The Fora: A Higher Education Community

QuotePolice storm Yale University's campus (https://nypost.com/2024/04/22/us-news/police-storm-yale-universitys-campus-with-riot-gear-as-hundreds-of-students-stage-anti-israel-protest/) with riot gear, arrest students as hundreds stage anti-Israel protest

QuoteLIVE: Over 40 pro-divestment protesters arrested on Beinecke Plaza (https://yaledailynews.com/blog/2024/04/22/live-police-begin-arresting-pro-divestment-protesters-on-beinecke-plaza/)
More than 300 protesters are now gathered in a circle blocking the intersection of College and Grove. Follow live.

Looking over decades of protests, the ones that are ongoing like this almost always end with police breaking them up. Eventually life has to get back to normal at these campuses.

Life does have to get back to normal on campuses. The Columbia protests have been in our local news with non-protesting students reporting that they haven't been able to get into campus or their dorms. It's exam time, so students are even more stressed out.

The sad part is there are probably a lot of hypocritical faculty who expressed public support for the protests, but are secretly glad for the police coming in and dealing with them. Their actions make everyone else's life more difficult.

Hope the protestors don't burn some poor professor's research notes (or delete the prof's files) and then deny doing it, like happened to Orest Ranum in '68.

Don't forget Columbia, where police in riot gear dragged students away from a sit-in, and the President has been suspending faculty for their speech.

Having clear rules for protest is critical. There has to be a good outlet for public engagement on campus, but with guardrails that prevent violence. The rules need to be unambiguous so that students (both protestors and protest-avoiders), administration and police (both campus and city) know what to expect and where the lines are.

We have to expect a certain amount of protest on campuses, so the various scenarios should have been worked out in regular table-top exercises with representatives of all those groups present. I think the latitude should be wide so that a lot of ideas can be expressed. 

Having groups shouting at each other does not accomplish any communication or sharing of ideas, so that activity should be ended. But treating it as violence is inappropriate. Those situations must be treated differently.

Some of the students seem to be engaging in the time-honored protest ritual of staying put and chanting while getting arrested for trespassing (charges that will be dropped). That exercise has not been productive  in the past, so I don't expect it to be at Yale or Columbia.

Quote from: Hibush on April 22, 2024, 07:51:05 AMHaving clear rules for protest is critical. There has to be a good outlet for public engagement on campus, but with guardrails that prevent violence. The rules need to be unambiguous so that students (both protestors and protest-avoiders), administration and police (both campus and city) know what to expect and where the lines are.

We have to expect a certain amount of protest on campuses, so the various scenarios should have been worked out in regular table-top exercises with representatives of all those groups present. I think the latitude should be wide so that a lot of ideas can be expressed. 

Having groups shouting at each other does not accomplish any communication or sharing of ideas, so that activity should be ended. But treating it as violence is inappropriate. Those situations must be treated differently.

Some of the students seem to be engaging in the time-honored protest ritual of staying put and chanting while getting arrested for trespassing (charges that will be dropped). That exercise has not been productive  in the past, so I don't expect it to be at Yale or Columbia.

Any action that prevents normal, necessary activity from continuing until the protesters leave is extortion, and needs to be treated as such.

QuoteColumbia University to Hold Classes Remotely After Weekend Protests (https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/22/us/columbia-university-protests-classes.html?unlocked_article_code=1.mU0.Hmv-.ZwlGQNNZpSuA&smid=url-share)
The campus has been shaken by pro-Palestinian demonstrations that have left some Jewish students fearing for their safety.

QuoteFaculty Group at Columbia Says It Has 'Lost Confidence' in the President (https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/19/nyregion/columbia-campus-protest-gaza-war.html?pgtype=Article&action=click&module=RelatedLinks)
The campus chapter of a faculty organization said it would "fight to reclaim our university." Students were undeterred by the crackdown on their protest.

Quote from: marshwiggle on April 22, 2024, 07:57:41 AMAny action that prevents normal, necessary activity from continuing until the protesters leave is extortion, and needs to be treated as such.

This basically amounts to not supporting protest (or strike) at all. If the only acceptable protest (or strike) is an invisible one that causes no disruption whatsoever, then it's not much of a protest (or strike) at all.

That's okay--it's a position that's available in ideological space. But we shouldn't pretend that that's not what it is, or that it's somehow a 'moderate' position. It involves significant curtailment of the rights to free speech and assembly, and in ways clearly unsupported by the judicial record in most democracies.

Quote from: Langue_doc on April 22, 2024, 08:09:58 AM

QuoteColumbia University to Hold Classes Remotely After Weekend Protests (https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/22/us/columbia-university-protests-classes.html?unlocked_article_code=1.mU0.Hmv-.ZwlGQNNZpSuA&smid=url-share)
The campus has been shaken by pro-Palestinian demonstrations that have left some Jewish students fearing for their safety.

QuoteFaculty Group at Columbia Says It Has 'Lost Confidence' in the President (https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/19/nyregion/columbia-campus-protest-gaza-war.html?pgtype=Article&action=click&module=RelatedLinks)
The campus chapter of a faculty organization said it would "fight to reclaim our university." Students were undeterred by the crackdown on their protest.

Just like old times at Columbia in '68.

Didn't hear anything about police arresting the Ivy League students who were protesting against the Tigray war in 2020-2022, which killed a half million. Or the students who have been protesting against the civil war in Sudan, which has killed ~ 20,000 and displaced ~ 8 million. Or the students who have been protesting Russia's invasion of Ukraine, which has killed about a half million so far, and has involved the rape and torture of civilians, as well as the deportation of Ukrainian children to Russian hinterlands.

Why are the students protesting against the war in Gaza so special?

Well, closing the campus down and trying to go remote as during the pandemic is one way of trying to de-escalate things, I guess.

Regarding Marsh's position on disruptive protests--protests have to create some level of disruption to get attention, and so that's protected speech up to a point.  But the more disruptive things get, the more the protestors themselves come to infringe upon others' liberties.  If they go very far with it, or persist for very long, what they're doing can become very counterproductive.  To name one recent example, many thousands of people got detained for hours while trying to go about their day-to-day business when protests shut down the Golden Gate bridge just last week.  Now there's talk of protestors being charged with "unlawful detention."

Quote from: spork on April 22, 2024, 10:42:04 AMWhy are the students protesting against the war in Gaza so special?

Because the Israelis are "settler colonialists," evidently. 

I was being, as my immigrant Arab Muslim wife would put it, facetious.

There haven't been protests against wars in Ethiopia, Sudan, or Ukraine. Gaza is a cause célèbre. 

Quote from: Parasaurolophus on April 22, 2024, 09:03:56 AM

Quote from: marshwiggle on April 22, 2024, 07:57:41 AMAny action that prevents normal, necessary activity from continuing until the protesters leave is extortion, and needs to be treated as such.

This basically amounts to not supporting protest (or strike) at all. If the only acceptable protest (or strike) is an invisible one that causes no disruption whatsoever, then it's not much of a protest (or strike) at all.

So if I'm upset that my boss didn't give me a raise, can I blockade the doors to her kids' daycare (with her kids inside)  until she changes her mind?

If voters are upset at an election results, can they blockade a railway, port, or major highway until it gets overturned?

QuoteThat's okay--it's a position that's available in ideological space. But we shouldn't pretend that that's not what it is, or that it's somehow a 'moderate' position. It involves significant curtailment of the rights to free speech and assembly, and in ways clearly unsupported by the judicial record in most democracies.

Speech and assembly aren't the issue; but behaviour that would be illegal for purely monetary gain shouldn't become legal just because it's for moral or ideological reasons.
 

Quote from: marshwiggle on April 22, 2024, 11:24:04 AM

Quote from: Parasaurolophus on April 22, 2024, 09:03:56 AM

Quote from: marshwiggle on April 22, 2024, 07:57:41 AMAny action that prevents normal, necessary activity from continuing until the protesters leave is extortion, and needs to be treated as such.

This basically amounts to not supporting protest (or strike) at all. If the only acceptable protest (or strike) is an invisible one that causes no disruption whatsoever, then it's not much of a protest (or strike) at all.

So if I'm upset that my boss didn't give me a raise, can I blockade the doors to her kids' daycare (with her kids inside)  until she changes her mind?

If voters are upset at an election results, can they blockade a railway, port, or major highway until it gets overturned?

QuoteThat's okay--it's a position that's available in ideological space. But we shouldn't pretend that that's not what it is, or that it's somehow a 'moderate' position. It involves significant curtailment of the rights to free speech and assembly, and in ways clearly unsupported by the judicial record in most democracies.

Speech and assembly aren't the issue; but behaviour that would be illegal for purely monetary gain shouldn't become legal just because it's for moral or ideological reasons.
 

It boils down to: Who owns the street? The street is free for the brown battalions? Surely not.

You'd be surprised how restrictively the right to assemble can legally be handled. You can't just cause inconvenience. Police permits are required for some actions. Here are some details from the ACLU (https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/protesters-rights)

Quote from: dismalist on April 22, 2024, 12:29:55 PMIt boils down to: Who owns the street? The street is free for the brown battalions? Surely not.

You'd be surprised how restrictively the right to assemble can legally be handled. You can't just cause inconvenience. Police permits are required for some actions. Here are some details from the ACLU (https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/protesters-rights)

Thanks for the link.  From there...

QuoteYour rights are strongest in what are known as "traditional public forums," such as streets, sidewalks, and parks. You also likely have the right to speak out on other public property, like plazas in front of government buildings, as long as you are not blocking access to the government building or interfering with other purposes the  property was designed for.

From this, I infer that protestors wouldn't have the right to block access to the state-owned building where I teach, nor to be so loud that teaching was impossible in my classroom.  However,

QuoteShutting down a protest through a dispersal order must be law enforcement's last resort. Police may not break up a gathering unless there is a clear and present danger of riot, disorder, interference with traffic, or other immediate threat to public safety.

That sounds like the police couldn't break up a protest even if it's loud enough to interfere with classes.  What happens then--the protestors would be going beyond what they're allowed to, but it wouldn't reach the point that police should intervene?  If protestors were blocking the building enough to cause a safety problem, police could break up the protest, but what if they're just making everyone late to classes?  It seems like the safety aspect would depend on knowing how full the building is and thus whether people could evacuate quickly enough in an emergency.

My curiosity is purely academic, since my campus doesn't have much of a protest culture.  My grad school did, but most of the protests occurred in a favorite central plaza.  I never had difficulty getting to my office or working even though my building was right next to the plaza.

Quote from: spork on April 22, 2024, 10:42:04 AMDidn't hear anything about police arresting the Ivy League students who were protesting against the Tigray war in 2020-2022, which killed a half million. Or the students who have been protesting against the civil war in Sudan, which has killed ~ 20,000 and displaced ~ 8 million. Or the students who have been protesting Russia's invasion of Ukraine, which has killed about a half million so far, and has involved the rape and torture of civilians, as well as the deportation of Ukrainian children to Russian hinterlands.

Why are the students protesting against the war in Gaza so special?

The standard answer is that Israel is an important ally in an oil-rich and unstable part of the world.  It makes the news.  We have many people who have relocated here from Israel and Muslim countries.  They also make the news with their extremism.  Africa? 

I am embarrassed to admit that I know nothing of these other wars.  I am sure they are in the news if I look for them, but they are certainly not headline getting.  As for Ukraine, I don't think there is a lot of controversy about our role in that conflict. 

Quote from: Liquidambar on April 22, 2024, 01:11:37 PM

Quote from: dismalist on April 22, 2024, 12:29:55 PMIt boils down to: Who owns the street? The street is free for the brown battalions? Surely not.

You'd be surprised how restrictively the right to assemble can legally be handled. You can't just cause inconvenience. Police permits are required for some actions. Here are some details from the ACLU (https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/protesters-rights)

Thanks for the link.  From there...

QuoteYour rights are strongest in what are known as "traditional public forums," such as streets, sidewalks, and parks. You also likely have the right to speak out on other public property, like plazas in front of government buildings, as long as you are not blocking access to the government building or interfering with other purposes the  property was designed for.

From this, I infer that protestors wouldn't have the right to block access to the state-owned building where I teach, nor to be so loud that teaching was impossible in my classroom.  However,

One very interesting point:

QuoteCounterprotesters also have free speech rights. Police must treat protesters and counterprotesters equally. Police are permitted to keep antagonistic groups separated but should allow them to be within  sight and sound of one another.

"Anything you can do, I can do." I imagine the obnoxious protesters would be deeply offended at someone doing the same things to them.

QuoteLive Updates: N.Y.U. Orders Protesters to Disperse as Tensions Rise at U.S. Colleges (https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/04/22/us/campus-protests-columbia-yale)

Quote from: marshwiggle on April 22, 2024, 07:57:41 AM

Quote from: Hibush on April 22, 2024, 07:51:05 AMSome of the students seem to be engaging in the time-honored protest ritual of staying put and chanting while getting arrested for trespassing (charges that will be dropped). That exercise has not been productive  in the past, so I don't expect it to be at Yale or Columbia.

Any action that prevents normal, necessary activity from continuing until the protesters leave is extortion, and needs to be treated as such.

Just being in the way is not going to meet the threshold for extortion. They have to threaten force. They also have to want something, but that is not the case for impeded passers by.

Interestingly, my handy legal dictionary (https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/extortion) also notes that extortion includes when "under the color of office, a public or private authority .., abuse{s} their authority."  In that case, the campus administrators and police have to be careful about threatening to knock heads the old fashioned way.

Time to turn a fire hose on these fools and give 'em a good soaking.

I can well imagine people having a well thought out level of support for either side.  But people who are so smugly full of righteous certainty that theirs is the only just cause get no sympathy from me.

Quote from: spork on April 22, 2024, 11:07:37 AMI was being, as my immigrant Arab Muslim wife would put it, facetious.

There haven't been protests against wars in Ethiopia, Sudan, or Ukraine. Gaza is a cause célèbre.

Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 22, 2024, 01:24:00 PMThe standard answer is that Israel is an important ally in an oil-rich and unstable part of the world.  It makes the news.  We have many people who have relocated here from Israel and Muslim countries.  They also make the news with their extremism.  Africa? 

Crucially, Israel is a client state which receives enormous subsidies from the United States--along with the very weapons they are using to willfully murder Palestinians and annex their land, and not to mention the extensive diplomatic cover the US has given them at the UN. That's just not true of Ethiopia, Ukraine, or Sudan. It's entirely appropriate to try to exert pressure on one's own government when that government (1) is so heavily (if indirectly) involved, and (2) has the diplomatic power to affect the conditions in question.

