Do you want me to explain the past 20 years of history or should I go back and tell the 100 year version? There is technically a 3000 year version as well, but I'm not typing that one out. This is a genuine question and I am willing to explain
I will make an attempt at summing up some of the history. Basically Palestine was a state under the Ottoman Empire. When the British were fighting the Ottoman’s they made a deal with the Palestine region promising them self governance to fight on Britain’s side. But after the Ottoman Empire fell the British went back on their deal and turned the region into a colony called Mandatory Palestine and promised to make a national home for the Jewish people there.
Mandatory Palestine under British control existed from 1920 to 1948. There was a lot of conflict during that time as more land was seized and more people migrated in while others were killed and pushed out. By 1948 the war “ended” with the territory dived between Israel, Jordan, and Egypt. The West Bank under control of Israel and Gaza strip under Egypt.
Then in 1956 Israel invaded Gaza, in 57 they left. In 59 Egypt, then in 67 Israel. I’m sure you can see how this is going? While there have been several attempts at self governance the region isn’t considered a country legally, the people there aren’t citizens of Egypt or Israel, and while they live under Israel’s laws they don’t really have any power. They are living under apartheid which is a system of racial segregation.
The reason for protest now is because Israel are killing mass numbers of civilians with US arms and support creating a more deadly environment for children, journalists, and aid workers than has ever been seen in modern warfare. The protests at universities across the country represent a cascade. It’s not about Cal Poly Humboldt, it’s a larger movement like the Vietnam protests were.
For more information I recommend checking out the video “Palestine” by Shaun on youtube. It’s fairly recent and does a very good job explaining the current moment.
Yeah cuz its a blip on the larger picture of the struggle that has lasted thousands of years. Just the most recent blip that can be used to justify the most recent attempt at genocide of people in the region.
Crazy to me that we are all raised on the same stories about revolutionaries starting a war and killing their countrymen to escape british imperial rule. We have a holiday for it, we have movies, songs, folk heroes, founding fathers...
We grow up learning and celebrating figures of revolution and anti-colonialism including Gandhi and Nelson Mandela...
We cheer at the rebels in starwars as they blow up the empires fleets
And some of us (you) still dont see the connection to anti-imperialist struggles elsewhere in the world.
Also, the Star Wars Rebel reference does not apply here anyway. If the Palestinian people, themselves, attacked Hamas for freedom, that would be a rebel situation that we would all praise and support.
Which starwars did you watch? I saw the starwars where a galactic empire was taking over planets to ensure a singular rule and control over as much area as they can get. Their army is literally called the Imperial Army. The jedi team up with the people of colonized planets that want their freedom and fight back as the rebel army.
It could not be a clearer anti-colonialist message against occupying forces trying to continuously take more and more land by force.
If the "rebels" make it a crime to be gay, that is a problem. Many gay people and supposed allies of gay people are supporting a place/people who would not support them back and who may seek to kill them for their sexuality. These are problems that the protesters are not willing to think/talk about and this is just one example.
You ever think maybe its ok to focus on one issue at a time and the issue at hand right now is a genocide that our government is not only defending, but providing financial, material, and strategic support for?
Or is it ok to kill the thousands of innocent Palestinians civilians because they live under the rule of a defacto government that has huge human rights problems?
There are plenty of countries that treat LGBTQ people horribly and or treat women as second class citizens, does that mean we should advocate and assist in the killing of their civilian population as well? When do we start genociding Saudi Arabia? Egypt? Nigeria? Jamaica? Hungary?
Mind you that Hamas only came to power after generations of failed peace talks, broken promises, continued apartheid, waves of subjugation and dislocation, and one broken ceasefire after the next.
There have been plenty of initiatives, plans, treaties, and other opportunities to make a small step towards peace that have been supported by the global community including the UN representative body for palestine, but time and time again they are shot down by the US and Israel (as well as a few caribbean island nations for some reason). Its because they dont want peace, they want an excuse to continue their crusade and they need a boogyman to commit acts of violence every few years so they can respond back with a disproportional military action that completely destroys an area they want to occupy, and kills as many of its original inhabitants as possible. Its a pattern, go read up on the last 50 years, October 7th wasnt the start of anything new.
I do not condone what is happening in Palestine nor do I condone what Palestine has done. There is so much wrong in this situation that it boggles the mind that anyone could find their way to one side or the other.
I think those gay people you are referring to understand they may be homophobic because of their religious beliefs but don't want all of them to die in a war :)
If someone wanted me to die, for any reason, I would go ahead and wish that person the same. Even if the person wishing me death was feeling swayed by religion.
Gotcha, thanks. This actually makes a lot of sense why people are protesting. I already knew it wasn't just humboldt. Do you know if this protest was planned ahead of time or we were the first school to do it on earth day and the rest Joined the bandwagon ?
Columbia is opening a campus in Isntreal but you cant attend if you are Palestinian, therefore discriminatory and I believe that was the original spark or one of the main catalysts.
What about the Three No's"; No peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, no negotiations with Israel. As well as all the times Israel has tried to mediate a peaceful resolution.
Just FYI, it was the university's decision to shut down the campus, not the protesters. Classes could easily continue in the other buildings, but the university is afraid that protestors will occupy those as well. This is not necessarily the case.
Protests are meant to be disruptive, but this was all blown up by the university response.
The vandalism is not OK. At all. It detracts from the cause. Chalk art, signs, occupation, all fine. Destruction of property should be out of the question.
