That is the provocative question posed by Vice to Professor Andrew Ross, who teaches Social and Cultural Analysis at New York University. As one of the founders of debt resistance groups like Occupy Student Debt and Strike Debt; a member of the Debt Collective; an advocate for the rights of debtors; and an author of Creditocracy and the Case for Debt Refusal, he is clearly something of an expert on the subject. His answer?
A strike of any kind is a tactic. It’s not a solution. It’s a tactic towards a goal, and the goal here ultimately is for the US to join the long list of industrialized countries around the world that make it their business to offer a free public higher education system. None of these other countries are as affluent as the US; there’s no question that this country could afford to do so. In fact, we produced an estimate not that long ago about how cheap it would be for the federal government to cover tuition at all two and four-year colleges. There are several estimates in circulation, and a few years ago that kind of proposal was dismissed out of hand. But now we’re beginning to see it pop up on Capitol Hill in various forms. It’s a proposal that’s part of Bernie Sanders’ campaign for president. It’s a proposal that pushed President Obama in the direction of making community colleges free, at least for two years. It’s becoming a little more respectable to talk about [solutions for student debt], on Capitol Hill and in the public sphere in general. None of that would have happened without a student debt resistance.
Read the rest of this illuminating interview here. Given the mounting economic and social consequences of this issue, one can expect the public debate about student debt and the cost of higher education to only intensify.