Remember, also, that public officials in Texas have to swear an oath to Israel. That alone shows that the relationship between the two countries is not the usual kind of thing between foreign countries.

Quote from: marshwiggle on April 22, 2024, 11:24:04 AMSo if I'm upset that my boss didn't give me a raise, can I blockade the doors to her kids' daycare (with her kids inside)  until she changes her mind?

That's a non sequitur, and you know it.

In the case of a strike, what you can do is band together with the other employees who are upset and refuse to work--or to allow replacements to work--until the management negotiates with you. You can block access to the workplace to encourage others not to undermine your strike (though you obviously may not physically remove anyone who wishes to cross your picket line). If it's just you, you're shit out of luck. If it's a couple hundred of you, the boss had better listen.

QuoteIf voters are upset at an election results, can they blockade a railway, port, or major highway until it gets overturned?

Sure. And, as you know from past discussion, I'm absolutely happy to extend the same courtesy to the other side, even when I think their cause is moronic. And that's because I firmly believe in the right to free speech (although, again, you'll recall that I'm not a Millian absolutist).

Quote from: Parasaurolophus on April 22, 2024, 03:23:14 PM

QuoteIf voters are upset at an election results, can they blockade a railway, port, or major highway until it gets overturned?

Sure. And, as you know from past discussion, I'm absolutely happy to extend the same courtesy to the other side, even when I think their cause is moronic. And that's because I firmly believe in the right to free speech (although, again, you'll recall that I'm not a Millian absolutist).

Sure, but free speech is a distraction here. It's about who owns the street. Power settles the argument. Annie, get my gun.

All this is true.   Doesn't mean that Israel isn't a settler colonialist state, though.

Quote from: kaysixteen on April 22, 2024, 06:16:54 PMAll this is true.   Doesn't mean that Israel isn't a settler colonialist state, though.

Don't forget the Biblical connection, however.

Quote from: kaysixteen on April 22, 2024, 06:16:54 PMAll this is true.   Doesn't mean that Israel isn't a settler colonialist state, though.

There is a very big can of worms which this opens. It's well established archeologically that in parts of North America, (for instance), at  times different indigenous groups have occupied a particular region. Often these occupations were centuries apart, and it's not clear what happened to the earlier groups. When there are questions about who "owns" artifacts from those earlier groups, the most recent indigenous group to have inhabited that area usually claims responsibility for them. But how is that claim any more legitimate that the claim of whoever currently occupies the area, indigenous or not?

Also, as some commentators have pointed out, in the UK, the *"indigenous" occupants are the white people, and immigrants are the "settlers".




(* And if you really want to get picky, the Welsh would have the most "indigenous" ancestry, since "welsic" was what the Anglo-Saxons called the indigenous Britons, which, ironically, means "foreigner". They were driven west as the invaders came from the continent.)

Quote from: spork on April 22, 2024, 10:42:04 AMDidn't hear anything about police arresting the Ivy League students who were protesting against the Tigray war in 2020-2022, which killed a half million. Or the students who have been protesting against the civil war in Sudan, which has killed ~ 20,000 and displaced ~ 8 million. Or the students who have been protesting Russia's invasion of Ukraine, which has killed about a half million so far, and has involved the rape and torture of civilians, as well as the deportation of Ukrainian children to Russian hinterlands.

Why are the students protesting against the war in Gaza so special?

The donors, the donors. Weren't they responsible for the resignations of the presidents at Harvard and UPenn?

Minouche is probably on the way out as well.

QuoteColumbia's President May Face a Censure Resolution (https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/22/us/politics/columbia-nemat-shafik-censure.html?searchResultPosition=4)
The university senate is expected to vote as early as Wednesday on a resolution censuring Nemat Shafik, a reaction to her testimony before Congress and the arrests of student protesters.

In the meantime, the protests continue here in the city and also at other universities.

QuoteUniversities Struggle as Pro-Palestinian Demonstrations Grow (https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/22/us/campus-protests-arrests.html)
Dozens were arrested Monday at N.Y.U. and Yale, but officials there and at campuses across the country are running out of options to corral protests that are expected to last the rest of the school year.

Quote from: Parasaurolophus on April 22, 2024, 03:23:14 PM

Quote from: spork on April 22, 2024, 11:07:37 AMI was being, as my immigrant Arab Muslim wife would put it, facetious.

There haven't been protests against wars in Ethiopia, Sudan, or Ukraine. Gaza is a cause célèbre.

Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 22, 2024, 01:24:00 PMThe standard answer is that Israel is an important ally in an oil-rich and unstable part of the world.  It makes the news.  We have many people who have relocated here from Israel and Muslim countries.  They also make the news with their extremism.  Africa? 

Crucially, Israel is a client state which receives enormous subsidies from the United States--along with the very weapons they are using to willfully murder Palestinians and annex their land, and not to mention the extensive diplomatic cover the US has given them at the UN. That's just not true of Ethiopia, Ukraine, or Sudan. It's entirely appropriate to try to exert pressure on one's own government when that government (1) is so heavily (if indirectly) involved, and (2) has the diplomatic power to affect the conditions in question.

[. . .]

The USA also heavily subsidizes Egypt's military, as part of the Camp David Peace Agreement. In an excellent example of making America great again, ammunition fired at Egyptian pro-democracy demonstrators in January 2011 was manufactured in the USA with U.S. taxpayer money. Didn't see any Ivy League campus protests about that. Although I can list numerous other examples (looking at you, Saudi Arabia, killing Yemenis with your American weapons), but I won't.

Hamas, or what's left it of it, has managed to persuade, with the connivance/laziness of mainstream U.S. media outlets, a chunk of Ivy League college students that American white vs. brown race politics maps exactly to the Palestinian-Israeli situation. Score one for American ignorance.

As for tent encampments and whatnot at places like Columbia, last I checked those campuses are private property. Interfere with business operations, suffer the consequences. Back in the Vietnam War era, getting arrested was the whole point of protesting. I guess not anymore. Students spending their time not being students have to be protected from the emotional harm of being held accountable for their actions.

Quote from: spork on April 23, 2024, 11:57:40 AMThe USA also heavily subsidizes Egypt's military, as part of the Camp David Peace Agreement. In an excellent example of making America great again, ammunition fired at Egyptian pro-democracy demonstrators in January 2011 was manufactured in the USA with U.S. taxpayer money. Didn't see any Ivy League campus protests about that. Although I can list numerous other examples (looking at you, Saudi Arabia, killing Yemenis with your American weapons), but I won't.

I certainly took part in demonstrations related to those conflicts, but not at a US university, let alone an Ivy League institution. I can't, offhand, remember whether there were any. But let's suppose not. The fact that in the past students didn't come together to protest against American aid to Saudi Arabia or Egypt, if it is one, has no bearing on whether the students there here and now are right to protest American involvement in the war on Gaza. There will always be some other event we can point to that did not gather sufficient attention and outrage (though it certainly merited it), but that doesn't mean that the attention and outrage that some conflict does garner is misplaced, especially when it involves a client state of one's own country.

QuoteHamas, or what's left it of it, has managed to persuade, with the connivance/laziness of mainstream U.S. media outlets, a chunk of Ivy League college students that American white vs. brown race politics maps exactly to the Palestinian-Israeli situation. Score one for American ignorance.

This isn't a very plausible analysis. Hamas hasn't convinced anyone; instead, people have been convinced by the atrocities Israel has perpetrated in full public view. (I write this, incidentally, as the UN has uncovered mass graves at hospitals containing the headless, limbless, and handcuffed corpses of men, women, and children alike; but that's not what I mean, because it didn't take place in full public view.)


The most charitable explanation--and this is clearly the explanation Ockham's razor favours--is just that they've seen and heard about what's going on, and found it appalling, and they've seen their own government's response, and judged it wanting.

Agitprop.

Quote from: dismalist on April 23, 2024, 03:45:45 PMAgitprop.

Hey, I resemble that remark!

As for the U.S. media, I haven't seen a single story that subtracts off an estimated number of dead Hamas soldiers from the total number of Gazans killed (which itself is a figure originating from Hamas).

Quote from: spork on April 23, 2024, 04:35:13 PMAs for the U.S. media, I haven't seen a single story that subtracts off an estimated number of dead Hamas soldiers from the total number of Gazans killed (which itself is a figure originating from Hamas).

Everyone has treated the Health Ministry's numbers as credible in the past, including Israel and the US government. That said, it's (1) clearly under-counting (because it's only counting those it can absolutely confirm), and (2) the infrastructure is now so degraded that keeping a reliable total tally is increasingly impossible.

That said, as of last month the estimate was 30k dead (~13k children), 70k injured, and ~10k missing (the death tally is now past 34k). At about the same time, Israel was claiming ~12k Hamas dead, while Hamas claimed and denied 6k. (Israel has provided no evidence for its numbers, however, and given what we know of its targeting practices--viz., 'male = Hamas' and 'bomb them in their homes at night', it's virtually guaranteed to be a vast over-count).

I can't speak to US media, of course (apart from print media, where these figures are definitely mentioned--but I don't haunt the big publications), but this is readily available and often cited (i.e. daily!) information in Canada and on the BBC. Hamas casualties are frequently, but not always, mentioned. I don't know that it really is appropriate not to count them as casualties, however; after all, we (rightly!) count IDF casualties from the October 7th attack, as well as the subsequent war (though it's worth pointing out that Israel has not been forthcoming about its casualty numbers). To subtract them sounds, to me, like an effort to sanitize the indiscriminate killing that is taking place.

And even if you buy the IDF's numbers--which you shouldn't--the ratio of one dead child to one dead Hamas fighter isn't exactly a great look.

The issue is never the issue. The issue is always the revolution.

How do we know who exactly qualifies as a 'Hamas soldier'?   Do these men wear uniforms and carry official id?  Do they have Hamas-issued serial numbers and ranks, to be offered to Israelis who catch them?

Quote from: kaysixteen on April 23, 2024, 08:16:53 PMHow do we know who exactly qualifies as a 'Hamas soldier'?   Do these men wear uniforms and carry official id?  Do they have Hamas-issued serial numbers and ranks, to be offered to Israelis who catch them?

They do not wear uniforms, do not openly identify themselves as combatants, deliberately target civilians, use schools and hospitals as shields, etc., and in doing so, violate various components of the Geneva Conventions related to the laws of war.

I will point out that, at least in the case of Columbia University, much of the incessant hullabaloo has been coming from non-Columbia-associated protesters on public streets adjacent to campus.

I think it's fair to ask what the reaction of university administrations and local law enforcement would be if protesters on or off campus were shouting slogans advocating for the extermination of Black, LGBTQ, or other groups.

Now where did I put my Gays for Gaza banner?

Quote from: Parasaurolophus on April 23, 2024, 05:30:12 PMAnd even if you buy the IDF's numbers--which you shouldn't--the ratio of one dead child to one dead Hamas fighter isn't exactly a great look.

And for comparison, what ratio of Israeli *hostage to dead IDF member is a "great look"?

*or decapitated baby, raped woman, etc.

Quote from: marshwiggle on April 24, 2024, 05:34:59 AM

Quote from: Parasaurolophus on April 23, 2024, 05:30:12 PMAnd even if you buy the IDF's numbers--which you shouldn't--the ratio of one dead child to one dead Hamas fighter isn't exactly a great look.

And for comparison, what ratio of Israeli *hostage to dead IDF member is a "great look"?

*or decapitated baby, raped woman, etc.

Now that Gaza is being attacked as a whole by IDF, I daresay there are a lot more Gazans trying to defend their homes and families. So are they considered Hamas as well?

Quote from: spork on April 24, 2024, 05:11:09 AMI think it's fair to ask what the reaction of university administrations and local law enforcement would be if protesters on or off campus were shouting slogans advocating for the extermination of Black, LGBTQ, or other groups.

Are they actually calling for the extermination of Jews or Israelis? Because, if not, then no, it's not a fair question.

Quote from: marshwiggle on April 24, 2024, 05:34:59 AM

Quote from: Parasaurolophus on April 23, 2024, 05:30:12 PMAnd even if you buy the IDF's numbers--which you shouldn't--the ratio of one dead child to one dead Hamas fighter isn't exactly a great look.

And for comparison, what ratio of Israeli *hostage to dead IDF member is a "great look"?

*or decapitated baby, raped woman, etc.

The smaller the better? Considering that the IDF straight-up murdered as many (escaped) hostages as it's rescued (three each), not to mention he dozens they've killed in the bombings, I'm not holding my breath. It's almost as though they don't actually care about the hostages.

Certainly the families of the hostages are concerned that the Netanyahu government and the IDF aren't particularly concerned about the hostages. Although, due to how they were taken and by whom, I don't think freeing them en masse or even in multiple raids is a realistic expectation. Dealing for them seems to be about the only way to go, but that road is leading to nowhere at the moment. Sadly, many thought to be living may not be.

Also, sorry, but please be careful in using words like "murder." Murder implies intentionality. Although a soldier intentionally shot a weapon, they certainly didn't intentionally shoot a hostage from their own country.

Quote from: Ruralguy on April 24, 2024, 07:28:00 AMAlso, sorry, but please be careful in using words like "murder." Murder implies intentionality. Although a soldier intentionally shot a weapon, they certainly didn't intentionally shoot a hostage from their own country.

I mean, they were unarmed, unclothed, waving a flag, and yelling in Hebrew, explaining that they were hostages. They wounded one who crawled into a building to hide, and they hunted him down and killed him. They may not have intended to kill three hostages, but they certainly intended to kill three unarmed people. It's a distinction without a meaningful difference. If I plot to murder my rival but the person I kill turns out to have been his brother, it's still counted as murder.

Is there a better word I should have used? Because it wasn't an accident, and it was a war crime (deliberately killing unarmed civilians and prisoners is forbidden by international law).

Quote from: Parasaurolophus on April 24, 2024, 07:50:14 AMIs there a better word I should have used? Because it wasn't an accident, and it was a war crime (deliberately killing unarmed civilians and prisoners is forbidden by international law).

Hamas seems to be able to get the best of both worlds. It can be seen as "defending" the people in Gaza, but the atrocities it commits can be overlooked because it's not actually overseen by any government, (so pesky things like international law don't apply to it.)