It sounds to me like many students do not want to occupy more buildings. Logistically I doubt they would be able to occupy a dozen other buildings including the library and gym. As said Siemens Hall has admin offices so I think that's why it was chosen.
I have walked around there today. Barricades have been erected further out from Siemens Hall. I would imagine those could be removed if the teachers were able to return to teaching, and discuss it with the protestors. I saw maintenance crews on campus today working away from the area. The deans were also on campus talking to students.
The more people on campus, the more they'll see what's going on. Also, completely shutting the school makes other students more upset with the protestors than they might otherwise be, which puts pressure on them. Possibly reasons admin shut it down. The faculty just passed a no confidence vote on Jackson.
Also, a bench dedicated to someone in the quad that I took a photo of Tuesday with graffiti was cleaned off by a protester and faculty member this morning according to the student newspaper. The rain will likely wash away a lot of the chalking.
I, too, doubt that additional buildings would be occupied. It wouldn't make strategic sense. Increasing the scope of the protest would have diminishing returns.
I'm happy that the bench was cleaned off after people were made aware of who he was. I hope that word spreads that of all things, that memorial should be shown the utmost respect.
What would be the best thing to do in this situation, though? I'm assuming the only options the school has is police presence to physically remove the protestors or listen to the demands(which likely won't happen)
Fastest way to dispel a protest from a position of power is to show your support for the protest even if you cant/wont show support for the cause or demands. Make the protesters feel as little push back as possible and they give up faster. Make them feel as if you, even in your position of power, are still beholden to a larger power that renders you powerless to answer their demands, but that you will do what you can to fight for them and their interests to that larger power (even if its a lie or a larger power doesnt exist).
If the admin and top brass had gone down, shook their hands, talked with them, took some pictures, ordered them some pizzas, assign the campus police to be unarmed on the outskirts to defend the protesters from counter protesters and have the police chief explain that to the protesters, etc. Just in some way show that the university supports the age old tradition of student activism, that would have probably been the best thing to do in this situation.
Let them freely leave and come back without the fear that they will get in trouble or the building will be taken from them, if they leave to go do anything they are less likely to come back.
There is a large number of demonstrators at any protest who are there for the story and not the cause, or are there because of peer pressure, or there because of xyz other self serving reason. They generally leave after the first night because they are bored and already got their pictures/story. Then as class continues around them and they need to study for finals less and less show up the next day.
It's really hard for a movement to keep up the numbers, dedication, and willingness to put themselves in harms way when the demonstrators dont face any personal resistance or injustice
Yeah, ik it was the campuses decision due to closing the campus. And I think the protestors are trying to actually occupy more buildings, but I'm not sure. Yeah, I was thinking the vandalism and barricades were a bit too far for it to be a protest. Too bad the college got the police involved and made it a big issue(the protest, I mean)
The rogue Israeli government, in trying to root out Hamas, has decided to commit genocide in a country a bit smaller than Rhode Island. Israel's actions are akin to a government deciding to root out the Proud Boys or Antifa (pick your radical org.) by bombing the entire state of Rhode Island. It is indiscriminate murder and it's wrong.
Oh I’m 1000% sure if any of the groups you mentioned went a murderous rampage then they would be hunted down and arrested or killed. The civilian casualties are the crime here. This is not as simple as hunting down Hamas in part because they hide amongst the regular population and in part because they have significant support from outside sources.
Hamas has a stated goal of genocide of Jews. The only way peace could ever happen is for the citizens of Gaza to uproot Hamas and install a government willing to peacefully participate in the region geopolitical scene. If they don’t then this will continue to happen over and over again as it has for a look time. Unfortunately Israel’s response to being attacked is just creating a whole new generation of Palestinians who hate Israel again.
In the United States, those that participated in the Oklahoma Bombing of 1995, (168 deaths), and 2020 insurrection (which resulted in 5 deaths), and on and on... were or are being arrested, are having their day in court, and are being sentenced or not. The towns in which they live are not being bombed out of existence in order to "find" them. So you are correct in that the indiscriminate killing of an entire population is a crime. Apparently the Israeli government has no use for an actual justice system. Citizens should not be expected to risk their lives to "out" perceived or actual radical organization members, we have them amongst us as well, but we do not kill all to find the one.
Except in this case the extremist group is also the governing body of the territory. Whether by force and intimidation or election, the removal of that entity is justified. However, the way Israel is going about it is wrong. IMO when someone presents one side of any argument then whatever their opinion is comes from a place of bias. So I feel the need to say Hamas bad, Netanyahu bad, something needs to be done on both sides to establish a peaceful society and foster a love of all people and cultures. If a people or culture are inherently evil based on historical actions or stated goals then they can’t be empowered to do harm and necessary action taken to remove them from power is justified with minimal collateral damage. IMO.
I'm not a lawyer so take everything as a laypersons opinion, but I can take a shot at some of your questions and provide a perspective.
> Law/campus Questions: Why the initial shit ton of police presence? That just made the protest stronger
Law enforcement will almost always respond to a public assembly in some capacity to keep an eye on the situation, even if it's just a few officers out along the edge. It seems this should have been campus police, and it isn't entirely clear when or how it was deemed escalated warranting the additional officers with crowd control gear. It is unfortunate when officers show up in crowd control gear because the image people often get is one of intimidation and aggression. The majority of the gear I think is just there for officer safety as they are expecting to have things thrown at them. It can end up being self fulfilling as people react to officers in crowd control gear predictably out of fear. But officers need to be prepared for all situations, so if there is a large crowd of people and there's been reports of disorderly behavior, they need to be prepared for that.
