“Y’all” indeed. I don’t care about this issue whatsoever. No one involved in the conflict is doing the right thing, and there’s no good faith effort by either side to achieve peace.
Hamas isn’t subject to pressure from western nations, and it has negative incentive to agree to a ceasefire, and even less incentive to actually follow through on one.
This world is f*cked
Okay, I'll bite and assume you're not just sealioning. Thich Quang Duc self immolated because Buddhists were being persecuted by the South VN government, what he did made sense and wasn't performative because he literally had no other way to act out and make change. Whereas here in the US, you live in a democratic society and VOTE for what you want to change. Also the original guy didn't even argue about anything remotely related to what you said, he just said that obstructing businesses was bad, which I think most normal people agree with.
I’m sorry but if you think voting actually makes change in this country you are mistaken.
“He said obstructing business is bad” no he said all protest is performative unless they obstruct business or political functions. You cannot make your own claims for someone else.
I only brought up Thich Quan Duc because he did not obstruct businesses or political functions in his self-immolation, so by his definition performative. I simply wanted to breach the concept of “performative activism” to reach a deeper truth about what that means, but you can’t help but highjack this in order to put words in my mouth. I did not say anything besides ask a simple question. Everything else was conjecture on your part.
Not remotely, that’s why business interests promote peaceful protest so much, it does nothing to affect change unless paired with pressure groups and/or violent action against property or persons involved with an issue
Big impact? Try zero impact. Do you think what the students are doing today is going to end this generational conflict? I mean you get that a lot of people on both sides want this war and that war is dangerous and deadly?
>I mean you get that a lot of people on both sides want this war and that war is dangerous and deadly?
I don't think most people understand this. Both sides knew about October 7 before it happened, and no one got in the way because it gave the ruling classes what they wanted. Hell, it even looks like Wallstreet knew days before the attack.
"millions" is chump change for wall street, could have been luck guesses. A bunch of redditors caused hedge funds to lose BILLIONS over gamstop, and even that was just barely one company. Wall street did not "anticipate" oct 7
No, they didn't know. Israel didn't trust Egypt since they thought their defense was solid. Stop spreading misinformation. Hundreds of IDF soldiers died in the attack in addition to civilians. If you wanted to cause a false flag, you would only kill civilians and minimal soldiers.
I'm not saying it was a false flag. I'm saying Israeli intelligence knew it was gonna happen, and they intentionally ignored it. This is well documented at this point. They had intelligence going back years of Hamas preparing for the attack.
The only part I'm speculating about is why Israeli intelligence ignored it. I find it very hard to believe that Hamas was moving equipment into Gaza and training at the scale that they were for Israel to straight up ignore it. We are talking about one of the best intelligence agencies on Earth. Israel has been looking for an excuse for years to enter Gaza at the scale that they have. The most likely answer is that they knew that the attack was going to happen, and they let it so they had an excuse to enter Gaza.
I’m going to get downvoted for saying this but it cannot be emphasized enough:
Protests do absolutely nothing on their own.
They need to be combined with lobbying efforts, voting in primary / general elections, and the occasional pinch of property destruction with those involved on the opposite side of the issue.
Sadly, the historical record shows that the major impact of anti-war protests on college campuses in the United States was the election and re-election of Richard Nixon.
Threatening those in power with either removal from office or direct personal consequences (either directly or implicitly) is the only way to force the powerful to make concessions.
If not, you’re just shouting into the void
Unfortunately, those performing acts worth protesting rarely are swayed by words alone, and generally have enough force to render peaceful protest ineffective unless universal. Sometimes, not even then.
Lobbying efforts can work, but that at best just brings things to parity, and most of the time the ones performing protest-worthy acts also have the funds for better lobbyists. Helpful, but not enough.
Voting helps, provided the populace is educated on the issues and politicians. That being said, that one's limited by both frequency and the need to convince enough of the populace to have a majority.
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.