Iran seems to be considering Hamas as "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" and supplying them with weaponry, but other than that, is there any material assistance coming into Gaza from the Arab world?  If there are huge protests in Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon or elsewhere about what is happening to their co-religionists I have not seen any mention of it.  It's not as if Egypt opened the Rafah crossing to let in any refugees.

It seems as if the protests are coming only from milk fed, middle class American college students at Ivy League schools brought up on a diet high in content about power, colonialism, and privilege.

My take on the whole situation is two-fold.

Hamas made a horrific miscalculation.  I think they figured that if they could provoke Israel into an all out shooting war, the Arab nations would come to their aid militarily.  That does not appear to have happened other than maybe some food aid air drops.

Second, Netanyahu completely buggered up the response to October 7.  I can't think of any example where a superior military power was actually able to dislodge a rag tag militia that can hide among the populace, take a few pot shots, and disappear back into the crowd.  Destroying Hamas was a fool's dream.  And now he has a tiger by the tail and is either too stupid or too afraid to let go.  Alternatively, he has the taste of blood in his mouth and has decided he likes it.

There are no good guys in this debacle. 

 

QuoteI can't think of any example where a superior military power was actually able to dislodge a rag tag militia that can hide among the populace, take a few pot shots, and disappear back into the crowd.

It is forgotten that the French military won the Battle of Algiers and, indeed, controlled Algeria. Algeria gained independence because of support from outside. This was called "the internationalization of the conflict". This strategy has been imitated by the PLO, and now Hamas. Placing armed fighters among the civilian population is intended to cause lots of civilian casualties, which are then thought to stimulate outside support.

I don't think it will be successful because the Battle for Gaza is being fought by a neighboring, independent country with an existential interest in complete victory, something that metropolitan France never had -- French soil was not seriously threatened by the NLF.

Less dramatic historical memory surrounds the Malayan Emergency [1948 - 1960] because the British defeated the insurgents.

QuoteI will point out that, at least in the case of Columbia University, much of the incessant hullabaloo has been coming from non-Columbia-associated protesters on public streets adjacent to campus.

According to our local news, most of the disruptions are by students inside campus.

QuoteInside the Week That Shook Columbia University (https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/23/nyregion/columbia-university-campus-protests.html)
In a Washington war room, Columbia's president, Nemat Shafik, decided to call police officers to arrest protesting students. The backlash now threatens her leadership.

Live Updates: Columbia Negotiates With Campus Protesters Ahead of House Speaker's Visit (https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/04/24/us/columbia-protests-mike-johnson)
Administrators let a deadline for demonstrators to disperse expire, saying there had been progress in discussions. In a radio interview before his visit with Jewish students, Speaker Mike Johnson called for the school's president to resign.

Shafik named names at the hearing, which seems to have angered faculty. The professors in question were under investigation, but had expectations of privacy as far as the investigations were concerned.

QuoteIs there a better word I should have used? Because it wasn't an accident, and it was a war crime (deliberately killing unarmed civilians and prisoners is forbidden by international law).

The war crimes continue unabated.

QuoteThe UN's human rights chief has said he is "horrified" by the destruction of Gaza's Nasser and al-Shifa hospitals  (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-68881325)and the reports of "mass graves" being found at the sites after Israeli raids.

Palestinian officials said they had exhumed 283 bodies at Nasser, some with their hands tied. It is not clear how they died or when they were buried.

QuoteU.N. Calls for Inquiry Into Mass Graves at 2 Gaza Hospitals (https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/23/world/middleeast/gaza-mass-grave.html)
Palestinian officials said scores of bodies had been found, some shot in the head, at one hospital after Israeli forces withdrew. Israel said it had dug up and reburied some bodies in a search for hostages.

I'm going to stick with my original statement.

Quote from: Ruralguy on April 24, 2024, 01:05:53 PMI'm going to stick with my original statement.

That's okay, I don't need to pick a fight, least of all with you.


It seems to me that the better option, here, was for the administration to let the students have their protest but ultimately refuse to divest/halt plans for their Tel Aviv campus (because that's what the administration wants, not because I endorse that response). This draconian response serves only to build bad blood/reputation and invite lawsuits (from students and faculty alike). Sure, some donors would have been pissy. But some donors are always pissy.

Politicians continue to meddle instead of mediating.

QuoteHouse Speaker Says White House Should Act as Campus Protests Spread (https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/04/24/us/columbia-protests-mike-johnson)
Speaker Mike Johnson faced boos at Columbia as he criticized protesters after meeting with Jewish students. He invoked the possibility of bringing in the National Guard and cutting funding to universities.

QuoteNew York governor tells Speaker Johnson to stay out of Columbia tumult (https://thehill.com/homenews/education/4618595-new-york-governor-tells-speaker-johnson-to-stay-out-of-columbia-tumult/)

QuoteHochul said Johnson would be better off taking up the bipartisan border security bill that, she said, would help deal with the ongoing situation involving migrants in the state of New York.

"It seems to me there's a lot more responsibilities and crises to be dealt with in Washington," Hochul said. "I'd encourage the Speaker to go back and perhaps take up the migrant bill, the bill to deal with closing the borders, so we can deal with the real crisis that New York has."

Republicans have been blasting the presidents of several elite East Coast schools for months over their handling of protests and the protection of Jewish students.

New York's House delegation this week called for the resignation of Columbia's president.

Quote from: dismalist on April 24, 2024, 11:12:48 AM

QuoteI can't think of any example where a superior military power was actually able to dislodge a rag tag militia that can hide among the populace, take a few pot shots, and disappear back into the crowd.

It is forgotten that the French military won the Battle of Algiers and, indeed, controlled Algeria. Algeria gained independence because of support from outside. This was called "the internationalization of the conflict". This strategy has been imitated by the PLO, and now Hamas. Placing armed fighters among the civilian population is intended to cause lots of civilian casualties, which are then thought to stimulate outside support.

I don't think it will be successful because the Battle for Gaza is being fought by a neighboring, independent country with an existential interest in complete victory, something that metropolitan France never had -- French soil was not seriously threatened by the NLF.

Less dramatic historical memory surrounds the Malayan Emergency [1948 - 1960] because the British defeated the insurgents.

^ This.

Viet Nam is a great example.

The US Civil War was a classic example. On paper, the North should have won in 20 minutes. They had all the industry, weapons, wealth. What did they have to do to the South, and how long did it take, for them to finally get the South to surrender?

The latest, from the NYT.

QuoteChaos and Oppression
The central question for universities responding to protests (https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/25/briefing/college-protests.html) is whether to prioritize the preservation of order or the desire of students to denounce oppression.

QuoteCollege Protesters Make Divestment From Israel a Rallying Cry (https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/24/business/college-protesters-divestment-israel.html)
The campaign is likely to have a negligible impact on the companies or Israel, but activists see divestment as a clear way to force colleges to take action on the issue.

QuoteConflict in Israel and Gaza, in Photos (https://www.nytimes.com/article/israel-gaza-hamas-photos.html)
A surprise attack by Hamas put Israel and the group that controlled Gaza at war. Here are images from the assault and what has followed.

Quote from: Langue_doc on April 25, 2024, 06:03:52 AMThe latest, from the NYT.

QuoteChaos and Oppression
The central question for universities responding to protests (https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/25/briefing/college-protests.html) is whether to prioritize the preservation of order or the desire of students to denounce oppression.

It's fine for students to "denounce" oppression; what they need to be made to understand that history is a long game. Whatever they do right now is unlikely to have any visible impact, but the concerted actions of people with influence and authority, over time, will change things for the better.

Quote from: ciao_yall on April 24, 2024, 07:23:19 PM

Quote from: dismalist on April 24, 2024, 11:12:48 AM

QuoteI can't think of any example where a superior military power was actually able to dislodge a rag tag militia that can hide among the populace, take a few pot shots, and disappear back into the crowd.

It is forgotten that the French military won the Battle of Algiers and, indeed, controlled Algeria. Algeria gained independence because of support from outside. This was called "the internationalization of the conflict". This strategy has been imitated by the PLO, and now Hamas. Placing armed fighters among the civilian population is intended to cause lots of civilian casualties, which are then thought to stimulate outside support.

I don't think it will be successful because the Battle for Gaza is being fought by a neighboring, independent country with an existential interest in complete victory, something that metropolitan France never had -- French soil was not seriously threatened by the NLF.

Less dramatic historical memory surrounds the Malayan Emergency [1948 - 1960] because the British defeated the insurgents.

^ This.

Viet Nam is a great example.

The US Civil War was a classic example. On paper, the North should have won in 20 minutes. They had all the industry, weapons, wealth. What did they have to do to the South, and how long did it take, for them to finally get the South to surrender?

It is also overlooked that the Viet Cong were destroyed upon their Tet offensive. But the war didn't end because North Vietnamese regulars got involved. What Hamas has learned from the Vietnam War is that to defeat the United States, or affect its policy, one has to get at the US home front propagandistically. This is what is unfolding now. But there is so little at stake for US voters, I doubt it will make any difference.

The US Civil War was a conventional war. It is an example of something else: The attempt to internationalize the conflict, as the NLF did successfully. The South initially embargoed cotton, hoping to starve British factories of inputs and thus getting Britain to declare war on the North. This failed miserably. It did what the North could not do the first year of the war -- blockade the South.

Quote from: marshwiggle on April 25, 2024, 08:04:13 AMIt's fine for students to "denounce" oppression; what they need to be made to understand that history is a long game. Whatever they do right now is unlikely to have any visible impact, but the concerted actions of people with influence and authority, over time, will change things for the better.

So is the idea that they should just wait until they have influence and authority, and then they should work for incremental change?

They have very little power right now, but they're hoping to influence some of the people with more power to start changing things for the better. What's wrong with trying to exert some influence, even if they're not successful? Is that not part of long-term incremental change for the better?

Quote from: marshwiggle on April 25, 2024, 08:04:13 AM

Quote from: Langue_doc on April 25, 2024, 06:03:52 AMThe latest, from the NYT.

QuoteChaos and Oppression
The central question for universities responding to protests (https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/25/briefing/college-protests.html) is whether to prioritize the preservation of order or the desire of students to denounce oppression.

It's fine for students to "denounce" oppression; what they need to be made to understand that history is a long game. Whatever they do right now is unlikely to have any visible impact, but the concerted actions of people with influence and authority, over time, will change things for the better.

It's not about denouncing oppression. They can denounce all they want. It's about interfering with other students' and citizens' lives. This has already gone so far as to close USC and put Columbia on-line. U Austin, on the other hand, shut down the interference right away.

Private universities can do whatever they please, for all I care. The most efficient will win.

Quote from: Parasaurolophus on April 25, 2024, 08:10:32 AM

Quote from: marshwiggle on April 25, 2024, 08:04:13 AMIt's fine for students to "denounce" oppression; what they need to be made to understand that history is a long game. Whatever they do right now is unlikely to have any visible impact, but the concerted actions of people with influence and authority, over time, will change things for the better.

So is the idea that they should just wait until they have influence and authority, and then they should work for incremental change?

They have very little power right now, but they're hoping to influence some of the people with more power to start changing things for the better. What's wrong with trying to exert some influence, even if they're not successful? Is that not part of long-term incremental change for the better?

Remember the truckers in Ottawa, and blockading bridges to the U.S.? The idea that anyone who thinks they can support a righteous cause by engaging in illegal activity undermines the whole idea of what a democratic society is about. Legitimate protest is an opportunity to get people to hear your message, so that you have the chance to win them over to it. Extorting them into doing what you want in order to get on with their lives makes winning them over to your cause irrelevant.

I've always wondered how many people take my stance when the side they agree with uses a tactic that makes their life difficult in some way or otherwise is unsympathetic for reasons other than the cause. My personal stance is that you may have my agreement but no longer my support. Here are a few examples:

-California had a 2008 ballot proposition regarding gay marriage which I was in favor of legalizing. I was held up during a traffic shutdown not quite as extreme as the Golden Gate but they f'd my day in a number of ways. Did I actively "support" that cause in any material way afterward such as donating or giving my own time even if I still agreed with it? Nope. There are other places to put my energy.

-I've discussed on this forum before that while I believe in bodily autonomy on the choice issue, I also will not use my own time or resources to "support" the furthering of that agenda since I perceive (based on polling, party affiliation, etc.) the average pro-choice female as voting for nanny state issues that negatively affect me to a disproportionate degree. Again, you have my agreement but not my support. There are many other issues I could give time, money or energy to.

The bottom line is that even if I agree with your side, that doesn't really guarantee any active involvement from me that may have value to you. I might give a limited amount of time or funds to causes I believe in and support in any given year. Many worthwhile causes exist that could be the subject of my limited resources. If I have to remove a group from consideration, one that has actively hassled me in some way by preventing me from accessing a bridge or engaging in a business activity without a thousand licenses and permits is easy to remove. I'll direct my support to any number of other worthwhile causes that are not promoted by people making my life more difficult.

Quote from: marshwiggle on April 25, 2024, 08:53:11 AM

Quote from: Parasaurolophus on April 25, 2024, 08:10:32 AM

Quote from: marshwiggle on April 25, 2024, 08:04:13 AMIt's fine for students to "denounce" oppression; what they need to be made to understand that history is a long game. Whatever they do right now is unlikely to have any visible impact, but the concerted actions of people with influence and authority, over time, will change things for the better.

So is the idea that they should just wait until they have influence and authority, and then they should work for incremental change?

They have very little power right now, but they're hoping to influence some of the people with more power to start changing things for the better. What's wrong with trying to exert some influence, even if they're not successful? Is that not part of long-term incremental change for the better?

Remember the truckers in Ottawa, and blockading bridges to the U.S.? The idea that anyone who thinks they can support a righteous cause by engaging in illegal activity undermines the whole idea of what a democratic society is about. Legitimate protest is an opportunity to get people to hear your message, so that you have the chance to win them over to it. Extorting them into doing what you want in order to get on with their lives makes winning them over to your cause irrelevant.

Indeed, I do remember. And I remember being just fine with them demonstrating and even blocking traffic. I was not okay with their setting open fires, because that is a significant public safety risk. I was also not okay with their blaring air horns (which cause permanent hearing damage) in residential neighbourhoods, especially at all times of the day and night (clearly an attempt to inflict sleep deprivation on residents). You'll recall I also opposed the invocation of the War Measures Act.

As for the bridge blockade, I have no problem with a bridge blockade in principle, save that those assholes were armed with firearms. That's absolutely not okay, and a serious danger to public safety.