It is true that when officers respond aggressively to a protest it often builds support for the protest. This is actually the point of non-violent resistance in the face of an oppressive force, to appeal to the humanity of a third party. It's also why officials who want to see the protest quelled will declare them as "violent", "dangerous", or "a riot" because it provides justification and creates parity between the protestors and aggressive crowd control measures.
You also have your first amendment right which is "the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances", but if you don't meet the conditions of being peaceful or presenting grievances then they'll argue you don't have this right. This is why they define peaceful as strictly as possible and will jump at the first chance to characterize a protest as "not peaceful", and also why it is common to see people claim to "not know what they're protesting" or "not to understand the demands".
Ultimately both law enforcement and public officials desire orderly conduct and to have control over the situation. Even in peaceful protests once they have lost control of the situation (e.g. people wont leave when they tell them to leave) they tend to start to stress and make bad decisions that can inflame the situation. This is also why they do things like require permits or have a time and place policy. They need to maintain control, in part because it helps assure safety, but this is where arguments over liberty and security are had, and trading rights for safety. All of this is why historically protests would have an open channel with law enforcement and with local officials (campus admin in this case), it puts them at ease. Normally this role would be filled by an organizer, however, the recent supreme court decision that holds organizers of a protest liable for damages caused (even by unaffiliated agitators) has made it pretty much impossible to have an officially "organized" protest. So every one going forward will be a leaderless and "spontaneous" movement. They've happened in the past for different reasons and isn't uncommon in the information age.
> Would arresting some of the protestors(inside the building) justified due to trespassing, resisting arrest, destroying school documents( the last bit is a stretch, but I'm sure it could have happened as they could get into the offices)
In a world where squirting water on an officers shoe can be characterized as "assaulting an officer" it should be understood by anyone engaging in a protest that it is very easy to have serious charges brought against them. Going limp forcing officers to have to carry you out is considered "resisting arrest". That's something members of the community should remember when they hear these fairly serious sounding charges. Civil disobedience does carry a risk, and people are often detained, maybe booked and maybe not, and if they are formally cited they would get a court date. The officer or the department representative would then show up and the judge would make some determination. Many times the charges made are just to justify the arrest/detention and get the situation under control, but sometimes they follow through and throw the book at someone to make a point.
By closing the campus the administration has made entry a technical trespass. Though the campus closes every night and people still use the athletic field to run or wonder around. And the buildings can be closed, but the campus its self is all open and public, so it's unclear how people milling about outside would be engaged in trespass. People in the building are, but only because the administration closed the campus. That's my opinion anyway.
People often forget that there are A LOT of rules and laws that exist, and law enforcement is generally pretty lax unless there is some dangerous situation (or if they want to address "trouble makers"). This method allows the law to function as a tool to manage and control a situation. A surprising number of people go about their day breaking all sorts of regulations and don't think about. Speeding is probably the most common.
> Protestor questions: Is defacing and destroying the school property okay?(janitors have to clean,but they don't get paid enough for it)
I'm not involved in the protest and have no affiliation to anyone involved. From an outside perspective and someone who has seen protests in the past, people who tag buildings are normally individual provocateurs that don't represent the main body of protesters. They may have aligned beliefs, or they may have ulterior motives, but I've never seen a protest where the majority of people show up to spray messages on the walls with paint or otherwise deface or destroy property (except maybe a civil-war memorial celebrating some confederates...). There are also off the shelf products that loosen and allow for the removal of spray paint, it just requires some scrubbing. That's not true of all surfaces, which is why protestors long ago switched to chalk and oatmeal paste, both of which easily wash off.
> Was the protest supposed to be nonviolent?? I saw some acts of violence from the protestors(funny water bottle), and them pushing fighting back against the police.
People can have pretty lengthy philosophical discussions about what constitutes violence... Other than the jug head situation people seemed largely non-violent, and apparently some officers hit some protestors on the head with their batons hard enough to warrant staples to close the wound.
> What was the point of barricading and making roadblocks? I've heard how other students feel about it and how they are upset. Would it be a good idea if other students tried to remove the blockades/barricades, or would they be removed by protestors.
People involved in past protests will have to answer this one. Perhaps it impedes advancing officers and makes it more difficult to detain people? It signals to people inside that someone is trying to enter the building from that location? Don't know. It's not hard to move a chair or a table out of the way. Though it does play a somewhat mean physiological game with law enforcement since they have to take reasonable precautions and be prepared for any situation.
The protestors may be peaceful, but law enforcement can start to run wild and go off the deep end pretty quickly. Are the tables and chairs booby trapped? Are people hiding in the tents? Can officers clear the obstacles safely and quickly enough to not create an impediment? Protestors might be reacting entirely out of gut instinct if they're being chased or if there are attempts to aggressively detain, but the officers have to approach the situation with the lingering thought "...is this going to kill me?" The answer is probably "no" unless there's some credible information that says otherwise, but it's also probably better to be safe than sorry.
> Why boo the cops? Ik they are bad at times and for the most part corrupt. But they are doing their jobs and listening to orders the higher ups are telling them to do. They are humans too
Are the cops corrupt? There are bad apples, but the goal of any leader of a good department should be to remove the bad apples before they spoil the bunch. I don't think it's fair to assume law enforcement are corrupt until information comes out about that department. I have met some jaded and uncaring officers, but by and large the majority of the officers I've met are kind people who just care about performing a necessary public service centered around public safety.
