Stanford Burma Campaign against Tac

[zni@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]

Subject: Stanford Burma Campaign against Taco Bell

>From Nick Thompson (nickt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)

In the last week, Stanford SEAC has had a much-more-succesful-than-we
thought-possible campaign against Taco Bell (ie... Pepsi + Burma).
One of the main reasons it has worked so well is because we have been able to
use the support and success of so many other schools as as a bargaining chip
in every situation. I hope all of you can use what happened here
to help your own campaigns.

So, it started last week when the Dean of Students announced that Taco
Bell was under serious consideration to open a franchise in our student
union. We responded immediately with a letter to the Stanford Daily and
then in a weekly column. After that we decided that we would set the
ambitious goal of getting 1000 signatures (on a campus of 5000
undergrads) specifically opposing Taco Bell and asking for a student
government resolution against all products from corporations directly
invested in Burma.

We held a late-night meeting and set up a petitioning plan, hitting all
the dorms, the center of campus, the campus movie theatre etc... After
one day we had gathered 500 signatures and sent out press releases titled
"The South Africa of the 90S!!!." and explained how we were exceeding our
goal far beyond our expectations. We also explaied that we were "part of
the largest student organization in the country."

Witthin the next days we got endorsed by most of the student government,
other organizations and got on the local radio, local TV and then The San
Francisco Chronicle and the big radio stations at their news hour.
Tomorrow, we plan a public presentation of 2000 signatures to the Dean of
Students and are completely convinced he will abandon Taco Bell - he's
been very friendly so far and it is pretty obvious at this point that
about 90% of the student body opposes Taco Bell. If anyone wants a copy of
the news reports, we'll be very happy to send them.

some things we learned:

it really helped us to identify with the S. Africa campaign; Newspapers
remember how crazy that was and would love to pick this one up just as it
is getting off the ground.

a lot of people, at least here, read the local
paper and can be convinced by solid arguments and, while signing a
petition is pretty easy, people haven't been nearly as apathetic as we
thought. Clearly, infiltrating the campus paper is a good idea.

If you send a press release out sayingthat you've "more than
accomplished your goals" it looks really cool. We also found that as this
campaign got going some people who hadn't been as active before, really
took ownership and did some amazing things. it also helped to talk to the
Dean of students before the campaign kicked off so that he didn't feel
like there was any antagonism. After all, he is the Dean of Students;
he's here for us.

here's a copy of the column i wrote in the Stanford Daily; feel free to
steal anything you want.

**********************
No Taco Hell

        In Friday's Daily, Dean of Students Marc Wais was quoted as
saying that any eatery in Tresidder must meet two criteria, "[they] must
provide a low-cost menu. And second, they must remain open late in the
evening."
        I suggest a third criterium: whomever runs the eatery must follow
a corporate ethic consistent with the goals of this university and with
the morals of the individuals who make up our community. Taco Bell can
easily meet the first two criteria; it fails abysmally on the third.
        Taco Bell is owned and operated by Pepsi - a company with a human
rights record that makes Darth Vadar look angelic and Ollie North seem
affable. Pepsi runs a bottling plant in Burma and in so doing, directly
gives money to a military dictatorship that gained power by shooting
thousands of non-violent student protesters in 1988, imprisoned Aung San
Suu Kyi, the 1991 Nobel Peace Prize winner for 6 years, uses slave labor,
refused to cede power to a democratically elected government in 1990,
recklessly logs pristine forests and is partly responsible for much of
our imported heroin. This oppressive dictatorship receives nearly all of
its financial support from the foreign investment banned from Burma
before 1988.
        These undisputed facts should be enough to deter anyone
interesting in doing business with the military regime. However, they
aren't strong enough to deter Pepsi and they aren't even strong enough
for Pepsi to act forthcomingly. Pepsi hasn't released information
regarding how much of their money goes into military coffers. Pepsi has
refused to answer questions regarding their possible use of slave labor
in their counter-trade practices. Pepsi has even promoted the
dictatorship at trade shows. No one is allowed into Burma to check on the
situation and Pepsi certainly refuses to help.
        While it is somewhat possible to form a cogent argument favoring
Pepsi's operations in Burma, it is almost impossible to argue that
Stanford should ignore the situation and blithely sponsor an eatery that
may be leading to the oppression of millions. To do this is to spit in
the face of conservative Republican senators, 10 Nobel Peace Prize
winners, the Stanford Investment Responsibility Committee and a giant
international investment movement working for what Desmond Tutu has
called "The South Africa of the 90s."
        In Stanford's original charter the University claims to be
founded to "...promote the public welfare by exercising an influence in
behalf of humanity and civilization, teaching the blessings of liberty
regulated by law..." With this charter, and with our humanity, comes a
burden to exercise responsibility beyond the confines of our serene
campus. It brings with it a burden to think about where our millions are
going and to avoid acting as leeches sucking up the cheapest late-night
tacos we can find if so doing funds forces diametrically opposed to
liberty.
        I am afraid of two things. The first is arriving next fall to
find a Taco Bell wormed into the center of campus. The second is a
divorce between Stanford and Taco Bell for "undisclosed reasons" -
perhaps because the administration fears the daily pickets that have
marked several other campus Taco Bells.
        Stanford must not side-step this critical issue. It must meet it
head on. Stanford must write an open letter to Pepsi explaining the
situation in Burma and why many at Stanford are concerned with the idea
of a campus Taco Bell. Then, the burden of responsibility should shift to
Pepsi to convince us that Aung San Suu Kyi and the Burmese democratic
forces are wrong. If Pepsi ignores our questions or responds with
beaurocratic jargon, as they have every other time they've been asked,
then another restaurant must sate our late-night hunger.
         Camus once wrote "I would like to be able to love justice and
love my country too."  We should be able to love justice and love
Stanford too.




*****************************************************************************
Nick Thompson       Stanford SEAC
(415) 723-3307      (415) 725-7339 (fax)
nickt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx     seac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
****************************************************************************

"All of us at Unocal are very proud of the international reputation for
integrity and high ethical standards that the company has earned."

__________
When spiders unite they can tie down a lion.  (Ethiopian Proverb)

The Free Burma Coalition
225 North Mills Street
Madison, WI 53706
Tel: (608)-256-6572
Fax: (608)-263-9992