I would point out, also, that the Columbia students aren't actually blocking anything. They're peacefully encamped in a corner of the campus that's typically unused (due to pesticide spraying) and not blocking any thoroughfares. It's all the administration's doing that buildings are locked, classes online, etc. What's more, Columbia has, in the past, agreed to student divestment demands (e.g. from prison labour).

Quote from: Parasaurolophus on April 25, 2024, 10:06:19 AM

Quote from: marshwiggle on April 25, 2024, 08:53:11 AM

Quote from: Parasaurolophus on April 25, 2024, 08:10:32 AM

Quote from: marshwiggle on April 25, 2024, 08:04:13 AMIt's fine for students to "denounce" oppression; what they need to be made to understand that history is a long game. Whatever they do right now is unlikely to have any visible impact, but the concerted actions of people with influence and authority, over time, will change things for the better.

So is the idea that they should just wait until they have influence and authority, and then they should work for incremental change?

They have very little power right now, but they're hoping to influence some of the people with more power to start changing things for the better. What's wrong with trying to exert some influence, even if they're not successful? Is that not part of long-term incremental change for the better?

Remember the truckers in Ottawa, and blockading bridges to the U.S.? The idea that anyone who thinks they can support a righteous cause by engaging in illegal activity undermines the whole idea of what a democratic society is about. Legitimate protest is an opportunity to get people to hear your message, so that you have the chance to win them over to it. Extorting them into doing what you want in order to get on with their lives makes winning them over to your cause irrelevant.

Indeed, I do remember. And I remember being just fine with them demonstrating and even blocking traffic. I was not okay with their setting open fires, because that is a significant public safety risk. I was also not okay with their blaring air horns (which cause permanent hearing damage) in residential neighbourhoods, especially at all times of the day and night (clearly an attempt to inflict sleep deprivation on residents). You'll recall I also opposed the invocation of the War Measures Act.

As for the bridge blockade, I have no problem with a bridge blockade in principle, save that those assholes were armed with firearms. That's absolutely not okay, and a serious danger to public safety.

Whether they have firearms or tire irons,  (which truckers surely do), they are a serious danger to public safety as long as they feel entitled to prevent anyone crossing the bridge.

Abbott even made Christopher Rufo and FIRE angry with this one:https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/4620838-texas-governor-abbott-backlash-mass-arrest-ut-austin-pro-palestine-protest/

Quote from: dismalist on April 25, 2024, 08:05:24 AM

Quote from: ciao_yall on April 24, 2024, 07:23:19 PM

Quote from: dismalist on April 24, 2024, 11:12:48 AM

QuoteI can't think of any example where a superior military power was actually able to dislodge a rag tag militia that can hide among the populace, take a few pot shots, and disappear back into the crowd.

It is forgotten that the French military won the Battle of Algiers and, indeed, controlled Algeria. Algeria gained independence because of support from outside. This was called "the internationalization of the conflict". This strategy has been imitated by the PLO, and now Hamas. Placing armed fighters among the civilian population is intended to cause lots of civilian casualties, which are then thought to stimulate outside support.

I don't think it will be successful because the Battle for Gaza is being fought by a neighboring, independent country with an existential interest in complete victory, something that metropolitan France never had -- French soil was not seriously threatened by the NLF.

Less dramatic historical memory surrounds the Malayan Emergency [1948 - 1960] because the British defeated the insurgents.

^ This.

Viet Nam is a great example.

The US Civil War was a classic example. On paper, the North should have won in 20 minutes. They had all the industry, weapons, wealth. What did they have to do to the South, and how long did it take, for them to finally get the South to surrender?

It is also overlooked that the Viet Cong were destroyed upon their Tet offensive. But the war didn't end because North Vietnamese regulars got involved. What Hamas has learned from the Vietnam War is that to defeat the United States, or affect its policy, one has to get at the US home front propagandistically. This is what is unfolding now. But there is so little at stake for US voters, I doubt it will make any difference.

The US Civil War was a conventional war. It is an example of something else: The attempt to internationalize the conflict, as the NLF did successfully. The South initially embargoed cotton, hoping to starve British factories of inputs and thus getting Britain to declare war on the North. This failed miserably. It did what the North could not do the first year of the war -- blockade the South.

The data indicates that separatist/irredentist/independence movements generally only succeed when they have external material support, which almost always comes from a neighbor. Sympathetic stories in international media do nothing by themselves. The military outcome of the current war is a function of how long Hamas's pre-war munitions stockpiles will last, since it's highly unlikely that Iran can get new supplies into Gaza. As secundem_artem mentioned upthread, Hamas made a horrific calculation and Netanyahu, while politically talented at saving his own skin, is a terrible statesman.

Back to campus protests:

I find it amusing that college students have taken up divestment as a cause. Divestment from what? The U.S. military-industrial complex? If they want to strike an economic blow against universities, they should spend their tuition money somewhere else -- other universities that are presumably less prestigious -- and convince others to do the same. Calls for divestment are either clueless or virtue signaling.

Also . . . doesn't it seem a bit odd that the university presidents grilled by headline-seeking members of Congress have been women, and that the grilling has largely been initiated by female members of Congress?

p.s.

Meanwhile, in Haiti . . . (https://www.newyorker.com/culture/essay/the-haiti-that-still-dreams)

Quote from: spork on April 25, 2024, 02:41:09 PMI find it amusing that college students have taken up divestment as a cause. Divestment from what? The U.S. military-industrial complex? If they want to strike an economic blow against universities, they should spend their tuition money somewhere else -- other universities that are presumably less prestigious -- and convince others to do the same. Calls for divestment are either clueless or virtue signaling.

The template comes from the divestment from South Africa to end apartheid. Because divestment was so widespread then it may have had some policy impact. (I understand that the social scientists studying it have found the sports boycott was more influential.)

It is now part of the Boycott-Divest-S[] package of actions to try influencing Israeli policy on Palestinian rights, so it makes sense that this action is being requested.

Students at my school were really gung ho on divesting from fossil fuels a few years ago. They thought that news of our school selling all its oils stocks would galvanize the CEO and BoD of Shell, Exxon et alia to change their business model and go to renewables in order to win back our holdings. That seems like a fanciful expectation. More so when you realize that our holdings represented several minutes of trading in those securities on the NYSE, so even if they got dumped in a single market order, it wouldn't even blip the share price. There would be nothing for the CEO to notice.

The unfortunate thing is that the university does thousands of things, through research and even operations, that have a large potential impact on climate change in general and fossil fuel demand in particular. If the goal is to get the university to do more to prevent or mitigate climate change, encourage more investment in those activies. Or even join into them as a student. That would make far more difference than divestment.

I suspect the arms industry follows the actions of university endowment managers even less than the oil industry does. 

Quote from: Hibush on April 25, 2024, 06:08:30 PMStudents at my school were really gung ho on divesting from fossil fuels a few years ago. They thought that news of our school selling all its oils stocks would galvanize the CEO and BoD of Shell, Exxon et alia to change their business model and go to renewables in order to win back our holdings. That seems like a fanciful expectation. More so when you realize that our holdings represented several minutes of trading in those securities on the NYSE, so even if they got dumped in a single market order, it wouldn't even blip the share price. There would be nothing for the CEO to notice.

This needs a term, like "recursive slacktivism"; where "activism" means doing nothing other than yelling for someone else to do something which in turn will have no discernible effect.

Kind of like Riddhi Patel in Bakersfield (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zu0MBkmmN1A).

Or like Kony2012 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kony_2012).
From the above article:

QuoteSince the video's release, Invisible Children has come under criticism for oversimplification of events in the region and has been accused of engaging in "slacktivism", in which a person donates or takes actions that have little to no effect beyond making said person feel as if they contributed to a positive cause.

Have we learned nothing? Troops on campus is a horrible idea: https://www.politico.com/news/2024/04/25/republicans-campus-protesters-democrats-00154508

Of course its a horrible idea. But some people will call for horrible solutions knowing that its the way to get attention.

Quote from: marshwiggle on April 26, 2024, 05:18:19 AMThis needs a term, like "recursive slacktivism"; where "activism" means doing nothing other than yelling for someone else to do something which in turn will have no discernible effect.

That neologism is both accurate and easily interpreted! Thanks, I shall endeavour to put it to good use.

Quote from: Ruralguy on April 26, 2024, 11:50:53 AMOf course its a horrible idea. But some people will call for horrible solutions knowing that its the way to get attention.

It is in my opinion a serious mistake to think that this was just a way to get attention. The GOP has a non trivial number of supporters and elected officials that want to do this and similar things as policy. I believe he and others (see my earlier post about Governor Abbott in Texas) want to and have done exactly this.

Sorry for the double. More on Texas: https://www.thefire.org/news/texas-tramples-first-amendment-rights-police-crackdown-pro-palestinian-protests

Now USC has cancelled its main graduation ceremony entirely:

QuoteIn the wake of a controversy surrounding the valedictory address and pro-Palestinian demonstrators on campus, the University of Southern California on Thursday announced its main graduation ceremony will not be held.

"With the new safety measures in place this year, the time needed to process the large number of guests coming to campus will increase substantially," the school wrote in an announcement. "As a result, we will not be able to host the main stage ceremony that traditionally brings 65,000 students, families, and friends to our campus all at the same time and during a short window from 8:30 a.m. to 10 a.m."

School officials said they plan to post details of their updated commencement plans on the graduation website by April 30.

https://ktla.com/news/local-news/usc-cancels-main-graduation-ceremony/


Were I a graduating senior (or parent of one), I'd be very unhappy with the activists who brought this about.

I don't know what percentage of police officers rather look forward to a small scale riot so they can break out the bats and hats and do a little recreational billy clubbing.  But from the photos I've seen, that numbers is not zero.

This is not gonna end well.

Quote from: apl68 on April 26, 2024, 12:38:41 PM]

Were I a graduating senior (or parent of one), I'd be very unhappy with the activists who brought this about.

If I were a parent who had traveled for commencement, I might consider occupying the presidents office (https://www.president.usc.edu/2024/04/26/a-message-to-the-trojan-community/) (or the SVP (https://giving.usc.edu/meet-our-team/) of alumni relations and development) in protest of a stupid response to student engagement with the improtant issues of the day.

Quote from: apl68 on April 26, 2024, 12:38:41 PMNow USC has cancelled its main graduation ceremony entirely:

This is the kind of stuff that hardcore Republicans love to hate and talk about endlessly.

The boneheaded decision to cancel the valedictorian's speech is the root of this particular issue, a numbskull adminiscritter's foolish desire to appease potentially offended-by-the-as-yet undelivered speech.

I didn't qualify with the word "just."
But your point is both valid and taken.

Quote from: jimbogumbo on April 26, 2024, 12:29:53 PM

Quote from: Ruralguy on April 26, 2024, 11:50:53 AMOf course its a horrible idea. But some people will call for horrible solutions knowing that its the way to get attention.

It is in my opinion a serious mistake to think that this was just a way to get attention. The GOP has a non trivial number of supporters and elected officials that want to do this and similar things as policy. I believe he and others (see my earlier post about Governor Abbott in Texas) want to and have done exactly this.

From the Ballon Juice blog:

"The other big news is all the protests occurring all over the country regarding the War in Gaza. I've been saying this for years, but I'll say it again. There is fundamentally NO DIFFERENCE between the majority of college and university administrations and every corporate hack out there. None. That's one of the dirty secrets about colleges that Republicans, in their 60 year war on the academy, don't want anyone to know. There may be faculty and students with liberal sensibilities, and a smattering of actual radicals, but the majority of administrators could just as easily be lying to congress about whether tobacco is addictive or that climate change is a hoax. The only real difference is that university admins are versed in the language of liberalism, but only enough so that they can brandish it at as a weapon against their enemies, which is usually faculty and staff and students.

So am I surprised that the gut instinct of all of these assholes is to immediately call the cops on students? Not even remotely. All they care about is that the donor cash keeps coming in and their record is not blemished with the people who matter- they're corporate donors, fellow administrators, and Republican politicians. Are there some bad actors who have said inexcusable things and peddled anti-Semitic tropes? Of course. Are they the majority? No. Not even close. I'll just leave it to you to parse why the most ardent critics of trigger warnings and safe spaces are now cheering on... the arrest and violence inflicted on them in the process of those with whom they disagree."

Quote from: jimbogumbo on April 29, 2024, 01:17:28 PMFrom the Ballon Juice blog:

"The other big news is all the protests occurring all over the country regarding the War in Gaza. I've been saying this for years, but I'll say it again. There is fundamentally NO DIFFERENCE between the majority of college and university administrations and every corporate hack out there. None. That's one of the dirty secrets about colleges that Republicans, in their 60 year war on the academy, don't want anyone to know. There may be faculty and students with liberal sensibilities, and a smattering of actual radicals, but the majority of administrators could just as easily be lying to congress about whether tobacco is addictive or that climate change is a hoax. The only real difference is that university admins are versed in the language of liberalism, but only enough so that they can brandish it at as a weapon against their enemies, which is usually faculty and staff and students.

So am I surprised that the gut instinct of all of these assholes is to immediately call the cops on students? Not even remotely. All they care about is that the donor cash keeps coming in and their record is not blemished with the people who matter- they're corporate donors, fellow administrators, and Republican politicians. Are there some bad actors who have said inexcusable things and peddled anti-Semitic tropes? Of course. Are they the majority? No. Not even close. I'll just leave it to you to parse why the most ardent critics of trigger warnings and safe spaces are now cheering on... the arrest and violence inflicted on them in the process of those with whom they disagree."

In a similar vein, a well-written open letter to Columbia's president by a UCLA history professor:

https://www.bostonreview.net/articles/letter-to-columbia-university-president-minouche-shafik/ (https://www.bostonreview.net/articles/letter-to-columbia-university-president-minouche-shafik/).

Quote from: jimbogumbo on April 29, 2024, 01:17:28 PMFrom the Ballon Juice blog:

"Are there some bad actors who have said inexcusable things and peddled anti-Semitic tropes? Of course. Are they the majority? No. Not even close."

That's because the majority are too clueless to find Gaza on a map, and are just parroting what the group tells them too, so they don't get left out.

QuoteColumbia Begins to Suspend Student Protesters (https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/29/nyregion/columbia-student-protest-encampment.html)
University officials gave the pro-Palestinian demonstrators a 2 p.m. deadline and threatened to suspend them if they did not leave.