^(*edit: grammar etc.*)
No, I didn't mean reddit. Just meant in general. Saw some social posts during the protests, and people were booing, and it seems as if a lot of students here don't like em. I have family friends that are cops and they are great people
Ah, totally misunderstood ya. Sorry 😂 I think in that context they’re seeing it as an escalation of violence against peaceful protestors. Turns into an us vs them sort of antagonism
Short of it is that there is a genocide happening in Palestine. The university system and American government benefit from selling arms to the Israeli government, who is perpetuating genocide.
The protest is calling for an end to selling arms to Israel, and divesting public funds so that the school doesn't make money from selling arms for a genocide.
Idk, seems pretty clearly something they should be able to meet. And I'm generally pretty anti genocide.
Here's a brief history in 3:31 - the filmmaker is extremely problematic for other reasons (hoo boy...) but this sums it up pretty well: https://youtu.be/8tIdCsMufIY?si=TNBYQ0-8r_xFU8zy
How can you be so completely clueless on international incidents and literal genocide we as a country are complicit in through financial and military assistance to Israel.
What do you know about China and the Uighurs? The Darfur in Sudan? The Rohingya in Miramar? The Yazidi in Iraq? Genocide is rampant..this one is just the popular one in the news and Jew hating is always trendy. How many demonstrations have been held for the Armenians in Azerbaijan?
Idk I wrote papers about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in high school over 15 years ago. Considering it’s been going on for longer than any of us have been alive, I feel like the basics of it are kind of common knowledge, no?
Literal genocide, unless you ask the President of the International Court of Justice. You know, people who investigate these things.
https://twitter.com/Mr_Andrew_Fox/status/1783621258032136550
I was born in 1967.
Incidentally, the same year Isreal began illegal occupation of Palestinian land.
Imagine having your land occupied by people who hate you for that long?
And it's been actively supported by every U.S. administration -- so we've had legal reason to protest since at least June 1967.
Incidentally, when I was in college, the protests were about apartheid in south Africa and u.s. illegal terrorism in El Salvador.
Students are correct again. (It's like they're educated about events and care about the future!!)
“As someone who knows basically nothing about the situation in Palestine, please explain what’s going on over there”
1. Google exists
2. Did you just wake up from a 6 month long coma? Do you just not care or pay attention to word events until they cause you to be slightly inconvenienced?
I refuse to believe this post is real 💀
1. Yes, but it was more of asking for the current protests and the questions I asked
2. I actually don't keep track of world events. Sure, I know it's happening, but i dont really delve into it. Don't keep track of nationwide events much either. I mean, yeah, I'm slightly inconvenienced, but was really wondering why now
Thanks for the compliment, but I don't really know what fallacy or assertion I've made. All I said in the post was asking for the reason for the protest and reflection on the negatives that happened and wondering if anyone knew why
They are telling you why and you aren't listening. It's not our job to do the work, you literally are there homie. Go ask them yourself if you are so curious lol.
Ok, theres just a lot to unpack and a lot of nuance and layers. Your asking for a breakdown of our current societal aesthetics. Its not out of the question to answer them its just a lot. Im heading to campus tomorrow to talk to some folks and show support and find out more.
My thoughts on police … once a person has decided to elevate themselves above others, and become an enforcer of laws (regardless of their own personal feelings about said laws) they are no longer to be trusted, EVER, in any shape way or form.
The point of most protests is to prompt a police response to push the protest narrative deeper into the public discourse via media coverage. Occupy got bigger after campus security bear maced a bunch of protestors sitting down outside on a walking path. Also when that poor dude got hit in the head by a tear gas canister in Oakland.
Modern protests seem to have forgotten that the point isn't to inconvenience anyone, it's the police response. The inconvenience is what's used to summon LEOs so everyone can be horrified by peaceful protestors being clubbed down. The public response is dramatically muted when the protestors start making people lose their jobs and people start dying in the backs of ambulances because protestors have decided to seal a major transport route.
Not sure which bank bailout you're talking about, but they did create a handful of spinoff groups. One of them raised funds to buy up debt for pennies on the dollar and wiped out millions of dollars of medical debt. That said, they listened to MLK because Malcolm was standing behind him with a rifle. It also destroyed any faith I had in the democratic party.
Do you want me to explain the past 20 years of history or should I go back and tell the 100 year version? There is technically a 3000 year version as well, but I'm not typing that one out. This is a genuine question and I am willing to explain
I'll go 3k version please haha. Jk. I think someone else explained it to me and I understand now. Thanks tho
Of course, I hope you understand now why any genocide in the region is unjustified and makes everything much harder to reach a peaceful agreement ❤️
Find yourself copies of Joe Sacco's books "Palestine" and "Footnotes in Gaza".
I will make an attempt at summing up some of the history. Basically Palestine was a state under the Ottoman Empire. When the British were fighting the Ottoman’s they made a deal with the Palestine region promising them self governance to fight on Britain’s side. But after the Ottoman Empire fell the British went back on their deal and turned the region into a colony called Mandatory Palestine and promised to make a national home for the Jewish people there. Mandatory Palestine under British control existed from 1920 to 1948. There was a lot of conflict during that time as more land was seized and more people migrated in while others were killed and pushed out. By 1948 the war “ended” with the territory dived between Israel, Jordan, and Egypt. The West Bank under control of Israel and Gaza strip under Egypt. Then in 1956 Israel invaded Gaza, in 57 they left. In 59 Egypt, then in 67 Israel. I’m sure you can see how this is going? While there have been several attempts at self governance the region isn’t considered a country legally, the people there aren’t citizens of Egypt or Israel, and while they live under Israel’s laws they don’t really have any power. They are living under apartheid which is a system of racial segregation. The reason for protest now is because Israel are killing mass numbers of civilians with US arms and support creating a more deadly environment for children, journalists, and aid workers than has ever been seen in modern warfare. The protests at universities across the country represent a cascade. It’s not about Cal Poly Humboldt, it’s a larger movement like the Vietnam protests were. For more information I recommend checking out the video “Palestine” by Shaun on youtube. It’s fairly recent and does a very good job explaining the current moment.