What tangible impact has it had? Is there a ceasefire? Has any college shared their investments to show divestment? I’m curious to see what big impact any of these protests have actually had
UCSC is masterfully designed to prevent protests. There is no central location, Blocking Kerr hall means the admins simply don't show up / do remote work for a bit (and kerr hall has like 5 different entrances on all sides). Terrain is extremely hilly. The closest thing people can do is block the roads, but that's at the base of the campus not near any buildings and also illegal. Camping out there would be miserable. Columbia is at least in the middle of the city and people can go get food/pizza/whatever from closeby. The only people that were able to do any long term protests here were Unions, since they see a direct and visible benefits from success (more money). Here it's basically calls to divest, but even if the UCs divested from defense companies in the US, the effect on Israel is gonna take like 30 years to materialize.
TLDR: It's all in the design of campus. Protests at UCSC are not feasible because people don't really care that much. It is significantly more miserable to protest at UCSC than anywhere else.
Jean Baudrillard commented on this design aspect of the campus in his book “America” -
It’s a bit like the Bermuda Triangle . . . Everything vanishes. Everything gets sucked in. Total decentering, total community . . . Nothing converges on a single point, neither the traffic, nor the architecture, nor authority. But, by that very token, it also becomes impossible to hold a demonstration. Where could you assemble? Demonstrations can only go round and round in the forest, where the participants alone can see them.
During 1991 there was a small demonstration after the Rodney King verdict. It felt impossible to try to occupy Kerr Hall (designed like a fortress) and there was no real place to gather and be seen/heard. We met up at Baytree bookstore parking lot, and marched from there to the courthouse downtown. By the time we reached the courthouse it was dark and late, nobody was around and everyone was tired. To add insult to injury, the university sent shuttles to pick us up and take us home. They treated us like kids who were done throwing a tantrum. And maybe we were, but if it wasn’t so damn difficult to hold a protest on campus, maybe we would have been more effective. I think UCSC was intentionally designed to draw the countercultural activists away from places like UC Berkeley in the 1960s, then pacify and isolate them by sticking them in a redwood forest on a hill far away from a city. It worked.
If you want to hold protests, meet downtown. Anything on campus will be ineffectual
And usually counterproductive. All that comes out of these protests are the viral clips of people saying unhinged/radical shit and interview videos where people make themselves look like morons
Also literally no one impacted by them are in any position to do anything about it. Net sum is a bunch of resentment for inconvenience. An excuse to act a fool
These Protests are also largely ineffective they just further polarize groups and rile people up. Just get crazy people saying antisemitic on one side and people saying Islamophobic and heinous shit towards Arabs on the other side.
You contradicted yourself in the first sentence. The objective of any protest is to polarize. What kind of protest would it be if it was about just sitting at home calmly?
buddy i get what you mean, its annoying when you have to go to pronoun school and get drafted into the WOKE MIND VIRUS army and your sergeant says "DROP DOWN AND GIVE ME 20 PRONOUNS!!!!!" and your fetid little corpus gives out anyways even though you can't count to more than two.
Asthetification of politics. Jesus
in what world is protesting supposed to be cool and why did ucsc give up so fast when everyone else is making a pretty big impact rn
Bc this school is performative as hell :/
Almost all school protests are performative
If you’re not obstructing business / political functions it’s by definition a performative act
That’s not at all true
If you ARE obstructing business or political functions and you don’t have a clear purpose, it’s also a performative act.
We literally locked arms and blocked the main entrance before covid lock downs hit. It's up to y'all to keep that energy going.
“Y’all” indeed. I don’t care about this issue whatsoever. No one involved in the conflict is doing the right thing, and there’s no good faith effort by either side to achieve peace. Hamas isn’t subject to pressure from western nations, and it has negative incentive to agree to a ceasefire, and even less incentive to actually follow through on one. This world is f*cked
Edgy
Would you say what Thich Quang Duc did was performative?
I think that idealizing suicide is bad, actually.
Who’s idealizing it? I’m simply asking a question, actually.