QuoteUniversities Face an Urgent Question: What Makes a Protest Antisemitic? (https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/29/nyregion/college-protests-columbia-campus.html)
Pro-Palestinian student activists say their movement is anti-Zionist but not antisemitic. It is not a distinction that everyone accepts.

QuotePolice Clear Building at Columbia and Arrest Dozens of Protesters (https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/04/30/nyregion/columbia-protests-college)
Officers in riot gear removed demonstrators who had seized Hamilton Hall, a building with a history of student takeovers. Scores of other arrests were made on campuses across the country.

QuoteNYPD says police arrested nearly 300 people at Columbia and City College protests (https://gothamist.com/news/nypd-says-police-arrested-nearly-300-people-at-columbia-and-city-college-protests)

This arrest has been making the social media / news rounds with very divided opinion about its legitimacy:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L5t5ldOXvwQ

We thank you for your services to this university, Professor, and they are no longer required.

Quote from: marshwiggle on April 29, 2024, 02:19:31 PM

Quote from: jimbogumbo on April 29, 2024, 01:17:28 PMFrom the Ballon Juice blog:

"Are there some bad actors who have said inexcusable things and peddled anti-Semitic tropes? Of course. Are they the majority? No. Not even close."

That's because the majority are too clueless to find Gaza on a map, and are just parroting what the group tells them too, so they don't get left out.

I think you might not know what majority means.

Seriously, I think these students know a great deal about the situation. On the merits of calling for disinvestment, and the idea that is really even possible, not so much.

Sent to me by a parent of a current Columbia undergrad:

https://twitter.com/elicalebon/status/1785560131100618798?s=49&t=RRIS-Y6CCLizLM83-jthEA

The key sentence, in my opinion, is "You don't see this in lower tier schools from kids of lower socio-economic standing because they aren't plagued with the guilt of privilege that they're seeking to launder through Middle East role plays of feigned suffering."

QuoteThe 63-Year-Old Career Activist Among the Protesters at Columbia (https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/01/nyregion/columbia-university-protest-consultant-lisa-fithian.html)
Videos show Lisa Fithian, whom the police called a "professional agitator," working alongside protesters who stormed Hamilton Hall.

QuoteWhat the First Amendment Means for Campus Protests (https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/01/us/free-speech-campus-protests.html?unlocked_article_code=1.ok0._-CP.91upU_NHGodb&smid=url-share)

QuoteWhat the First Amendment Means for Campus Protests
Encampments? Occupying buildings? Demonstrators cite their right to free expression, but the issues are thorny.

QuoteEric Adams Seizes Role as Face of the Crackdown on Student Protests (https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/01/nyregion/eric-adams-columbia-protests.html)
Mayor Eric Adams of New York defended the arrests of nearly 300 protesters and said he would not allow the protests to disrupt the city.

Meanwhile, at UCLA, (https://dailybruin.com/2024/05/01/pro-israel-counter-protesters-attempt-to-storm-encampment-sparking-violence) counter-protesters attacked encamped students with clubs, tear gas, and fireworks, while shouting racial slurs. The cops came but then stood around.

Our local news has been reporting about the vandalism and damage to buildings. There have also been credible reports of non-students on campus directing/co-ordinating the vandalism.

QuoteSmashed windows, stacked furniture left after occupation of Hamilton Hall at Columbia University (https://www.yahoo.com/news/smashed-windows-stacked-furniture-left-065241302.html)

Students who don't have the luxury of ignoring their studies seem to have been sidelined by the protesters.

Quote'We can't work, we can't think': Columbia University students study for finals following protest (https://gothamist.com/news/we-cant-work-we-cant-think-columbia-university-students-study-for-finals-following-protest-campus-lockdown), campus lockdown

From the article:"The students are saying we can't work, we can't think, we can't study under these conditions. We've got faculty whose papers they need to grade are locked in their offices right now," said Joseph Howley, a classics professor at Columbia. "It completely upended everything that we do."

Howley joined dozens of other faculty members on Wednesday to protest Columbia President Minouche Shafik's request for the NYPD to arrest students who had barricaded themselves inside the Hamilton Hall school building. The NYPD said police arrested 109 protesters at Columbia on Tuesday. Another 173 pro-Palestinian students at City College were arrested around the same time.

"Students and outside activists breaking Hamilton Hall doors, mistreating our public safety officers and maintenance staff, and damaging property are acts of destruction, not political speech," Shafik wrote in a message to Columbia students and employees on Wednesday.

"It is going to take time to heal, but I know we can do that together. I hope that we can use the weeks ahead to restore calm, allow students to complete their academic work, and honor their achievements at commencement."[/quote]

Quote from: jimbogumbo on May 01, 2024, 01:21:32 PM

Quote from: marshwiggle on April 29, 2024, 02:19:31 PM

Quote from: jimbogumbo on April 29, 2024, 01:17:28 PMFrom the Ballon Juice blog:

"Are there some bad actors who have said inexcusable things and peddled anti-Semitic tropes? Of course. Are they the majority? No. Not even close."

That's because the majority are too clueless to find Gaza on a map, and are just parroting what the group tells them too, so they don't get left out.

I think you might not know what majority means.

Seriously, I think these students know a great deal about the situation. On the merits of calling for disinvestment, and the idea that is really even possible, not so much.

How many of these students had any knowledge or interest in any of the institution's investments before October 7? How many now could identify, from a list of corporation names, which ones have ties to Israel and are ones in which the institution invests?

I have no respect whatsoever for protesters, from any place on the political spectrum, who are just bandwagon-jumpers who are just there so they look good in front of their "friends".

If there are protesters who have actually lost friends or family members in Gaza, that's an entirely different story. They actually have some knowledge and legitimate grievance.

And outside "protesters" who aren't even from campus? They should be jailed and charged with trespass, break and enter, and anything else on the books. They're the worst of the worst.

Quote from: marshwiggle on May 02, 2024, 05:23:56 AMI have no respect whatsoever for protesters, from any place on the political spectrum, who are just bandwagon-jumpers who are just there so they look good in front of their "friends".

Reinforcing group identity may be the main motivator for joining the protests. It is understandable. Not a good policy technique, but perhaps some will get interested in policy as a result.

Peak protest has come and gone. Final exams start soon. In another week, undergrads will have left campus.

Quote from: spork on May 01, 2024, 01:37:57 PMThe key sentence, in my opinion, is "You don't see this in lower tier schools from kids of lower socio-economic standing because they aren't plagued with the guilt of privilege that they're seeking to launder through Middle East role plays of feigned suffering."

Probably a good deal of truth to that.

Some of the stacked and overturned furniture in the photos in the article Langue_doc posted looks like that highly durable old-school wooden stuff.  It may well have been used for a similar purpose during the Vietnam-era protests.  At least they don't seem to have gone around wantonly breaking stained-glass windows in the buildings.

Wonder whether those non-students spotted among the demonstrators are actually "professional agitators" from out of town, or simply local lewd fellows of the baser sort taking an opportunity to blow off some steam by joining a protest?  Either way, if the protest's organizers can't keep such people from co-opting their protest for their own purposes, they'd do well to reconsider the wisdom of these demonstrations.

Quote from: apl68 on May 02, 2024, 07:45:35 AMWonder whether those non-students spotted among the demonstrators are actually "professional agitators" from out of town, or simply local lewd fellows of the baser sort taking an opportunity to blow off some steam by joining a protest?  Either way, if the protest's organizers can't keep such people from co-opting their protest for their own purposes, they'd do well to reconsider the wisdom of these demonstrations.

I was on a "liberal" campus during the first Gulf War when we only had, like, a week to protest.  The students managed not to damage anything, but I became convinced that their motivation was not pacificism but the excitement and adventure of the protest.  I was a bit older than most undergrads, so while I went to see the show I wasn't terribly impressed. 

What we ended up with were a number of elderly hippies stoking on the disruption. I'm sure someone has done scholarship on this aspect of American college life, and I just wonder how much protest is genuine and how much is the perception on students' part that this is how they are supposed to object and express themselves.  Certainly it is okay to support Gaza in this situation and call on Israel to behave in a civilized manner (without being accused of antisemitism), I just wonder how much actual good it does for students to wreck their own campuses.

Quote from: spork on May 01, 2024, 01:37:57 PMSent to me by a parent of a current Columbia undergrad:

https://twitter.com/elicalebon/status/1785560131100618798?s=49&t=RRIS-Y6CCLizLM83-jthEA

The key sentence, in my opinion, is "You don't see this in lower tier schools from kids of lower socio-economic standing because they aren't plagued with the guilt of privilege that they're seeking to launder through Middle East role plays of feigned suffering."

Nothing more amusing than seeing a student whiter than an albino in a snowstorm wearing a kaffiyeh.  Once upon a time, these same students would have said that was cultural appropriation.

That said, the real idiots are the faculty who have chosen to join this and are astonished to find themselves tackled to the ground and led away in zip cuffs.  PhD =/= all that bright it seems

I confess that I am more than a bit amazed at these posts. Many of the students protesting are in fact doing so because they think what Israel is doing is wrong. Just as they did in the 1980's to protest what was happening in South Africa. Just as they did in the 1960's to promote civil rights for Blacks.

There is a great deal of peaceful congregating being met with police in riot gear (just because we can?). An example from Indiana University. A small group (fewer than 100) set up tents at Dunn Meadows, a nice green space in the heart of campus. This space has traditionally been a place students throw frisbees, hang out, do what students do. It has ALSO been a space where students meet to protest, most famously in the 1960's, where thousands would be. Never any major shows of police force, because essentially nothing was shut down.


Now? The IU BoT meets on Wednesday evening and passes an emergency resolution that sets a new policy where setting up tents without prior approval is a violation. IU sends in the state police on Thursday and forcibly remove the students, and tear down the tents. Over 60 arrests. Did I mention the snipers? Yes, State Police head Carter has confirmed that over the two days this "action" was undertaken there were in fact police snipers on rooftops. All to combat a protest which featured no violence, no destruction and in fact little (if any) disruption of campus activities.


There has been, imo, a nightmarish response across the nation, encouraged by conservative media and politicians, and abetted by spineless liberals and administrators. There simply was no need at a great many campuses for this series of escalations by institutional forces. None.

QuoteNothing more amusing than seeing a student whiter than an albino in a snowstorm wearing a kaffiyeh.  Once upon a time, these same students would have said that was cultural appropriation.

That said, the real idiots are the faculty who have chosen to join this and are astonished to find themselves tackled to the ground and led away in zip cuffs.  PhD =/= all that bright it seems.

Quote from: jimbogumbo on May 02, 2024, 12:10:29 PMI confess that I am more than a bit amazed at these posts.

There has been, imo, a nightmarish response across the nation, encouraged by conservative media and politicians, and abetted by spineless liberals and administrators. There simply was no need at a great many campuses for this series of escalations by institutional forces. None.

As with most things in culture, there is little black and white.  Some of these students are grandstanding and performing irrationally (watch the videos).  Some, I am sure, are truly concerned.  Cops behave in the manner cops tend to do in these scenarios.

As with most things in culture, the truth is somewhere in the middle of the polarities.

I don't give a shit about which higher education institutions will survive in the eternal struggle for resources. There are enough that some good ones will surely survive. I see the current fracas on campuses as a failure of governance in some places. Those with good governance will succeed.

But, to not put too dismal an edge on this, there is [Robert] Conquest's Third Law of Politics: The simplest way to explain the behaviour of any bureaucratic organisation is to assume that it is controlled by a cabal of its enemies. :-)

Somebody explains ["duplicative language without appropriate attribution" follows]: What makes this paradox so insightful? I take it to mean that any organisation that survives long enough ends up being run in such a way as to contradict its founding purpose. As an organisation grows and becomes more complex, it ends up acting primarily to ensure its own perpetuation. The purpose for which it was founded becomes secondary to its own survival. In fact, for many in the organisation, possibly the vast majority, its continued survival becomes confused with the purpose it was originally founded to deliver. This can lead to behaviours that seem rational when viewed from the perspective of perpetuating the organisation but look counter-intuitive when considered from the perspective of what the organisation ostensibly exists to do.

This is descriptively good stuff. I'm just predicting that those protesting got the details wrong. To hell with psychologizing -- they're being instrumentalized, useful idiots.

Quote from: jimbogumbo on May 02, 2024, 12:10:29 PM[. . .]

Never any major shows of police force, because essentially nothing was shut down.

[. . .]

Paralysis followed by incompetent overreaction by the corporate management of Ivy League and Ivy League-adjacent universities reflects the new normal. Well, not really new, since Thorstein Veblen wrote about this over a hundred years ago in The Higher Learning in America and The Theory of the Leisure Class. Tents and building occupations are bad PR that could hurt the bottom line, especially as commencement ceremonies draw near.

Quote from: dismalist on May 02, 2024, 12:52:02 PM[. . .]

there is [Robert] Conquest's Third Law of Politics: The simplest way to explain the behaviour of any bureaucratic organisation is to assume that it is controlled by a cabal of its enemies. :-)

[. . .]

You've reminded me of Erving Gottman's "total institutions."

Quotethey're being instrumentalized, useful idiots.

Got to internationalize something. If not the Intifada, something else.

Quote from: dismalist on May 02, 2024, 12:52:02 PMI don't give a shit about which higher education institutions will survive in the eternal struggle for resources. There are enough that some good ones will surely survive. I see the current fracas on campuses as a failure of governance in some places. Those with good governance will succeed.

But, to not put too dismal an edge on this, there is [Robert] Conquest's Third Law of Politics: The simplest way to explain the behaviour of any bureaucratic organisation is to assume that it is controlled by a cabal of its enemies. :-)

Somebody explains ["duplicative language without appropriate attribution" follows]: What makes this paradox so insightful? I take it to mean that any organisation that survives long enough ends up being run in such a way as to contradict its founding purpose. As an organisation grows and becomes more complex, it ends up acting primarily to ensure its own perpetuation. The purpose for which it was founded becomes secondary to its own survival. In fact, for many in the organisation, possibly the vast majority, its continued survival becomes confused with the purpose it was originally founded to deliver. This can lead to behaviours that seem rational when viewed from the perspective of perpetuating the organisation but look counter-intuitive when considered from the perspective of what the organisation ostensibly exists to do.

This is descriptively good stuff. I'm just predicting that those protesting got the details wrong. To hell with psychologizing -- they're being instrumentalized, useful idiots.