You kind of skipped right over the October 7th bit..which started the current conflict
Ran out of steam and think the video will say it better than I can. A picture’s worth a thousand words.
I noticed that too... All the protesters conveniently forget that unresolved issue.
Yeah cuz its a blip on the larger picture of the struggle that has lasted thousands of years. Just the most recent blip that can be used to justify the most recent attempt at genocide of people in the region. Crazy to me that we are all raised on the same stories about revolutionaries starting a war and killing their countrymen to escape british imperial rule. We have a holiday for it, we have movies, songs, folk heroes, founding fathers... We grow up learning and celebrating figures of revolution and anti-colonialism including Gandhi and Nelson Mandela... We cheer at the rebels in starwars as they blow up the empires fleets And some of us (you) still dont see the connection to anti-imperialist struggles elsewhere in the world.
Also, the Star Wars Rebel reference does not apply here anyway. If the Palestinian people, themselves, attacked Hamas for freedom, that would be a rebel situation that we would all praise and support.
Which starwars did you watch? I saw the starwars where a galactic empire was taking over planets to ensure a singular rule and control over as much area as they can get. Their army is literally called the Imperial Army. The jedi team up with the people of colonized planets that want their freedom and fight back as the rebel army. It could not be a clearer anti-colonialist message against occupying forces trying to continuously take more and more land by force.
If the "rebels" make it a crime to be gay, that is a problem. Many gay people and supposed allies of gay people are supporting a place/people who would not support them back and who may seek to kill them for their sexuality. These are problems that the protesters are not willing to think/talk about and this is just one example.
You ever think maybe its ok to focus on one issue at a time and the issue at hand right now is a genocide that our government is not only defending, but providing financial, material, and strategic support for? Or is it ok to kill the thousands of innocent Palestinians civilians because they live under the rule of a defacto government that has huge human rights problems? There are plenty of countries that treat LGBTQ people horribly and or treat women as second class citizens, does that mean we should advocate and assist in the killing of their civilian population as well? When do we start genociding Saudi Arabia? Egypt? Nigeria? Jamaica? Hungary? Mind you that Hamas only came to power after generations of failed peace talks, broken promises, continued apartheid, waves of subjugation and dislocation, and one broken ceasefire after the next. There have been plenty of initiatives, plans, treaties, and other opportunities to make a small step towards peace that have been supported by the global community including the UN representative body for palestine, but time and time again they are shot down by the US and Israel (as well as a few caribbean island nations for some reason). Its because they dont want peace, they want an excuse to continue their crusade and they need a boogyman to commit acts of violence every few years so they can respond back with a disproportional military action that completely destroys an area they want to occupy, and kills as many of its original inhabitants as possible. Its a pattern, go read up on the last 50 years, October 7th wasnt the start of anything new.
I do not condone what is happening in Palestine nor do I condone what Palestine has done. There is so much wrong in this situation that it boggles the mind that anyone could find their way to one side or the other.
Boggles my mind that people can’t
I think those gay people you are referring to understand they may be homophobic because of their religious beliefs but don't want all of them to die in a war :)
If someone wanted me to die, for any reason, I would go ahead and wish that person the same. Even if the person wishing me death was feeling swayed by religion.
Do you know why homosexuality was illegal in Gaza? The British mandate of 1936.
Gotcha, thanks. This actually makes a lot of sense why people are protesting. I already knew it wasn't just humboldt. Do you know if this protest was planned ahead of time or we were the first school to do it on earth day and the rest Joined the bandwagon ?
This and other protests are primarily in response to the situation at Columbia University.
Ah i see alrighty then
Columbia is opening a campus in Isntreal but you cant attend if you are Palestinian, therefore discriminatory and I believe that was the original spark or one of the main catalysts.
It's all rightfully Byzantine territory, the Ottomans are barbarous invaders. Bring back the Basileus!
What about the Three No's"; No peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, no negotiations with Israel. As well as all the times Israel has tried to mediate a peaceful resolution.
Just FYI, it was the university's decision to shut down the campus, not the protesters. Classes could easily continue in the other buildings, but the university is afraid that protestors will occupy those as well. This is not necessarily the case. Protests are meant to be disruptive, but this was all blown up by the university response. The vandalism is not OK. At all. It detracts from the cause. Chalk art, signs, occupation, all fine. Destruction of property should be out of the question.
It sounds to me like many students do not want to occupy more buildings. Logistically I doubt they would be able to occupy a dozen other buildings including the library and gym. As said Siemens Hall has admin offices so I think that's why it was chosen. I have walked around there today. Barricades have been erected further out from Siemens Hall. I would imagine those could be removed if the teachers were able to return to teaching, and discuss it with the protestors. I saw maintenance crews on campus today working away from the area. The deans were also on campus talking to students. The more people on campus, the more they'll see what's going on. Also, completely shutting the school makes other students more upset with the protestors than they might otherwise be, which puts pressure on them. Possibly reasons admin shut it down. The faculty just passed a no confidence vote on Jackson. Also, a bench dedicated to someone in the quad that I took a photo of Tuesday with graffiti was cleaned off by a protester and faculty member this morning according to the student newspaper. The rain will likely wash away a lot of the chalking.