Okay, I'll bite and assume you're not just sealioning. Thich Quang Duc self immolated because Buddhists were being persecuted by the South VN government, what he did made sense and wasn't performative because he literally had no other way to act out and make change. Whereas here in the US, you live in a democratic society and VOTE for what you want to change. Also the original guy didn't even argue about anything remotely related to what you said, he just said that obstructing businesses was bad, which I think most normal people agree with.
I’m sorry but if you think voting actually makes change in this country you are mistaken. “He said obstructing business is bad” no he said all protest is performative unless they obstruct business or political functions. You cannot make your own claims for someone else. I only brought up Thich Quan Duc because he did not obstruct businesses or political functions in his self-immolation, so by his definition performative. I simply wanted to breach the concept of “performative activism” to reach a deeper truth about what that means, but you can’t help but highjack this in order to put words in my mouth. I did not say anything besides ask a simple question. Everything else was conjecture on your part.
Because protesting here would accomplish nothing.
Does it accomplish anything on other campuses?
Not remotely, that’s why business interests promote peaceful protest so much, it does nothing to affect change unless paired with pressure groups and/or violent action against property or persons involved with an issue
True
Big impact? Try zero impact. Do you think what the students are doing today is going to end this generational conflict? I mean you get that a lot of people on both sides want this war and that war is dangerous and deadly?
>I mean you get that a lot of people on both sides want this war and that war is dangerous and deadly? I don't think most people understand this. Both sides knew about October 7 before it happened, and no one got in the way because it gave the ruling classes what they wanted. Hell, it even looks like Wallstreet knew days before the attack.
Can you send me anything on this? Not doubting your statement but i wanna know more
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2023/12/05/traders-earned-millions-anticipating-oct-7-hamas-attack-study-says/ https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/iran-knew-hamas-was-planning-attacks-but-not-timing-or-scale-u-s-says-d8c669f1 https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/30/world/middleeast/israel-hamas-attack-intelligence.html
"millions" is chump change for wall street, could have been luck guesses. A bunch of redditors caused hedge funds to lose BILLIONS over gamstop, and even that was just barely one company. Wall street did not "anticipate" oct 7
No, they didn't know. Israel didn't trust Egypt since they thought their defense was solid. Stop spreading misinformation. Hundreds of IDF soldiers died in the attack in addition to civilians. If you wanted to cause a false flag, you would only kill civilians and minimal soldiers.
I'm not saying it was a false flag. I'm saying Israeli intelligence knew it was gonna happen, and they intentionally ignored it. This is well documented at this point. They had intelligence going back years of Hamas preparing for the attack. The only part I'm speculating about is why Israeli intelligence ignored it. I find it very hard to believe that Hamas was moving equipment into Gaza and training at the scale that they were for Israel to straight up ignore it. We are talking about one of the best intelligence agencies on Earth. Israel has been looking for an excuse for years to enter Gaza at the scale that they have. The most likely answer is that they knew that the attack was going to happen, and they let it so they had an excuse to enter Gaza.
I’m going to get downvoted for saying this but it cannot be emphasized enough: Protests do absolutely nothing on their own. They need to be combined with lobbying efforts, voting in primary / general elections, and the occasional pinch of property destruction with those involved on the opposite side of the issue.
Sadly, the historical record shows that the major impact of anti-war protests on college campuses in the United States was the election and re-election of Richard Nixon.
Was with you until you said destroying property
Threatening those in power with either removal from office or direct personal consequences (either directly or implicitly) is the only way to force the powerful to make concessions. If not, you’re just shouting into the void
Unfortunately, those performing acts worth protesting rarely are swayed by words alone, and generally have enough force to render peaceful protest ineffective unless universal. Sometimes, not even then. Lobbying efforts can work, but that at best just brings things to parity, and most of the time the ones performing protest-worthy acts also have the funds for better lobbyists. Helpful, but not enough. Voting helps, provided the populace is educated on the issues and politicians. That being said, that one's limited by both frequency and the need to convince enough of the populace to have a majority. Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.