Pretty much what Ivan Illich wrote in the 1970's. Eventually, any organization evolves to become the cause of the problems it was designed to solve.  Healthcare, education etc.  Healthcare was designed to reduce suffering but causes a fair bit of harm and suffering along the way.  Teaching students about structural racism and violence - and they take it far too seriously and start to engage in their own separation into in/out groups and maybe tearing up the quad.

Also "duplicative language without appropriate attribution": As a society, we're like the Marlon Brando character Johnny Strabler in The Wild One. "Hey Johnny," a woman asks him, "what are you rebelling against?" His laconic, iconic response: "Whaddya got?"

In some ways the situation is much simpler than any of that.

The students are occupying government property designated for a specific activity, not camping, or private property that is designated for whatever, but not camping.

If administration tells students they have to go, it is a lawful command.  Same with the cops.  If the students do not leave, the cops can lawfully use reasonable force (and before we vilify them too much, police are not breaking heads or using chokeholds, they are wrestling students and sometimes a professor into handcuffs and then escorting them off campus----hardly the treatment Palestinians are subject to).

Should police not enforce lawful orders simply because the complaints against Israel are justifiable? 

It is simler in this way also. Administrators always overreact, contrary to Fox News headlines.


I asked someone once about a student I suspected of lying about an instructor. All I to my source was I'm going to say a name, tell me what you think. Her response: " He lies, he lies all the time. He can't help himself. He lies even when the truth would be better for him."


That was definitely the case at IU, and AZ, and WI etc etc. The response simply makes things worse for the campus. In the IU case, yes they could ask the police in (albeit under a shady pretext), but it wasn't in the administration's best interest. They did it anyway.


Even if justified to have police get students to disperse, batons, let alone snipers, rubber bullets or chemical gas is unjustified for peaceful gatherings. Almost all of these were peaceful UNTIL cops started busting.


No matter whether the students are justified, ill-informed or pawns, the institutional response is often counter productive.


And in case you think I'm over reacting, in two days it will be May 4, followed soon by May 15. We've done it before, and learned nothing.

Quote from: jimbogumbo on May 02, 2024, 12:10:29 PMDid I mention the snipers? Yes, State Police head Carter has confirmed that over the two days this "action" was undertaken there were in fact police snipers on rooftops. All to combat a protest which featured no violence, no destruction and in fact little (if any) disruption of campus activities.

Holy shit. What the ever-living fuck?! Talk about making 'some' students feel unsafe on campus.

The issue is never the issue. The issue is always the revolution.

Approximately 30% of the so-called protestors were not affiliated with the university; it isn't clear how they were able to enter campus which has been closed to students and employees.

QuoteLocks, Chains, Diversions (https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/02/nyregion/columbia-students-hamilton-hall.html): How Columbia Students Seized Hamilton Hall
Some of those arrested during the pro-Palestinian demonstration were outsiders, who appeared to be unaffiliated with the school, according to an analysis of Police Department data.

QuoteBut the takeover of Hamilton Hall was a new turning point. The university decided to call in the police to clear the building — drawing both harsh criticism and praise, and raising new questions about who, exactly, was behind the growing unrest.

The people who took over the building were an offshoot of a larger group of protesters who had been camping out on campus in an unauthorized pro-Palestinian demonstration. On Tuesday night, more than 100 of them — people inside the hall along with others outside on campus and those beyond Columbia's gates — were arrested.

QuoteOn Thursday, Mayor Adams and Edward A. Caban, the police commissioner, released a statement saying that of the 112 people arrested at Columbia, 29 percent were not affiliated with the school. That percentage was similar to the findings of a Times analysis of a Police Department list of people who were arrested that night.

At City College, north of Columbia in Manhattan, 170 individuals were arrested, and about 60 percent of them were not affiliated with the school, the statement said.

According to the Times analysis, most of those arrested on and around Columbia's campus appeared to be graduate students, undergraduates or people otherwise affiliated with the school.

At least a few, however, appeared to have no connection to the university, according to The Times's review of the list. One was a 40-year-old man who had been arrested at antigovernment protests around the country, according to a different internal police document. His role in the organization of the protest is still unclear.

QuoteThe day after New York City police officers stormed into the building through a second-floor window and rooted out the protesters from Hamilton Hall, new details emerged about both the takeover of the building and the operation to reclaim it. The details revealed a 17-hour-long student occupation that was destructive and damaging to property, amateurish, but in some respects, carefully organized.

As for the demands, initially the protests were in support of Gaza. The current demands call for divesting from companies that support Israel. Scroll down several paragraphs (https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/01/nyregion/college-protests-divestment-columbia-brown.html) for a list of demands and why universities are unable to comply with these.

QuoteThe difficulty administrators face stems in large part from one of the demands that student protesters are making: that schools end financial ties with companies supporting Israel. Students at Columbia and elsewhere also want universities to publicly disclose all of their investments, to ensure accountability for divestment.

For universities, considering those demands raises a host of problems, both logistical and political, that may make acquiescing nearly impossible.

Subsequently the demands included divesting from a long list of companies including Google and Airbnb.

QuoteIn a written proposal submitted last December, activists at Columbia listed a number of companies they wanted the school to divest from, including Google, which has a large contract with the Israeli military, and Airbnb, which advertises listings on Israeli settlements in the West Bank. It also named the university's indirect holdings in companies like Caterpillar, a maker of armored bulldozers for the Israeli government, which Columbia owns in an exchange-trade fund managed by BlackRock, the world's largest asset manager.

Divesting from Israel is illegal in NY:

QuoteIn addition, most states, including New York, also have laws that bar public institutions from divesting from Israel, or ban them from entering into contracts with companies that call for boycotts of Israel, to guard against the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement that targets Israel. Opponents see the movement as antisemitic for singling out the world's only Jewish-majority state.

There are also technical reasons that divestment would be more difficult now than it was following protests in decades past.

Brown's administration negotiated dispersal on the condition that they put a divestment proposal to the Trustees. That seems like a pragmatic agreement. I expect the trustees will vote no on the proposal. Probably in the summer when the students are more widely dispersed.

Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 02, 2024, 09:10:09 AM

Quote from: apl68 on May 02, 2024, 07:45:35 AMWonder whether those non-students spotted among the demonstrators are actually "professional agitators" from out of town, or simply local lewd fellows of the baser sort taking an opportunity to blow off some steam by joining a protest?  Either way, if the protest's organizers can't keep such people from co-opting their protest for their own purposes, they'd do well to reconsider the wisdom of these demonstrations.

I was on a "liberal" campus during the first Gulf War when we only had, like, a week to protest.  The students managed not to damage anything, but I became convinced that their motivation was not pacificism but the excitement and adventure of the protest.  I was a bit older than most undergrads, so while I went to see the show I wasn't terribly impressed. 

What we ended up with were a number of elderly hippies stoking on the disruption. I'm sure someone has done scholarship on this aspect of American college life, and I just wonder how much protest is genuine and how much is the perception on students' part that this is how they are supposed to object and express themselves.  Certainly it is okay to support Gaza in this situation and call on Israel to behave in a civilized manner (without being accused of antisemitism), I just wonder how much actual good it does for students to wreck their own campuses.

I remember an editorial cartoon from the Rodney King riots. It showed a big white guy in front of a smashed store window with a television on his shoulder, and he was shouting "Justice for Rodney King!" I thought that about summed it up.

During the George Floyd riots in 2020, it was the same thing with the looters; no-one gave a flip whether the stores where white- or black-owned. They were just thieves who wanted free stuff.

I would imagine at any sort of protest, from any part of the political spectrum, many (if not most) of the most violent agitators have little or no connection to the cause, but just want to steal and destroy.

Quote from: marshwiggle on May 03, 2024, 06:38:24 AMI would imagine at any sort of protest, from any part of the political spectrum, many (if not most) of the most violent agitators have little or no connection to the cause, but just want to steal and destroy.

What you describe above is clearly wrong, but just as clearly unlike what is actually happening in these protests.


https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/05/03/college-campus-protests-israel-gaza-student-journalists-00155672

It may be worth reminding people that even the Civil Rights protests, protests which we widely acknowledge as good and non-violent, and models of good protests, were very unpopular. In 1961, only 27% of people thought sit-ins, freedom buses, etc. helped the Civil Rights cause. in 1968, fully 75% of whites disapproved of Martin Luther King, Jr.

Protests are disruptive, and that doesn't win them many friends. But that doesn't make them wrong, or less important.

Hamas is not Gandhi.

Quote from: dismalist on May 03, 2024, 03:35:51 PMHamas is not Gandhi.

Who said they were? These aren't pro-Hamas protests, and I wasn't talking about Hamas's attack on Israel.

Quote from: Parasaurolophus on May 03, 2024, 03:37:06 PM

Quote from: dismalist on May 03, 2024, 03:35:51 PMHamas is not Gandhi.

Who said they were? These aren't pro-Hamas protests, and I wasn't talking about Hamas's attack on Israel.

"I am not crazy; my reality is just different from yours."
--Lewis Carroll

Quote from: dismalist on May 03, 2024, 03:39:15 PM"I am not crazy; my reality is just different from yours."
--Lewis Carroll

I'm not so sure 'reality' is the right word, if that's what you think is going on.

Quote from: Parasaurolophus on May 03, 2024, 03:19:02 PMIt may be worth reminding people that even the Civil Rights protests, protests which we widely acknowledge as good and non-violent, and models of good protests, were very unpopular. In 1961, only 27% of people thought sit-ins, freedom buses, etc. helped the Civil Rights cause. in 1968, fully 75% of whites disapproved of Martin Luther King, Jr.

Protests are disruptive, and that doesn't win them many friends. But that doesn't make them wrong, or less important.

I have a hard time seeing these kids in the same league as the freedom fighters. They are not analogous to people who selflessly give their lives to others, and I have a hard time believing they are going to actually accomplish anything except, perhaps, lose Biden some votes.  Remember that the J6 crowd likes this analogy too and loves to see hypocrisy in people's support for wealthy students camping in a public space.

Our culture has got to learn to think past World War II and the '70s-style protest.  I don't think it works anymore.  And I am anti-Hamas but pro-Palestinian-independence.       

Quote from: jimbogumbo on May 03, 2024, 01:50:13 PM

Quote from: marshwiggle on May 03, 2024, 06:38:24 AMI would imagine at any sort of protest, from any part of the political spectrum, many (if not most) of the most violent agitators have little or no connection to the cause, but just want to steal and destroy.

What you describe above is clearly wrong, but just as clearly unlike what is actually happening in these protests.


https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/05/03/college-campus-protests-israel-gaza-student-journalists-00155672

QuoteWith so many incidents taking place in so many places, it's hard for anyone to grasp what's really happening at America's universities right now. So POLITICO Magazine reached out this week to top student journalists, who have been reporting on the turmoil at the ground level for weeks and months. As neutral observers able to interact with all sides, they can provide unique insights, even as they watch friends get arrested or worry if their graduation ceremonies will even take place.

About as neutral as Fox news on the Jan. 6 riots.

Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 03, 2024, 04:53:08 PM

Quote from: Parasaurolophus on May 03, 2024, 03:19:02 PMIt may be worth reminding people that even the Civil Rights protests, protests which we widely acknowledge as good and non-violent, and models of good protests, were very unpopular. In 1961, only 27% of people thought sit-ins, freedom buses, etc. helped the Civil Rights cause. in 1968, fully 75% of whites disapproved of Martin Luther King, Jr.

Protests are disruptive, and that doesn't win them many friends. But that doesn't make them wrong, or less important.

I have a hard time seeing these kids in the same league as the freedom fighters. They are not analogous to people who selflessly give their lives to others, and I have a hard time believing they are going to actually accomplish anything except, perhaps, lose Biden some votes.  Remember that the J6 crowd likes this analogy too and loves to see hypocrisy in people's support for wealthy students camping in a public space.

Our culture has got to learn to think past World War II and the '70s-style protest.  I don't think it works anymore.  And I am anti-Hamas but pro-Palestinian-independence.       

The point isn't that they're in the same league. It's that even the "model" protests of the past were widely despised. So we need to rethink the way we relate to them in these discussions.

For my part, I would be curious to know how many especially among those most vocally dismissive or sneering of these protests--have ever participated in a protest of heir own. Because I see a lot of tarring with broad brushes going on.

Quote from: Parasaurolophus on May 03, 2024, 05:48:38 PMFor my part, I would be curious to know how many especially among those most vocally dismissive or sneering of these protests--have ever participated in a protest of heir own. Because I see a lot of tarring with broad brushes going on.

Dude, I grew up on the west coast in the '80s. 

I observed my fair share of protests and participated in several.  That's part of the reason I think this style of protest has turned sour.

Nevertheless, I marched against the first Gulf War because at the time it seemed like a very scary prospect.  It did not (yet) lead to World War III, but I think we've seen a whole series of atrocities on all sides in part because of it (no facile answers to what we should have done exist, BTW).

So yeah, I've seen protests. 

And for the record, I think one can be anti-occupation and anti-occupied Palestine without being antisemitic.  Israel has things to answer for and America should stop supporting her until she becomes a humane state.  Oh, and Hamas is a terrorist organization.

However, we have been marching, screaming, occupying, and fighting police for close to a hundred years if you count the Bonus Army of 1932.  MLK prevailed because of his maturity in the face of oppression.  Now we have kids occupying their very vulnerable college campuses, resisting when given lawful commands by the police, and then crying to the media when they are arrested.  And many people have a specific kneejerk reaction, "The students were peaceful," as if that gives them the right to break the law.

We need a new cultural imagination to meet our challenges.  I don't think the old system is working any more.

Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 03, 2024, 08:57:21 PMAnd for the record, I think one can be anti-occupation and anti-occupied Palestine without being antisemitic.  Israel has things to answer for and America should stop supporting her until she becomes a humane state.  Oh, and Hamas is a terrorist organization.

However, we have been marching, screaming, occupying, and fighting police for close to a hundred years if you count the Bonus Army of 1932.  MLK prevailed because of his maturity in the face of oppression.  Now we have kids occupying their very vulnerable college campuses, resisting when given lawful commands by the police, and then crying to the media when they are arrested.  And many people have a specific kneejerk reaction, "The students were peaceful," as if that gives them the right to break the law.

We need a new cultural imagination to meet our challenges.  I don't think the old system is working any more.

Well said. What I think many young people don't get is that MLK modelled his actions on Gandhi, and both of them saw that their protests were only a pointer to the social change that would inevitably happen in a basically moral society. No protest had to achieve specific, short term results. The impatience of protests now requires that they have concrete, immediate outcomes, so the disruption has to escalate until they win.