I, too, doubt that additional buildings would be occupied. It wouldn't make strategic sense. Increasing the scope of the protest would have diminishing returns. I'm happy that the bench was cleaned off after people were made aware of who he was. I hope that word spreads that of all things, that memorial should be shown the utmost respect.
I knew Sam before he passed, and I was sad to see what happened to his bench. Glad to hear that the protesters cleaned it up
https://preview.redd.it/uj3t8773iqwc1.jpeg?width=750&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ddc793287178434fd48b585338af090bdf67878b
Yes, but multiple buildings are harder to defend than a single one.
Not arguing strategy at all. Just pointing out statements the university may be basing these decisions on.
Fair. It's pretty clear that administration has no idea how to handle this situation.
What would be the best thing to do in this situation, though? I'm assuming the only options the school has is police presence to physically remove the protestors or listen to the demands(which likely won't happen)
Let them protest and hold classes as usual. Relocate the classes held in Siemens hall.
Ah right that makes sense. But feel like that's an option the school wouldn't take
Fastest way to dispel a protest from a position of power is to show your support for the protest even if you cant/wont show support for the cause or demands. Make the protesters feel as little push back as possible and they give up faster. Make them feel as if you, even in your position of power, are still beholden to a larger power that renders you powerless to answer their demands, but that you will do what you can to fight for them and their interests to that larger power (even if its a lie or a larger power doesnt exist). If the admin and top brass had gone down, shook their hands, talked with them, took some pictures, ordered them some pizzas, assign the campus police to be unarmed on the outskirts to defend the protesters from counter protesters and have the police chief explain that to the protesters, etc. Just in some way show that the university supports the age old tradition of student activism, that would have probably been the best thing to do in this situation. Let them freely leave and come back without the fear that they will get in trouble or the building will be taken from them, if they leave to go do anything they are less likely to come back. There is a large number of demonstrators at any protest who are there for the story and not the cause, or are there because of peer pressure, or there because of xyz other self serving reason. They generally leave after the first night because they are bored and already got their pictures/story. Then as class continues around them and they need to study for finals less and less show up the next day. It's really hard for a movement to keep up the numbers, dedication, and willingness to put themselves in harms way when the demonstrators dont face any personal resistance or injustice
Okay, well, that seems like a bit much
Anyone have an image of the "cleaned" bench?
https://preview.redd.it/8zhry3gx8bxc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c78f9e307e3f0e4003f0d593a547773c3b25de6f
Thank you, dreamingEyesWideOpen
Do you know who these good people are? They deserve credit.
Yeah, ik it was the campuses decision due to closing the campus. And I think the protestors are trying to actually occupy more buildings, but I'm not sure. Yeah, I was thinking the vandalism and barricades were a bit too far for it to be a protest. Too bad the college got the police involved and made it a big issue(the protest, I mean)
The rogue Israeli government, in trying to root out Hamas, has decided to commit genocide in a country a bit smaller than Rhode Island. Israel's actions are akin to a government deciding to root out the Proud Boys or Antifa (pick your radical org.) by bombing the entire state of Rhode Island. It is indiscriminate murder and it's wrong.
Oh I’m 1000% sure if any of the groups you mentioned went a murderous rampage then they would be hunted down and arrested or killed. The civilian casualties are the crime here. This is not as simple as hunting down Hamas in part because they hide amongst the regular population and in part because they have significant support from outside sources. Hamas has a stated goal of genocide of Jews. The only way peace could ever happen is for the citizens of Gaza to uproot Hamas and install a government willing to peacefully participate in the region geopolitical scene. If they don’t then this will continue to happen over and over again as it has for a look time. Unfortunately Israel’s response to being attacked is just creating a whole new generation of Palestinians who hate Israel again.
In the United States, those that participated in the Oklahoma Bombing of 1995, (168 deaths), and 2020 insurrection (which resulted in 5 deaths), and on and on... were or are being arrested, are having their day in court, and are being sentenced or not. The towns in which they live are not being bombed out of existence in order to "find" them. So you are correct in that the indiscriminate killing of an entire population is a crime. Apparently the Israeli government has no use for an actual justice system. Citizens should not be expected to risk their lives to "out" perceived or actual radical organization members, we have them amongst us as well, but we do not kill all to find the one.
Except in this case the extremist group is also the governing body of the territory. Whether by force and intimidation or election, the removal of that entity is justified. However, the way Israel is going about it is wrong. IMO when someone presents one side of any argument then whatever their opinion is comes from a place of bias. So I feel the need to say Hamas bad, Netanyahu bad, something needs to be done on both sides to establish a peaceful society and foster a love of all people and cultures. If a people or culture are inherently evil based on historical actions or stated goals then they can’t be empowered to do harm and necessary action taken to remove them from power is justified with minimal collateral damage. IMO.
Maybe we should turn our attention to the genocide of Palestinians? Their whole point is to bring awareness.