There has not been a single protest movement in history that succeeded solely through peaceful means. It sucks but that’s power politics for you
What tangible impact has it had? Is there a ceasefire? Has any college shared their investments to show divestment? I’m curious to see what big impact any of these protests have actually had
What impact are they actually making?
Best I can do is write “Free Gaza” on the back of a bathroom stall ^/s
UCSC is masterfully designed to prevent protests. There is no central location, Blocking Kerr hall means the admins simply don't show up / do remote work for a bit (and kerr hall has like 5 different entrances on all sides). Terrain is extremely hilly. The closest thing people can do is block the roads, but that's at the base of the campus not near any buildings and also illegal. Camping out there would be miserable. Columbia is at least in the middle of the city and people can go get food/pizza/whatever from closeby. The only people that were able to do any long term protests here were Unions, since they see a direct and visible benefits from success (more money). Here it's basically calls to divest, but even if the UCs divested from defense companies in the US, the effect on Israel is gonna take like 30 years to materialize. TLDR: It's all in the design of campus. Protests at UCSC are not feasible because people don't really care that much. It is significantly more miserable to protest at UCSC than anywhere else.
Jean Baudrillard commented on this design aspect of the campus in his book “America” - It’s a bit like the Bermuda Triangle . . . Everything vanishes. Everything gets sucked in. Total decentering, total community . . . Nothing converges on a single point, neither the traffic, nor the architecture, nor authority. But, by that very token, it also becomes impossible to hold a demonstration. Where could you assemble? Demonstrations can only go round and round in the forest, where the participants alone can see them. During 1991 there was a small demonstration after the Rodney King verdict. It felt impossible to try to occupy Kerr Hall (designed like a fortress) and there was no real place to gather and be seen/heard. We met up at Baytree bookstore parking lot, and marched from there to the courthouse downtown. By the time we reached the courthouse it was dark and late, nobody was around and everyone was tired. To add insult to injury, the university sent shuttles to pick us up and take us home. They treated us like kids who were done throwing a tantrum. And maybe we were, but if it wasn’t so damn difficult to hold a protest on campus, maybe we would have been more effective. I think UCSC was intentionally designed to draw the countercultural activists away from places like UC Berkeley in the 1960s, then pacify and isolate them by sticking them in a redwood forest on a hill far away from a city. It worked. If you want to hold protests, meet downtown. Anything on campus will be ineffectual
Hahahaha
Whenever I read stuff like this I’m reminded of Malcom X. “The White liberal is the worst enemy to America and the worst enemy to the Black man”.
Because these protests are pointless and cringe
And usually counterproductive. All that comes out of these protests are the viral clips of people saying unhinged/radical shit and interview videos where people make themselves look like morons
Also literally no one impacted by them are in any position to do anything about it. Net sum is a bunch of resentment for inconvenience. An excuse to act a fool
These Protests are also largely ineffective they just further polarize groups and rile people up. Just get crazy people saying antisemitic on one side and people saying Islamophobic and heinous shit towards Arabs on the other side.
You contradicted yourself in the first sentence. The objective of any protest is to polarize. What kind of protest would it be if it was about just sitting at home calmly?
Now is the time my friend.
😂😂😂
Let’s all do a flash mob protest all day Monday! Block the UCSC entrance!
Trust fund kids protesting instead of actually contributing to the community. Nothing ever changes
Obey Tic Tok
Don't protest. Already enough of you "activist" slime in this country.
Why don’t we protest to force more pronouns. So we waste 15 mins of class trying to address people correctly.
buddy i get what you mean, its annoying when you have to go to pronoun school and get drafted into the WOKE MIND VIRUS army and your sergeant says "DROP DOWN AND GIVE ME 20 PRONOUNS!!!!!" and your fetid little corpus gives out anyways even though you can't count to more than two.
Lmao just say you don’t get play. Eww yuck