand an untainted
public image, the College agreed to terminate the contract and
rehired the entire custodial unit under the same terms they had
before the outsourcing.  The new custodial contract, which would
come up for negotiation in late Fall of 1998, would be bargained
with Teamster representation.  It felt like a victory for all of
us. 

2.10. The CFJ, however, had already gained quite a bit of support
from local community groups and activists and wanted to build on
its success.  During the first meeting in September of 1998, the
Coalition decided to put on a conference that focused on local
and regional community organizing and would pull in a wide range
of groups interested in a variety of issues.  The group also was
concerned that, without the custodial issue, it might not be able
to focus on some of the broader concerns raised during the
struggle, such as the fragmentation and hierarchy of power in
campus governance; the lack of minority representation in faculty
and staff; the need for adjunct faculty to organize; and the
desire to have an environmentally safe and sustainable campus.
While all of these issues had been discussed at meetings and
demonstrations, the CFJ itself had rarely done any specific work
or crafted any particular strategy to deal with them.  The group,
now led mostly by students and ad-hoc gatherings, continued to
organize the conference, but it became increasingly clear that
the Coalition itself would probably cease to meet once the
conference was over. 

2.11. The conference itself was quite successful as over 100
people attended sessions on youth organizing, environmental
sustainability, a national demonstration against the School for
the Americas (which had been attended by some CFJ students),
Anti-Bias activism, and a variety of other local issues.  Over
the ensuing months, a number of local activists would credit the
CFJ with raising the community's consciousness about race and
class issues and bringing together activists to network and
strategize on a number of different topics.  On campus, adjunct
faculty continued to organize and students held a demonstration
and sit-in in the provost's office to protest the school's lack
of an official policy on sexual harassment.  Many of the students
who led the sexual harassment protest had been involved in the
Coalition's efforts.  As one student explained, "the Coalition
still remains with each person who participated in it.  The group
and the experience is part of us and we bring it to other places
and groups of people." 

From College to Community 

3.1. On a frigid winter's day in January of 2000, over 100 people
marched through the streets of Southampton to protest the Town
Board's violation of Affirmative Action policies.  The
demonstrators nailed a three page list of demands on the door to
Town Hall calling on the local government to diversify its staff
positions--only 29 of 345 government workers were African
American and two-thirds of those workers were in the lowest pay
grades.  The key incident triggering the march occurred when the
Board hired 5 new Town attorneys, all of them white, despite the
application of a highly qualified Black woman, Judith Mitchell. 
Many leaders from various communities of color addressed the
crowd.  Lucius Ware, president of the Eastern Long Island NAACP
chastized the Town's long history of racism and discrimination,
while Sherry Blakey-Smith, Director of the Shinnecock Indian
Reservation's Community Learning Center observed that, "People
are coming together and waking up.  We need to go on, to stand up
and say we want a better community.  Everyone needs to be a part
of this.  Let's get those people out of their mansions and into
this kind of forum." 

3.2. One week later, Ware was back in front of the Southampton
District School Board.  As part of the NAACP's annual address to
the board, Ware lambasted the group for not hiring more African
American and other teachers of color.  Citing figures once again,
he noted that only 9 of 144 teachers were Black, fewer were
Latino or Native American, and only 2 of 21 professional staff
were minorities.  Ware was joined at this presentation by Sharon
Saunders, the founder of the local youth group THANKU (The
Hillcrest Neighborhood Kids Union).  The Hillcrest area is the
largest black community within the Village of Southampton and
Saunders has become the neighborhood's strongest youth
advocate--directing after-school activities, learning groups, a
partnership with a local organic farmer, and a host of music and
theater projects.  At the Board meeting, she argued that "it
should be against the law to deprive African American children of
having Black teachers....  It's important to see someone who
looks like you behind the desk, teaching you and showing you that
you can succeed, too."  Both Ware and Saunders mentioned the
increasing need for more Latino instructors to meet the
burgeoning population of year-round Latino residents. 