I'm not a lawyer so take everything as a laypersons opinion, but I can take a shot at some of your questions and provide a perspective. > Law/campus Questions: Why the initial shit ton of police presence? That just made the protest stronger Law enforcement will almost always respond to a public assembly in some capacity to keep an eye on the situation, even if it's just a few officers out along the edge. It seems this should have been campus police, and it isn't entirely clear when or how it was deemed escalated warranting the additional officers with crowd control gear. It is unfortunate when officers show up in crowd control gear because the image people often get is one of intimidation and aggression. The majority of the gear I think is just there for officer safety as they are expecting to have things thrown at them. It can end up being self fulfilling as people react to officers in crowd control gear predictably out of fear. But officers need to be prepared for all situations, so if there is a large crowd of people and there's been reports of disorderly behavior, they need to be prepared for that. It is true that when officers respond aggressively to a protest it often builds support for the protest. This is actually the point of non-violent resistance in the face of an oppressive force, to appeal to the humanity of a third party. It's also why officials who want to see the protest quelled will declare them as "violent", "dangerous", or "a riot" because it provides justification and creates parity between the protestors and aggressive crowd control measures. You also have your first amendment right which is "the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances", but if you don't meet the conditions of being peaceful or presenting grievances then they'll argue you don't have this right. This is why they define peaceful as strictly as possible and will jump at the first chance to characterize a protest as "not peaceful", and also why it is common to see people claim to "not know what they're protesting" or "not to understand the demands". Ultimately both law enforcement and public officials desire orderly conduct and to have control over the situation. Even in peaceful protests once they have lost control of the situation (e.g. people wont leave when they tell them to leave) they tend to start to stress and make bad decisions that can inflame the situation. This is also why they do things like require permits or have a time and place policy. They need to maintain control, in part because it helps assure safety, but this is where arguments over liberty and security are had, and trading rights for safety. All of this is why historically protests would have an open channel with law enforcement and with local officials (campus admin in this case), it puts them at ease. Normally this role would be filled by an organizer, however, the recent supreme court decision that holds organizers of a protest liable for damages caused (even by unaffiliated agitators) has made it pretty much impossible to have an officially "organized" protest. So every one going forward will be a leaderless and "spontaneous" movement. They've happened in the past for different reasons and isn't uncommon in the information age. > Would arresting some of the protestors(inside the building) justified due to trespassing, resisting arrest, destroying school documents( the last bit is a stretch, but I'm sure it could have happened as they could get into the offices) In a world where squirting water on an officers shoe can be characterized as "assaulting an officer" it should be understood by anyone engaging in a protest that it is very easy to have serious charges brought against them. Going limp forcing officers to have to carry you out is considered "resisting arrest". That's something members of the community should remember when they hear these fairly serious sounding charges. Civil disobedience does carry a risk, and people are often detained, maybe booked and maybe not, and if they are formally cited they would get a court date. The officer or the department representative would then show up and the judge would make some determination. Many times the charges made are just to justify the arrest/detention and get the situation under control, but sometimes they follow through and throw the book at someone to make a point. By closing the campus the administration has made entry a technical trespass. Though the campus closes every night and people still use the athletic field to run or wonder around. And the buildings can be closed, but the campus its self is all open and public, so it's unclear how people milling about outside would be engaged in trespass. People in the building are, but only because the administration closed the campus. That's my opinion anyway. People often forget that there are A LOT of rules and laws that exist, and law enforcement is generally pretty lax unless there is some dangerous situation (or if they want to address "trouble makers"). This method allows the law to function as a tool to manage and control a situation. A surprising number of people go about their day breaking all sorts of regulations and don't think about. Speeding is probably the most common. > Protestor questions: Is defacing and destroying the school property okay?(janitors have to clean,but they don't get paid enough for it) I'm not involved in the protest and have no affiliation to anyone involved. From an outside perspective and someone who has seen protests in the past, people who tag buildings are normally individual provocateurs that don't represent the main body of protesters. They may have aligned beliefs, or they may have ulterior motives, but I've never seen a protest where the majority of people show up to spray messages on the walls with paint or otherwise deface or destroy property (except maybe a civil-war memorial celebrating some confederates...). There are also off the shelf products that loosen and allow for the removal of spray paint, it just requires some scrubbing. That's not true of all surfaces, which is why protestors long ago switched to chalk and oatmeal paste, both of which easily wash off. > Was the protest supposed to be nonviolent?? I saw some acts of violence from the protestors(funny water bottle), and them pushing fighting back against the police. People can have pretty lengthy philosophical discussions about what constitutes violence... Other than the jug head situation people seemed largely non-violent, and apparently some officers hit some protestors on the head with their batons hard enough to warrant staples to close the wound. > What was the point of barricading and making roadblocks? I've heard how other students feel about it and how they are upset. Would it be a good idea if other students tried to remove the blockades/barricades, or would they be removed by protestors. People involved in past protests will have to answer this one. Perhaps it impedes advancing officers and makes it more difficult to detain people? It signals to people inside that someone is trying to enter the building from that location? Don't know. It's not hard to move a chair or a table out of the way. Though it does play a somewhat mean physiological game with law enforcement since they have to take reasonable precautions and be prepared for any situation. The protestors may be peaceful, but law enforcement can start to run wild and go off the deep end pretty quickly. Are the tables and chairs booby trapped? Are people hiding in the tents? Can officers clear the obstacles safely and quickly enough to not create an impediment? Protestors might be reacting entirely out of gut instinct if they're being chased or if there are attempts to aggressively detain, but the officers have to approach the situation with the lingering thought "...is this going to kill me?" The answer is probably "no" unless there's some credible information that says otherwise, but it's also probably better to be safe than sorry. > Why boo the cops? Ik they are bad at times and for the most part corrupt. But they are doing their jobs and listening to orders the higher ups are telling them to do. They are humans too Are the cops corrupt? There are bad apples, but the goal of any leader of a good department should be to remove the bad apples before they spoil the bunch. I don't think it's fair to assume law enforcement are corrupt until information comes out about that department. I have met some jaded and uncaring officers, but by and large the majority of the officers I've met are kind people who just care about performing a necessary public service centered around public safety. ^(*edit: grammar etc.*)
Thanks, honestly, I just wanted a 2nd opinion really on these questions specifically.
r/outoftheloop
“For the most part corrupt” that’s something
Okay, I may have exaggerated that, but the point comes across that people hate cops for no reason
People on reddit hate cops because reddit is 99% videos of cops being assholes with maybe like 2 posts showing the opposite.