"Getting out the message" has been replaced by "getting in peoples' faces until they cave."

Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 03, 2024, 08:57:21 PM

Quote from: Parasaurolophus on May 03, 2024, 05:48:38 PMFor my part, I would be curious to know how many especially among those most vocally dismissive or sneering of these protests--have ever participated in a protest of heir own. Because I see a lot of tarring with broad brushes going on.

Dude, I grew up on the west coast in the '80s. 

I observed my fair share of protests and participated in several.  That's part of the reason I think this style of protest has turned sour.

Nevertheless, I marched against the first Gulf War because at the time it seemed like a very scary prospect.  It did not (yet) lead to World War III, but I think we've seen a whole series of atrocities on all sides in part because of it (no facile answers to what we should have done exist, BTW).

So yeah, I've seen protests. 

And for the record, I think one can be anti-occupation and anti-occupied Palestine without being antisemitic.  Israel has things to answer for and America should stop supporting her until she becomes a humane state.  Oh, and Hamas is a terrorist organization.

However, we have been marching, screaming, occupying, and fighting police for close to a hundred years if you count the Bonus Army of 1932.  MLK prevailed because of his maturity in the face of oppression.  Now we have kids occupying their very vulnerable college campuses, resisting when given lawful commands by the police, and then crying to the media when they are arrested.  And many people have a specific kneejerk reaction, "The students were peaceful," as if that gives them the right to break the law.

We need a new cultural imagination to meet our challenges.  I don't think the old system is working any more.

FWIW, I didn't have you in mind.

Quote from: dismalist on May 03, 2024, 03:35:51 PMHamas is not Gandhi.

What's a Gandhi?

It isn't clear if the majority of the students at Columbia or their parents who are paying their tuition support the protests. Parents who aren't very affluent probably spent years saving up for their children's education, only to find that courses have been moved online, and there's minimal learning. The faculty, according to one of the professors have been asked to modify final exams (https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/03/opinion/columbia-protests-civil-rights.html?unlocked_article_code=1.pU0.dtG8.oesGuJARBsr0&smid=url-share):

QuoteAfter students occupied the university's storied Hamilton Hall — and police officers in riot gear conducted over 100 arrests — the administration closed the campus, moved all classes online and recommended that we professors either trim or eliminate final examinations in our classes.

Outsiders seem to have taken it upon themselves to join the protests (https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/04/nyregion/columbia-protests-arrest-agitators-israel.html), despite the campus, a private institution, having closed the campus to facutly, students, and other employees. There are bound to be complaints from parents as well as requests that Columbia return this semester's tuition.

The only accomplishments of these protests so far have been the disruption of the costly education of their fellow students and vandalism. The war continues unabated. Protesting in front of the NY state senator's office, the Israeli embassy, and the United Nations would have been far more effective.

Quote from: Parasaurolophus on May 04, 2024, 08:47:22 AM

Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 03, 2024, 08:57:21 PM

Quote from: Parasaurolophus on May 03, 2024, 05:48:38 PMFor my part, I would be curious to know how many especially among those most vocally dismissive or sneering of these protests--have ever participated in a protest of heir own. Because I see a lot of tarring with broad brushes going on.

Dude, I grew up on the west coast in the '80s. 

I observed my fair share of protests and participated in several.  That's part of the reason I think this style of protest has turned sour.

Nevertheless, I marched against the first Gulf War because at the time it seemed like a very scary prospect.  It did not (yet) lead to World War III, but I think we've seen a whole series of atrocities on all sides in part because of it (no facile answers to what we should have done exist, BTW).

So yeah, I've seen protests. 

And for the record, I think one can be anti-occupation and anti-occupied Palestine without being antisemitic.  Israel has things to answer for and America should stop supporting her until she becomes a humane state.  Oh, and Hamas is a terrorist organization.

However, we have been marching, screaming, occupying, and fighting police for close to a hundred years if you count the Bonus Army of 1932.  MLK prevailed because of his maturity in the face of oppression.  Now we have kids occupying their very vulnerable college campuses, resisting when given lawful commands by the police, and then crying to the media when they are arrested.  And many people have a specific kneejerk reaction, "The students were peaceful," as if that gives them the right to break the law.

We need a new cultural imagination to meet our challenges.  I don't think the old system is working any more.

FWIW, I didn't have you in mind.

Fair enough. 

I will concede that these protests have gotten a hella bunch of news.  I doubt that either Israel or Hamas care, but it certainly got the attention of the politicians.

Quote from: marshwiggle on May 04, 2024, 07:44:55 AM

Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 03, 2024, 08:57:21 PMAnd for the record, I think one can be anti-occupation and anti-occupied Palestine without being antisemitic.  Israel has things to answer for and America should stop supporting her until she becomes a humane state.  Oh, and Hamas is a terrorist organization.

However, we have been marching, screaming, occupying, and fighting police for close to a hundred years if you count the Bonus Army of 1932.  MLK prevailed because of his maturity in the face of oppression.  Now we have kids occupying their very vulnerable college campuses, resisting when given lawful commands by the police, and then crying to the media when they are arrested.  And many people have a specific kneejerk reaction, "The students were peaceful," as if that gives them the right to break the law.

We need a new cultural imagination to meet our challenges.  I don't think the old system is working any more.

Well said. What I think many young people don't get is that MLK modelled his actions on Gandhi, and both of them saw that their protests were only a pointer to the social change that would inevitably happen in a basically moral society. No protest had to achieve specific, short term results. The impatience of protests now requires that they have concrete, immediate outcomes, so the disruption has to escalate until they win.

"Getting out the message" has been replaced by "getting in peoples' faces until they cave."

Well, to be fair, MLK and Gandhi led disruptive movements.  I mean, the point of protest is to make people uncomfortable and to make the news.  But they were also involved in a lifelong fight against institutionalized oppression and for their own and their peoples' civil rights, and they both paid the ultimate price.  I've never thought it right to point to the "entitled" or "rich" kids as if it's their fault that their parents are wealthy or to talk about "elite" students as if it is an accusation to be accomplished enough to get into an Ivy, or any college, for that matter.  But we also have to acknowledge that the price the students are paying is pretty cheap, even if they are arrested, and their chants such as "This is what democracy looks like" are cliche, a little facile, and not the ostensible point of their protest. No matter what happens in Palestine or their college campuses, these kids are going to be fine. Then I would be careful about martyring students or professors.  It is bad optics to see cops in riot gear----they look like your typical bad guys in video games or sci fi films----but the police don't want to get hurt, and who can blame them?  I'd armor-up too.  Then I read stories from professors who have no sympathy for a late paper or a missed exam but who are then outraged by police officers upholding the law, hypothetically speaking, of course.  And being a kindly professor is not a get-out-of-jail-free card.

I just don't see the analogous situation between the great era of protest in the '50s through '70s that garnered so many ethical changes in our society and the situations now.  I think we have copycat kids who, while I agree with their stance, are enacting a paradigm that is rather self-serving.   

Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 04, 2024, 02:34:20 PM[. . .]

enacting a paradigm that is rather self-serving.   

in the way described by the X tweet I posted upthread.

Quote from: spork on May 04, 2024, 05:07:40 PM

Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 04, 2024, 02:34:20 PM[. . .]

enacting a paradigm that is rather self-serving.   

in the way described by the X tweet I posted upthread.

Yeah, she was brutal. 

Whether the concept of protest works or not is not my main focus, rather the institutional response. The Big 10 campuses were all really benign protests, but the responses were dramatically different. For example, at Purdue the official response is that if they stay on the Memorial Union Lawn (they have) we'll do nothing. IU and Ohio State both for some ridiculous reason used force (and yes both featured rooftop snipers). Michigan left them alone, while Wisconsin tore down the tents (and yes, they came back anyway).


IU's faculty have called for the President to resign, but recall she canceled several previously scheduled Palestine speakers/artists for no apparent reason but currying favor with politicians. Here is a letter to the editor in the Indy Star:

https://www.indystar.com/story/opinion/readers/2024/05/03/jeffrey-c-isaac-jim-banks-iu-lies-threaten-academic-freedom/73548988007/

Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 04, 2024, 02:34:20 PM

Quote from: marshwiggle on May 04, 2024, 07:44:55 AM

Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 03, 2024, 08:57:21 PMAnd for the record, I think one can be anti-occupation and anti-occupied Palestine without being antisemitic.  Israel has things to answer for and America should stop supporting her until she becomes a humane state.  Oh, and Hamas is a terrorist organization.

However, we have been marching, screaming, occupying, and fighting police for close to a hundred years if you count the Bonus Army of 1932.  MLK prevailed because of his maturity in the face of oppression.  Now we have kids occupying their very vulnerable college campuses, resisting when given lawful commands by the police, and then crying to the media when they are arrested.  And many people have a specific kneejerk reaction, "The students were peaceful," as if that gives them the right to break the law.

We need a new cultural imagination to meet our challenges.  I don't think the old system is working any more.

Well said. What I think many young people don't get is that MLK modelled his actions on Gandhi, and both of them saw that their protests were only a pointer to the social change that would inevitably happen in a basically moral society. No protest had to achieve specific, short term results. The impatience of protests now requires that they have concrete, immediate outcomes, so the disruption has to escalate until they win.

"Getting out the message" has been replaced by "getting in peoples' faces until they cave."

Well, to be fair, MLK and Gandhi led disruptive movements.  I mean, the point of protest is to make people uncomfortable and to make the news.

One other distinction is that when they broke the law, they broke the specific law they wanted to change. Modern protesters just break whatever laws they like, which is basically run-of-the-mill criminal behavior.

They are not remotely following the example of MLK and others.

QuoteBut they were also involved in a lifelong fight against institutionalized oppression and for their own and their peoples' civil rights, and they both paid the ultimate price.  I've never thought it right to point to the "entitled" or "rich" kids as if it's their fault that their parents are wealthy or to talk about "elite" students as if it is an accusation to be accomplished enough to get into an Ivy, or any college, for that matter.  But we also have to acknowledge that the price the students are paying is pretty cheap, even if they are arrested, and their chants such as "This is what democracy looks like" are cliche, a little facile, and not the ostensible point of their protest. No matter what happens in Palestine or their college campuses, these kids are going to be fine. Then I would be careful about martyring students or professors.  It is bad optics to see cops in riot gear----they look like your typical bad guys in video games or sci fi films----but the police don't want to get hurt, and who can blame them?  I'd armor-up too.  Then I read stories from professors who have no sympathy for a late paper or a missed exam but who are then outraged by police officers upholding the law, hypothetically speaking, of course.  And being a kindly professor is not a get-out-of-jail-free card.

I just don't see the analogous situation between the great era of protest in the '50s through '70s that garnered so many ethical changes in our society and the situations now.  I think we have copycat kids who, while I agree with their stance, are enacting a paradigm that is rather self-serving.   

Their tactics reflect their failure to follow the moral principles of those they claim to emulate.

QuoteMaintenance workers had a firsthand view of how protesters seized the building (https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/08/nyregion/columbia-hamilton-hall-protests.html), and wondered why the university failed to stop it.

Some paragraphs from the article:

QuoteMariano Torres, a maintenance worker at Columbia University, was cleaning on the third floor of Hamilton Hall in his signature Yankees cap one night last week, when he heard a commotion downstairs. He said he figured it had something to do with the pro-Palestinian encampment on the lawn outside and kept working.

He was shocked, he said, when he suddenly saw five or six protesters, their faces covered by scarves or masks, picking up chairs and bringing them into the stairway.

"I'm like, what the hell is going on? Put it back. What are you doing?" he recalled.

He said he tried to block them and they tried to reason with him to get out of the way, telling him "this is bigger than you." One person, he recalled, told him he didn't get paid enough to deal with this. Someone tried to offer him "a fistful of cash."

He said he replied: "I don't want your money, dude. Just get out of the building."

It was the beginning of what would be a frightening time for Mr. Torres, who goes by Mario, and two other maintenance workers in Hamilton Hall, who were inside when pro-Palestinian protesters at Columbia took over the building.

Just as upsetting as their encounters with the protesters, the three workers recounted in interviews this week, was their feeling that the university had not done enough to prevent the attack or to help them once the building was under siege.

QuoteThe sole public safety officer in the lobby left when confronted by the occupiers and called for backup, several witness said. The protesters then quickly began barricading the main doors with furniture and chains. The occupiers appear to have timed their break-in with the midnight shift change, and the woman on duty was coming off her shift, the union said.

Mr. Torres, who had worked there for five years, confronted some of the protesters, trying to protect what he saw as "his building."

But as he saw the number of protesters grow to "maybe 15 or 20," he said, he realized he could not fight them. He asked to be let out, but someone said the doors downstairs were already barricaded and that he couldn't leave.

He thought of his two young sons at home. He had no idea if other buildings were being taken over, too. Fear made him "crazy," he said. He grabbed an older protester and ripped off his sweatshirt and mask, demanding to be let out.

The man said he could bring 20 people up to back him. "I was terrified," Mr. Torres said. "I did what I had to do." Mr. Torres then grabbed a nearby fire extinguisher and pulled the pin before someone persuaded him to calm down.

Mr. Wilson, 47, saw Mr. Torres facing off with protesters in the stairwell. He radioed his supervisors for help. Then he made his way down to the main doors. They were fastened shut with zip ties.

"So I begged them," Mr. Wilson said. "I said, I work here, let me out, let me out." Eventually, someone cut the zip ties and pushed him outside, he said, then secured the doors again. He found the public safety officer and told her that his co-workers were stuck inside.

Quote from: Langue_doc on May 09, 2024, 04:50:19 AM

QuoteMaintenance workers had a firsthand view of how protesters seized the building (https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/08/nyregion/columbia-hamilton-hall-protests.html), and wondered why the university failed to stop it.

Some paragraphs from the article:

QuoteMariano Torres, a maintenance worker at Columbia University, was cleaning on the third floor of Hamilton Hall in his signature Yankees cap one night last week, when he heard a commotion downstairs. He said he figured it had something to do with the pro-Palestinian encampment on the lawn outside and kept working.

He was shocked, he said, when he suddenly saw five or six protesters, their faces covered by scarves or masks, picking up chairs and bringing them into the stairway.

"I'm like, what the hell is going on? Put it back. What are you doing?" he recalled.

He said he tried to block them and they tried to reason with him to get out of the way, telling him "this is bigger than you." One person, he recalled, told him he didn't get paid enough to deal with this. Someone tried to offer him "a fistful of cash."