3.3. In April of 2000, a group of Shinnecock activists blocked
developers' attempts to start bulldozing property across the
highway from the Reservation.  Claiming the land was an ancient,
ancestral burial ground, dozens of people tried to keep work
crews from clearing trees and digging foundations for a housing
development.  The Shinnecock had filed a lawsuit seeking an
injunction against the development, but were turned down because
they missed a 30-day deadline following the Town's approval of
the project.  While they awaited an appeal, the developers tried
to move in, hoping to make any subsequent court decision moot. 
As Shinnecock and their supporters showed up to stop the
bulldozers, State police arrived, and within minutes had arrested
three demonstrators.  Meanwhile, Shinnecock residents and student
supporters from Southampton College had built a teepee on the
grounds of the College across from the proposed development. 
After several days College Provost Tim Bishop requested that the
teepee be removed.  He stated that, "The teepee represented a
symbol that the college was taking a position in this matter, and
we're not taking a position."  While it may have been wise to
avoid land disputes with the Shinnecock who have for years
claimed that Southampton College itself sits on land stolen from
the Tribe, Bishop's claim seems disingenuous given earlier
statements concerning the institution's "decidedly pro-business"
position. 

3.4. This was not the first land-use protest by Shinnecock
residents in Southampton, but it marked the first time that
Native Americans were joined by members of the Town's Anti-Bias
Task Force and the NAACP.  In fact, one of the first people
arrested during the civil disobedience was Bob Zellner, who had
become the ABTF Co-Chair.  A few days later, Ware again addressed
the Town Board, this time arguing for a policy that would notify
Shinnecock leaders of pending development applications for any
lands bordering the Reservation and other contested areas.  He
explained, "These lands have been taken, stolen, over the years. 
This town needs to immediately take it upon itself to properly
code the disputed lands and put into law means that would
directly notify the Indians of any development on property that
would remotely be linked to Indian ownership."  What was new
about this particular land dispute between the Shinnecock and
Town-supported developers was the evolving coalition of groups
that formed to support the Tribe's protest. 

3.5. According to Bob Zellner, it would be hard to imagine this
type of activist climate without the Coalition for Justice's
struggle two years ago.  Zellner explains: 

When the Coalition came to the Anti-Bias Task Force, it forced the group to address real issues of racism in the community.  Before the custodians' fight, the task force was mostly made up of apologists and people who wanted to celebrate `diversity.'  Only a few people wanted to challenge long established structuresof racial and economic oppression.  The Hamptons (Southampton College included) really looked like a modern day plantation society. 
3.6. As the Coalition pressed the ABTF to address the custodial
issue, the more conservative leadership came under fire for
backtracking on promises and for holding secret and exclusive
meetings with College administrators.  As the leadership lost
credibility, they stepped away from the task force, as did other
conservative members who tired of heated discussions that became
commonplace.  In their place came a newer group of more
activist-oriented members. 

3.7. Lucious Ware was not a "new" attendee to ABTF meetings--he
had been a member in the past.  But Ware conveyed that when
Zellner became co-chair and started "making waves," he decided to
return and become an active member of the group.  Soon, the task
force also attracted people who had been quietly active in
neighborhood or school issues (Hazel Saunders, for example), and
were now beginning to speak out on larger issues.  In fact,
Saunders is currently organizing the Hillcrest area residents
(with the aid of the NAACP and the ABTF) to block the building of
an 86,000 square foot nursing home facility in the middle of the
neighborhood.  Despite local environmental groups' concerns over
pollution and traffic, the Town Board has given the developers
approval for the construction.  But Saunders argues that it's an
act of environmental racism because, "the Town would never have
given such a zoning exemption to developers to build in a white
community."  She continues, "We are going to stop this by any
means necessary--any means necessary, you understand.  I'm
rounding up local activists, appealing to the state legislators,
Senators Charles Schumer and Hillary Clinton.  I talked to Jesse
Jackson last week, and if we have to conduct sit-ins or
demonstrations, people in this neighborhood and others will do
it."  And Saunders will get help from a variety of local
activists, the ABTF, and Shinnecock leaders who have pledged
their support. 

3.8. In November 2001 Bob Zellner lost an election for
Southampton Town Supervisor.  His work as Co-Chair of the ABTF
had placed him sufficiently in the public eye to be chosen as the
Democratic candidate for Supervisor.  Given his uphill battle in
an overwhelmingly Republican region, Zellner did much better than
any recent Democratic candidate for the position.  By running for
office, Zellner was able to promote a platform that both
criticized the history of racism and prejudice in the area and
recognized the need to address the result of changing local
demographics.  Thus he called for continuing affirmative action
in support of the growing low-income population.  He also spoke
about increasing bilingual programs for the growing population of
Latino and Asian children in the public schools.  Zellner got
almost unanimous support from Latino, African American and Native
American voters. 