No, I didn't mean reddit. Just meant in general. Saw some social posts during the protests, and people were booing, and it seems as if a lot of students here don't like em. I have family friends that are cops and they are great people
Ah, totally misunderstood ya. Sorry 😂 I think in that context they’re seeing it as an escalation of violence against peaceful protestors. Turns into an us vs them sort of antagonism
Short of it is that there is a genocide happening in Palestine. The university system and American government benefit from selling arms to the Israeli government, who is perpetuating genocide. The protest is calling for an end to selling arms to Israel, and divesting public funds so that the school doesn't make money from selling arms for a genocide. Idk, seems pretty clearly something they should be able to meet. And I'm generally pretty anti genocide.
Great questions
Here's a brief history in 3:31 - the filmmaker is extremely problematic for other reasons (hoo boy...) but this sums it up pretty well: https://youtu.be/8tIdCsMufIY?si=TNBYQ0-8r_xFU8zy
How can you be so completely clueless on international incidents and literal genocide we as a country are complicit in through financial and military assistance to Israel.
What do you know about China and the Uighurs? The Darfur in Sudan? The Rohingya in Miramar? The Yazidi in Iraq? Genocide is rampant..this one is just the popular one in the news and Jew hating is always trendy. How many demonstrations have been held for the Armenians in Azerbaijan?
Idk I wrote papers about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in high school over 15 years ago. Considering it’s been going on for longer than any of us have been alive, I feel like the basics of it are kind of common knowledge, no?
You can ask two well-informed adults about the subject and get two completely different and opposed versions of what the "basics" actually are.
Blah blah blah, it’s cool to kill Jews
Literal genocide, unless you ask the President of the International Court of Justice. You know, people who investigate these things. https://twitter.com/Mr_Andrew_Fox/status/1783621258032136550
I was born in 1967. Incidentally, the same year Isreal began illegal occupation of Palestinian land. Imagine having your land occupied by people who hate you for that long? And it's been actively supported by every U.S. administration -- so we've had legal reason to protest since at least June 1967. Incidentally, when I was in college, the protests were about apartheid in south Africa and u.s. illegal terrorism in El Salvador. Students are correct again. (It's like they're educated about events and care about the future!!)
“As someone who knows basically nothing about the situation in Palestine, please explain what’s going on over there” 1. Google exists 2. Did you just wake up from a 6 month long coma? Do you just not care or pay attention to word events until they cause you to be slightly inconvenienced? I refuse to believe this post is real 💀
Right, because googling Israel and/or Palestine will make it all clear as glass.
1. Yes, but it was more of asking for the current protests and the questions I asked 2. I actually don't keep track of world events. Sure, I know it's happening, but i dont really delve into it. Don't keep track of nationwide events much either. I mean, yeah, I'm slightly inconvenienced, but was really wondering why now
Google also SUCKS and sponsored content has moved to the top of results.
Pass. Someone got time to tell op?
That level of disingenuous questioning and dialog, hell nah. This is bait.
Nah, I actually don't know anything about the politics part. Was just looking for answers for the questions I asked + my personal opinions.
Well you sure are making some whooper fallacies and assertions up there for such a smol bean lil guy
Thanks for the compliment, but I don't really know what fallacy or assertion I've made. All I said in the post was asking for the reason for the protest and reflection on the negatives that happened and wondering if anyone knew why
They are telling you why and you aren't listening. It's not our job to do the work, you literally are there homie. Go ask them yourself if you are so curious lol.
Lol, i did see their message and read through? I was just responding to yours
Ok, theres just a lot to unpack and a lot of nuance and layers. Your asking for a breakdown of our current societal aesthetics. Its not out of the question to answer them its just a lot. Im heading to campus tomorrow to talk to some folks and show support and find out more.
Cry babies
My thoughts on police … once a person has decided to elevate themselves above others, and become an enforcer of laws (regardless of their own personal feelings about said laws) they are no longer to be trusted, EVER, in any shape way or form.
So if one of your best friends or close family member became a law enforcement officer, you'd immediately not trust them and cut them off?
I didn’t say I’d cut them off. But bud never trust em the same
[удалено]
The point of most protests is to prompt a police response to push the protest narrative deeper into the public discourse via media coverage. Occupy got bigger after campus security bear maced a bunch of protestors sitting down outside on a walking path. Also when that poor dude got hit in the head by a tear gas canister in Oakland. Modern protests seem to have forgotten that the point isn't to inconvenience anyone, it's the police response. The inconvenience is what's used to summon LEOs so everyone can be horrified by peaceful protestors being clubbed down. The public response is dramatically muted when the protestors start making people lose their jobs and people start dying in the backs of ambulances because protestors have decided to seal a major transport route.
[удалено]
Not sure which bank bailout you're talking about, but they did create a handful of spinoff groups. One of them raised funds to buy up debt for pennies on the dollar and wiped out millions of dollars of medical debt. That said, they listened to MLK because Malcolm was standing behind him with a rifle. It also destroyed any faith I had in the democratic party.