He said he replied: "I don't want your money, dude. Just get out of the building."

It was the beginning of what would be a frightening time for Mr. Torres, who goes by Mario, and two other maintenance workers in Hamilton Hall, who were inside when pro-Palestinian protesters at Columbia took over the building.

Just as upsetting as their encounters with the protesters, the three workers recounted in interviews this week, was their feeling that the university had not done enough to prevent the attack or to help them once the building was under siege.

QuoteThe sole public safety officer in the lobby left when confronted by the occupiers and called for backup, several witness said. The protesters then quickly began barricading the main doors with furniture and chains. The occupiers appear to have timed their break-in with the midnight shift change, and the woman on duty was coming off her shift, the union said.

Mr. Torres, who had worked there for five years, confronted some of the protesters, trying to protect what he saw as "his building."

But as he saw the number of protesters grow to "maybe 15 or 20," he said, he realized he could not fight them. He asked to be let out, but someone said the doors downstairs were already barricaded and that he couldn't leave.

He thought of his two young sons at home. He had no idea if other buildings were being taken over, too. Fear made him "crazy," he said. He grabbed an older protester and ripped off his sweatshirt and mask, demanding to be let out.

The man said he could bring 20 people up to back him. "I was terrified," Mr. Torres said. "I did what I had to do." Mr. Torres then grabbed a nearby fire extinguisher and pulled the pin before someone persuaded him to calm down.

Mr. Wilson, 47, saw Mr. Torres facing off with protesters in the stairwell. He radioed his supervisors for help. Then he made his way down to the main doors. They were fastened shut with zip ties.

"So I begged them," Mr. Wilson said. "I said, I work here, let me out, let me out." Eventually, someone cut the zip ties and pushed him outside, he said, then secured the doors again. He found the public safety officer and told her that his co-workers were stuck inside.

Wouldn't that count as forcible confinement? Ironic for the pro-Hamas protesters to resort to kidnapping to support "freedom" for people in Gaza.

IHE: UC Berkeley Investigates Pro-Palestinian Dinner Protest Fracas (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/quick-takes/2024/05/09/berkeley-investigates-pro-palestinian-dinner-protest-fracas)

QuoteThe Council on American-Islamic Relations shared on X a video showing Fisk coming up behind Afaneh, grabbing the phone in her hand from which she was reading the speech, putting her arm around Afaneh's shoulder and saying, "Leave, this is not your house, it is my house." Chemerinksy also says "Please leave our house." Fisk then tries to pull Afaneh's microphone out of her hands. Afaneh says UC is funding weapons manufacturers and Fisk, relinquishing the mic, says "I have nothing to do with what the UC does."

Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 09, 2024, 07:13:22 AMIHE: UC Berkeley Investigates Pro-Palestinian Dinner Protest Fracas (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/quick-takes/2024/05/09/berkeley-investigates-pro-palestinian-dinner-protest-fracas)

QuoteThe Council on American-Islamic Relations shared on X a video showing Fisk coming up behind Afaneh, grabbing the phone in her hand from which she was reading the speech, putting her arm around Afaneh's shoulder and saying, "Leave, this is not your house, it is my house." Chemerinksy also says "Please leave our house." Fisk then tries to pull Afaneh's microphone out of her hands. Afaneh says UC is funding weapons manufacturers and Fisk, relinquishing the mic, says "I have nothing to do with what the UC does."

So you can invade my house but I'm the one being dragged up to see what transgressions I have committed?

In a state with stand your ground laws, the response could well have involved a load of buckshot with the invader on the receiving end.  But in Berkley??????  It seems not.

Truly we are living in cloud cuckoo land.

UC will most likely do nothing,
I wonder what effects will things like this have on election, as Pelosi mentioned, there is Russian involvement in the protests and they seem to serve Trump to some extent. 

Quote from: secundem_artem on May 09, 2024, 08:37:54 AM

Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 09, 2024, 07:13:22 AMIHE: UC Berkeley Investigates Pro-Palestinian Dinner Protest Fracas (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/quick-takes/2024/05/09/berkeley-investigates-pro-palestinian-dinner-protest-fracas)

QuoteThe Council on American-Islamic Relations shared on X a video showing Fisk coming up behind Afaneh, grabbing the phone in her hand from which she was reading the speech, putting her arm around Afaneh's shoulder and saying, "Leave, this is not your house, it is my house." Chemerinksy also says "Please leave our house." Fisk then tries to pull Afaneh's microphone out of her hands. Afaneh says UC is funding weapons manufacturers and Fisk, relinquishing the mic, says "I have nothing to do with what the UC does."

So you can invade my house but I'm the one being dragged up to see what transgressions I have committed?

In a state with stand your ground laws, the response could well have involved a load of buckshot with the invader on the receiving end.  But in Berkley??????  It seems not.

Truly we are living in cloud cuckoo land.

The charges of "Islamophobia" are simply hysterical.

The professor should have simply called the police, but I guess anger took over.

NBC News: ASU post-doc on leave after harassing Arab woman (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/asu-scholar-leave-video-verbal-attack-woman-hijab-goes-viral-rcna151165).

Updates on the protests (https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/05/09/us/college-campus-protests):

Quote'Past Time' to Clear Penn Encampment, Governor Says

QuoteUnion Theological Seminary will divest from holdings that profit from the war in Gaza.

QuoteColson Whitehead cancels his commencement speech at UMass Amherst after arrests of protesters.

QuotePolice arrest protesters at M.I.T., where suspensions have ramped up tension.

QuoteA pro-Palestinian encampment at Penn grows as commencement nears.

QuoteIn a surprise, Cornell's president resigns.

QuoteU.S.C.'s president is censured by the university's academic senate.

QuotePolice officials say that U.C.L.A. protesters had metal pipes, bolt cutters and an occupation manual.

Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 09, 2024, 11:01:18 AM

Quote from: secundem_artem on May 09, 2024, 08:37:54 AM

Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 09, 2024, 07:13:22 AMIHE: UC Berkeley Investigates Pro-Palestinian Dinner Protest Fracas (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/quick-takes/2024/05/09/berkeley-investigates-pro-palestinian-dinner-protest-fracas)

QuoteThe Council on American-Islamic Relations shared on X a video showing Fisk coming up behind Afaneh, grabbing the phone in her hand from which she was reading the speech, putting her arm around Afaneh's shoulder and saying, "Leave, this is not your house, it is my house." Chemerinksy also says "Please leave our house." Fisk then tries to pull Afaneh's microphone out of her hands. Afaneh says UC is funding weapons manufacturers and Fisk, relinquishing the mic, says "I have nothing to do with what the UC does."

So you can invade my house but I'm the one being dragged up to see what transgressions I have committed?

In a state with stand your ground laws, the response could well have involved a load of buckshot with the invader on the receiving end.  But in Berkley??????  It seems not.

Truly we are living in cloud cuckoo land.

The charges of "Islamophobia" are simply hysterical.

The professor should have simply called the police, but I guess anger took over.

Well, it was a private party.

QuoteChemerinksy, a free speech scholar, has written that the presidents of the third-year law school class had asked him and Fisk to have graduating law students over for dinner last month.

The monumental ingratitude of insulting your hosts is shocking.

A person with any class and integrity would simply and politely decline the invitation.

Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 09, 2024, 11:01:18 AM

Quote from: secundem_artem on May 09, 2024, 08:37:54 AM

Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 09, 2024, 07:13:22 AMIHE: UC Berkeley Investigates Pro-Palestinian Dinner Protest Fracas (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/quick-takes/2024/05/09/berkeley-investigates-pro-palestinian-dinner-protest-fracas)

QuoteThe Council on American-Islamic Relations shared on X a video showing Fisk coming up behind Afaneh, grabbing the phone in her hand from which she was reading the speech, putting her arm around Afaneh's shoulder and saying, "Leave, this is not your house, it is my house." Chemerinksy also says "Please leave our house." Fisk then tries to pull Afaneh's microphone out of her hands. Afaneh says UC is funding weapons manufacturers and Fisk, relinquishing the mic, says "I have nothing to do with what the UC does."

So you can invade my house but I'm the one being dragged up to see what transgressions I have committed?

In a state with stand your ground laws, the response could well have involved a load of buckshot with the invader on the receiving end.  But in Berkley??????  It seems not.

Truly we are living in cloud cuckoo land.

The charges of "Islamophobia" are simply hysterical.

The professor should have simply called the police, but I guess anger took over.

The student in question went to a private residence (https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-04-10/uc-berkeley-law-school-dean-clashes-with-pro-palestinian-activists) armed with a microphone and a speech so that she could disrupt the dinner, instead of declining the invitation. Hijacking a dinner in a private residence was disruptive to the hosts as well as the guests. Accusing the hosts of Islamophobia when the group supporting Malak Afaneh distributed a poster depicting a "caricature of [Chemrinsky] holding a bloody knife and fork and the words "No dinner with Zionist Chem while Gaza starves" is blatantly anti-Semetic. According to one of the reports (https://www.kqed.org/news/11982697/confrontation-at-uc-berkeley-law-school-deans-home-highlights-campus-tensions)

QuoteIn his own statement released the morning after the incident, Chemerinsky said he was "enormously sad that we have students who are so rude as to come into my home, in my backyard, and use this social occasion for their political agenda."

But he said he and Fisk would not be intimidated and still planned to host the additional scheduled student dinners at their home, albeit with security measures in place. (An attendee of Wednesday's dinner said the event transpired without incident.)

Chemerinsky, who is Jewish, said a poster that Afaneh's group distributed before the event, with a caricature of him holding a bloody knife and fork and the words "No dinner with Zionist Chem while Gaza starves," was blatantly antisemitic.

Apologies for the double posting.

According to The Gothamist (https://gothamist.com/news/lock-all-windows-a-designated-smoking-room-inside-columbia-protesters-maps-and-plans),

QuoteThe students who orchestrated last week's takeover of Columbia University's Hamilton Hall left behind a series of charts, maps and supply lists that detail the extensive planning behind the brief occupation.

Photos shared exclusively with Gothamist reveal the protesters' hand-drawn schematics mapping out entire floors of the building, locations of supplies, doors they wanted to barricade, and the locations of water fountains and fire extinguishers.

A "task list" included to-dos like "set up pulley," "lock all windows," "security shifts," and "role [sic] call." A hand-drawn map of the building's third floor indicated that room 313 had been designated the "smoking room." Another list was titled "Heavy Equipment Locations" and noted rooms with "tons of books," "large tables," "tall ladder" and "portable podium/table." In all caps, the list also included the following note: "3rd floor windows in need of blockade."

See the article for photos of two lists by the protesters who occupied Hamilton Hall, the first a hand-drawn map of stairways and entrances to the building and the second, a list of "heavy supplies" like tables and books, along with room locations.

Hope Room 313 wasn't some poor faculty or staff member's office....

In support of an opinion upthread from Wahoo: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/05/protest-effectiveness-research/678292/

Somebody somewhere is making a mint selling keffiyehs to  white college kids who didn't even know what those things were 6 weeks ago.

Quote from: secundem_artem on May 10, 2024, 03:07:07 PMSomebody somewhere is making a mint selling keffiyehs to  white college kids who didn't even know what those things were 6 weeks ago.

Brando in "The Wild One" [1953]:

"Hey, Johnny, what are you rebelling against?"
"Whaddya got?"

Quote from: secundem_artem on May 10, 2024, 03:07:07 PMSomebody somewhere is making a mint selling keffiyehs to  white college kids who didn't even know what those things were 6 weeks ago.

Try Amazon where keffiyeh scarves, made in China, sell for under $10. Type "keffiyeh scarf Vivian and Vincent" in the Amazon search bar for details regarding price and place of origin.

Quote from: jimbogumbo on May 10, 2024, 02:29:52 PMIn support of an opinion upthread from Wahoo: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/05/protest-effectiveness-research/678292/

Today's students are relying on the zeitgeist of their grandparents.  Volatile protests, protest signs, marches, slogans, chants, camp-outs, occupations----all 1970s.

Then there is the rightwing media distorting in typical fashion.  My father-in-law had FOX News on his TV today, and considerable coverage was dedicated to "the anti-Israel protests" of college students with cherrypicked footage of students resisting arrest and, of course, a professor complaining about police brutality. 

CNN: Dozens of professors among those arrested in campus protests (https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/11/us/professors-campus-arrests-invs/index.html)

Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 11, 2024, 05:35:32 PMCNN: Dozens of professors among those arrested in campus protests (https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/11/us/professors-campus-arrests-invs/index.html)

If profs could have been restricted to only "supporting" student protesters on the "other" side; i.e. ones who they didn't agree with politically, (so it was just about the principle of free speech), I'd wager you could count them on one hand. With fingers to spare.

And, of all people, Jerry Seinfeld involved: NBC: Duke students walk out of Jerry Seinfeld's commencement speech amid wave of graduation anti-war protests (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/duke-students-walkout-jerry-seinfeld-commencement-wave-graduation-anti-rcna151876)

Context from the Guardian: (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/may/10/peaceful-pro-palestinian-campus-protests)

QuoteAn analysis of 553 US campus demonstrations nationwide between 18 April and 3 May found that fewer than 20 resulted in any serious interpersonal violence or property damage, according to statistics from the Armed Conflict Location and Event Data Project (Acled).

Over the same period, Acled documented at least 70 instances of forceful police intervention against US campus protests, which includes the arrest of demonstrators and the use of physical dispersal tactics, including the deployment of chemical agents, batons and other kinds of physical force.

Quote from: Parasaurolophus on Today at 10:32:06 AMContext from the Guardian: (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/may/10/peaceful-pro-palestinian-campus-protests)

QuoteAn analysis of 553 US campus demonstrations nationwide between 18 April and 3 May found that fewer than 20 resulted in any serious interpersonal violence or property damage, according to statistics from the Armed Conflict Location and Event Data Project (Acled).

Over the same period, Acled documented at least 70 instances of forceful police intervention against US campus protests, which includes the arrest of demonstrators and the use of physical dispersal tactics, including the deployment of chemical agents, batons and other kinds of physical force.

The whole point of a demo is to get arrested! Preferably in front of TV cameras. Better yet, provoke the police to use their sticks on people, cuff them, and throw them on the pavement. Gas is OK on account the filming doesn't move too many, so don't protest it too much.

In that sense, I guess the demos have been successful.

In another sense, I have no clue where these numbers come from, the number arrested aside. You can get a demo in New York City at any time, for any cause, but all these events seem populated by protesting tourists.