3.9. I do not want to claim that, without the CFJ's work, none of
this community activism would have occurred.  Struggles over
racial discrimination and inequality in Southampton have arisen
in the past.  But the unique social and economic dynamics of the
community made these past protests brief, limited and localized
moments of action.  For the first time in the Southampton's
history there is a prolonged conversation on issues of race,
discrimination, and economic and social justice.  Two years ago
the pressures from communities of color and from progressive
white activists fueled the return of two Democrats to the
previously all-Republican Town Board.  This year, despite
Zellner's defeat, another Democrat was elected to the Board,
giving Democrats a 3-2 majority.  While the Democrats have
promised to be more accessible and sensitive to issues of racial
discrimination and bias, none of the activists interviewed or
observed seem prepared to rely on pledges made by politicians. 
The new climate of organizing, demonstrating, and civic
engagement is not likely to be quelled easily. 

3.10. I would like to conclude by saying that this invigorated
spirit of political participation and progressive activism comes
in a unique period.  With new populations vying to establish
identities as legitimate residents of the Hamptons, and older
"settlers" in the area also struggling to maintain their control
over the region's character and landscape, struggles over issues
of racial and economic equality have an enormous potential to
make a significant impact on the future.  Specific and explicit
discussions and debates about racism and discrimination won't
guarantee a more equitable, democratic and just society in the
Hamptons, but a continued silence on these issues would most
certainly have guaranteed their impossibility.  I am confident
that the campus struggle of a small coalition has helped to break
that silence. 
 

References 

Breen, T.H. 1996.  Imagining the Past: East Hampton Histories
Atlanta: University of Georgia Press. 

Dolgon, Corey. 2001.  "Building Community Amidst the Ruins:
Strategies for Struggle from the Coalition For Justice at
Southampton College."  Forging Radical Alliances Across
Difference: Coalition Politics for the New Millennium.  Edited
by Jill Bystedzienski and Steven Schacht.  Lanham, MD: Rowman and
Littlefield. 

Dolgon, Corey.  2000a.  "Politics on Campus: The Sociologist and
the Janitors."  Applying Sociology: Making a Better World.  Ed.
William Dubois.  New York: Allyn & Bacon. 

Dolgon, Corey.  2000b.  "Janitors For Justice: Building Campus
Movements for Social Change" in Campus, Inc.: Corporate Power in
the Ivory Tower.  Ed. Geoffry D. White.  New York: Prometheus
Books. 

Dolgon, Corey.  1999.  "Universities in Crisis; Workers in
Struggle: The Knowledge Industry, Political Solidarity and
Applied Sociology."  Journal of the National Social Science
Association (12:2). 

Dolgon, Corey.  1998.  "Anatomy of a Victory."  Z Magazine
(December). 

Dolgon, Corey.  1997.  "Coalition Organizing: Cleaning Up the
Hamptons."  Z Magazine (June). 

Gaines, Stephen.  1997.  Philistines at the Hedgerow: Passion
and Property in the Hamptons.  New York: Little, Brown & Co. 

Geiger, Roger.  1997.  Research and Relevant Knowledge: American
Research Universities since World War II.  Oxford: Oxford
University Press. 

___________.  1986.  To Advance Knowledge: The Growth of
American Research Universities, 1900-1940.  Oxford: Oxford
University Press. 

Nelson, Cary.  1997.  Will Teach For Food: The Crisis in
Academic Labor.  Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. 

Noble, David.  1979.  America By Design: Science, Technology,
and the Rise of Corporate Capitalism.  Oxford: Oxford University
Press. 

Soley, Lawrence.  1995.  Leasing the Ivory Tower: The Corporate
Takeover of Academia.  Boston: South End Press. 

White, Geoffry D., ed.  2000.  Campus, Inc.: Corporate Power in
the Ivory Tower.  New York: Prometheus Books. 
 

Corey Dolgon (cdolgon@worcester.edu) is Chair of the Sociology Department, Worcester State College, Worcester Massachusetts


 
 
 

 


 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 


 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 


 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 


 

Return to Table of Contents