The sit-in lasted 97 hours. Students had stormed the university's main administrative buildings, chanting angry slogans about exploitation and morality in distant lands. When administrators finally capitulated to the students' demands, a wave of similar protests swept through campuses all across the country. The year could have been 1969, except that the issue wasn't Vietnam -- it was sweatshop labor. And instead of bringing flowers and marijuana to their protests, these University of Wisconsin (UW) students brought laptops and cell phones -- the networking tools of the modern activist.Despite their reputation for apathy and self-absorption, many of today's college students are getting involved in a new wave of activism. United by the campaign against exploitative sweatshops, students all across the nation -- from sprawling public universities to tiny Quaker colleges -- are proving their commitment to economic justice. Their demands are simple: Colleges must stop contracting with unethical sweatshops to produce university logo-wear (clothing and accessories sold in a school's bookshop or catalogue). Their tactics are reminiscent of the '60s -- sit-ins, marches, petitions -- but with a '90s edge. Connected by e-mail and sophisticated Web sites, the "sweat-free campus" protesters are using technology and refined organizing skills to create a united, national campaign.The sweat-free campus crusade dates back to 1997, when students at Duke University successfully pressured administrators to adopt an anti-sweatshop "Code of Conduct." The idea of a code (which creates standards that factories producing logo-wear must abide by, such as health and safety codes, living-wage requirements, anti child-labor provisions and factory location disclosures) quickly caught on with student groups at other universities. On at least 50 campuses -- by some estimates, as many as 150 -- student groups presented Codes of Conduct to their administrators. A national coalition, the United Students Against Sweatshops (USAS), was formed in July of 1998. Communicating almost exclusively via the Internet, the USAS allowed activists to develop comprehensive, strong Codes of Conduct to present to administrators. It also held a well-attended international Web-based conference on sweatshop abuses and student activism.By late 1998, an estimated 30 universities had adopted or were considering some form of a Code of Conduct. Sweat-free groups had sprung up at hundreds of other schools, and campus awareness about sweatshops radically increased. The USAS campaign's focus then shifted to a more stubborn foe: the Collegiate Licensing Company (CLC), which manufactures logo-wear for about 160 schools. Student groups recognized that even if their individual school had a strict Code, if the CLC didn't abide by similar standards, the school logo-wear would continue to be produced in exploitative conditions.The CLC responded by pushing back at the universities, trying to persuade them to adopt modified, weaker codes. University administrators told students they would have to compromise. Most student groups, seeing these Codes as a first step in a long battle, agreed to settle on certain points. But as the proposed codes got weaker and weaker -- with crucial provisions like independent monitoring and living-wage assurances excluded -- students became so disenchanted with the "compromising" that they took to the streets."We understand that there are times to compromise, that it's okay to compromise when you're getting the good instead of the great," said Duke senior Tico Almeida, the virtual spokesperson for the sweat-free movement, to a New York Times reporter. "But this latest code is too flawed. It's not even good."Sharing his concerns, about 30 Duke students staged a two-day sit-in to demand a revision of the weak code. Students at Georgetown, facing a similar predicament, occupied their president's office for four days. Next came the UW sit-in, generally regarded as the most successful in that UW administrators yielded to nearly all the protesters' demands. News of these three demonstrations spread quickly through e-mail listserves and Web sites, and soon Harvard, Princeton, New York University, Brown, University of Michigan, Yale, University of Illinois, Cornell, Penn State and countless others all held sweat-free rallies."After recent sit-ins and actions at other schools, students are being taken seriously," one Brown University senior told her school paper after she helped stage a vocal protest at Brown. "Those other efforts empowered us." Other Brown protesters were quoted as saying that their timing was important to show that the sweat-free movement is a "united front." As this article goes to press, dozens of campuses around the nation are planning their own demonstrations.Though their efforts are internally focused, the sweat-free campus message has spilled out past the university gates, inspiring and collaborating with other anti-sweatshop campaigns. The USAS Web site sports many links to national and international anti-sweat organizations, and draws much of its information from those other campaigns. The student efforts have also fueled (and been fueled by) January's flurry of publicity surrounding the "Saipan lawsuits" -- three class-action suits filed against companies who manufacture clothes in the American territory of Saipan. And since the UW sit-in, sweat-free organizers have been able to thrust their agenda into the national media spotlight. ABC News, the New York Times, USA Today and the Boston Globe have all run extensive pieces on the latest protests.Dawn of a New Activism?The vitality of the sweat-free campaign raises a question in many observer's minds: Are the seeds being planted for a new age of campus activism? Despite being the target of the protests, many university administrators certainly hope so."I'm very, very proud of our students," Georgetown's dean of students, James Donahue, told the Boston Globe. "Their commitment and passion is just remarkable." Donahue's sentiments seem to resonate with other university officials, who were more than happy to negotiate with the well-organized, sophisticated student groups. In fact, in most cases the university presidents and chancellors have come out with glowing statements of support and praise for the sweat-free campaign, and have pledged -- publicly, at least -- to pressure the CLC to strengthen its Code of Conduct. As one Duke administrator, John Burness, told the Globe, "Thank God students are getting passionate about something other than basketball and bonfires." Not exactly the heels-dug-in conservatism that college administrators are famous for.It may be this relative ease of protest that makes the sweat-free campus movement appealing to today's college kids. Sweatshop labor is clearly morally reprehensible -- teenage women making poverty wages, living behind barbed-wire fences and enduring forced abortions would outrage anyone with a conscience. Not only does the sweat-free campaign have the moral high ground, it is focused enough to make a genuine, palpable change. Furthermore, students won't have to sacrifice anything more than a couple of bucks per logo-emblazoned sweatshirt. With administrators as conciliatory as Donahue and Burness, students aren't exactly risking expulsion. They're probably more likely to get community service awards.Then again, the ease of the protests may defuse the movement as quickly as it sparked. Nothing kills a movement like an enemy (in this case, the administration) that doesn't fight back. Once administrators submit to student demands, they'll probably enter into drawn-out, closed-door negotiations with the CLC. The students will have won their first battle, but will have lost their visible target. If so, the infamous Gen X attention span might suck the momentum out of the crusade.On the other hand, campus organizers may be learning important lessons from the sweat-free campaign. Surely the movement has proven that the Internet can be used to pull together a national student campaign with a fraction of the energy it would have taken in the past. The lesson of focus and follow-up -- never easy to maintain in transitory, splinter-happy student groups -- has proven effective once again. If campus organizers are smart, they'll use both the momentum of the sweat-free campaign and its tactics to push forward their other agendas.Whether or not student activism is truly reborn, the sweat-free campus movement is having an unmistakable effect on the larger anti-sweatshop campaign. If their energy and commitment is maintained, we will have college students to thank for leading the fight against international economic exploitation.Find the United Students Against Sweatshops homepage at home.sprintmail.com/~jeffnkari/USAS, or contact Sweatshop Watch (www.sweatshopwatch.org) or Global Exchange (www.globalexchange.org) for more information.