Colgate University’s film and media studies program continued its Ryan Family Film Series with “The Encampment,” a powerful documentary examining the realities of student protest movements. The film follows student organizers, university professors and community activists throughout the pro-Palestine encampments of 2024. It centers Columbia University as a reference point for all of the encampments occurring at universities, both nationally and globally. The film does not shy away from the difficult conversations innate to the Gaza-Israel conflict. Using on-the-ground testimony from both activists and whistleblowers, it discusses antisemitism, Islamophobia and the line between legitimate and mock-up criticism.
A significant aspect of the documentary is its focus on rhetoric and free speech. While encampment participants peacefully protested, reporters condemned them. Reporters further devalued the encampments by claiming they resulted from a TikTok trend. The film, however, illustrates the long history of these protests, noting similar encampments at Columbia to protest the Vietnam War. It follows the Columbia students who had voted on divestment and financial transparency years before the encampments. They eventually organized and led the encampments.
However, the film does not solely look at the students’ side. It explores the universities’ reactions to encampments, including initial neutrality, professor involvement and attempts at compromise. At Columbia, politicians and media outlets pressured the administration to bring in police, deploy the National Guard or even deport student protestors. Eventually, this led to the mass detainment of many encampment members. Some students were suspended or expelled, while involved alumni had their degrees rescinded.
After screening “The Encampment,” a panel of speakers explored the film’s issues in relation to Colgate. This panel was a collaboration between the peace and conflict studies and women’s, gender and sexuality studies programs. Two student representatives from Colgate Students of Liberation (CSL) also participated.
Jacob Mundy, associate professor and director of the peace and conflict studies program, remarked on his ability to hold events like the controversial film screening.
“We were effectively told if we made things academic, we would be supported by the administration,” Mundy said. “I feel really appreciative of that.”
This positive perspective does not mean there is no frustration with the administration. While Colgate did not see any encampments, students have not been silent. CSL’s two representatives, including co-president Nicole Hernandez, expressed discontent with how the administration has treated their club, further exploring the tension between university and student goals.
“We went through so much to even become a registered student organization,” Hernandez said. “We become registered, and they still tell us to move our [Oct. 7th] vigil.”
Regarding the student participants themselves, CSL’s experience with campus activism is much different than the large, diverse Columbia protests.
“In the last two years, [CSL has] only been women and people of color,” Hernandez said. “There’s a significant lack of community here as compared to New York City. There were vendors handing out food and … people coming together [in New York City]. I’m not sure what’s wrong with our student body.”
Where CSL brought current issues to mind, the panel’s professors handled the topic through historical context. Toward the end of the discussion, a student asked why Israelis are called colonizers in the film. This is a common point of contention and confusion for Zionists; Israel is the Jewish people’s promised land, so how could they be called colonizers? At a point in the film, the Israeli government was compared to South Africa’s apartheid administration. Nimanthi Rajasingham, associate professor of English and director of the women’s, gender and sexuality studies program, provided context.
“Of course there were Jewish people who lived on the land for hundreds of years, and they were indigenous to the land — there’s no one denying that,” Rajasingham said. “I think when they call it a settlers’ state, it’s referring to when the state of Israel was founded … when 750,000 Palestinians were displaced and some 500 villages evacuated.”
Mundy expanded on Rajasingham’s statement.
“Israel emerges out of a hasty decolonization by the British,” Mundy said. “What we’re dealing with is a legacy of British colonialism.”
To finish, Mundy provided a powerful statement emphasizing the brutal reality of the Gaza-Israel conflict.
“The conflict could be over tomorrow if Palestinians were given citizenship in Israel,” he said.
Despite the tension and controversy surrounding the subject, the documentary closes on an unexpectedly hopeful note. In the final moments, one of the student activists envisioned a future where the conflict ends and he can return to a place of peace and understanding — both personally and politically. Similarly, the post-film discussion invited students to engage critically with justice, dissent and the politics of belonging while providing a tentative path forward.
The film does not promise a happy ending because a decades-long struggle cannot be wrapped with a neat bow. However, through simple discussion, students and faculty can advocate for a better, more peaceful future.
