Chris Hayes has a question:
I feel like I'm losing my mind a little: people understand that "occupying buildings on campus" is, like, one of the most common forms of student protest for decades and not some devious new ploy devised by professional anarchist plotters, right?
— Chris Hayes (@chrislhayes) May 1, 2024
Point taken, but you may be surprised to know that it's not quite as true as Chris thinks—not in the US, anyway. Students occupied plenty of buildings during the protests of the '60s, but have done it only sporadically since then—usually ending with police being called in and arrests made.
In 2001 SJP occupied a building at UC Berkeley, interrupting a midterm exam. Police were called. SJP did it again in 2002 and police were called again. In both cases, dozens of protesters were arrested.
In 2008, protesters at New School occupied a faculty building. Police were called but things ended peacefully. A few months later they occupied another building. Riot police were called and the students were arrested.
In 2009 protesters occupied the food court at NYU. Police were called and the protesters were dispersed after a raid by campus security.
Also in 2009, UC students began protests over tuition hikes. Protesters took over buildings on some campuses, and in all cases were forced out by police.
Between 2011 and 2018 there were brief building occupations at CSU East Bay, Occidental College, and Ole Miss. During the same period UC Davis students had a habit of periodically semi-occupying the administration building for various reasons, but it was always very polite and they never closed down the building. Police roamed the hallways, disciplinary action was sometimes taken, and eventually everyone got bored and left.
In 2018 students at Seton Hall overstayed their permit to occupy the administration building but eventually left peacefully.
There may be other examples, but these were all I could find over the past few decades. So it's not really all that common, and police are often called in if things last more than a couple of days. What's happening to today's Gaza protesters is extremely normal.
I would agree that occupying building gets the cops involved. But this:
"What's happening to today's Gaza protesters is extremely normal"
is false if we're talking about the response to Gaza protesters short of occupying buildings. Calling the cops in to arrest protesters sitting around the quad is unusual and outrageous. And yeah, that applies even if doing so violates The Rules.
It’s treated a little differently when the protesters are calling for the genocide of Jews.
Ahh, but it's okay if you're calling for the genocide of Palestinians?
Also, noted, you found no protests calling for the genocide of Jews. Which is par for your course.
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskMiddleEast/comments/17510ay/proisrael_demonstrators_call_for_genocide_of/
Nobody is calling for "the genocide of Jews." Since WWII. Or maybe since the Charlottesville tiki torch march, which consisted of "some very good people."
Dishonest much?
Yes, they are.
I am not aware of any school calling cops in to arrest protesters sitting around the quad.
In all cases where the police were called, the protesters had either erected structures, excluded other students from common spaces where all have the right to go, or both.
"erected structures", lol. Pitched a tent.
"erected structures" means something more than a tent, like building four walls and a roof.
*woosh*
sorry.
Tents are structures.
Try going to any university campus and pitching a tent on the main quad.
The scandal is that anti-Semites got treated better than some frat boys pitching a tent for the LOLs.
Tents are not structures. Tents are merely shelters.
That said, sure, there are probably policies against tents on lawns at campuses. But they're not "erecting a structure."
Houses are also shelters... and also structures, as are tents.
Don’t think they’re allowed to pitch tents
Well there you go then. For someone like you that's plenty good enough reason to cheer as the cops beat the shit out of them.
I wish they would beat the shit out of these terrorist supporters. But the police are doing the right thing and showing a tremendous amount of restraint.
Wrong the idiot governor if Virginia had the state police arrest the students at VA Tech and VCU even though the protests were peaceful and no structures.
So shade structures are suddenly a reason to call the cops?
I didn't know EZ-ups were so dangerous.
They are when they are not permitted there. Especially when the people who put them up are saying vile anti-Semitic things.
I think people today have lost sight of how civil disobedience works if they object to being arrested for breaking the law. As originally understood the arrest was part of the point. The public who saw the arrests recognized how unfair it was to arrest someone for violating an unjust law and rallied to their defense and advocated for changing the law. When the laws being broken are wholly unrelated to what’s being protested the public is far less sympathetic and the protest far less effective.
I’m not taking a side here, just making a point about effectiveness of protesters. When arrests are made and the public says “good!” the protesters have hurt their cause. When the arrests are made and the public says “outrageous!” the protesters have possibly advanced their cause.
I’m not really sure what the overwhelming public reaction is to the current arrests. If the reaction matches directly with how they already felt about the issue then I’d guess the protest was likely not effective.
Consequences for civil disobedience?? Well, as Martin Luther King wrote in his "Letter From a Birmingham Hotel Room"...
And what law or laws did the students break? For example, here's a Virignia law professor who can't say exactly what law was broken. He can only speak about what might be the reason for their arrest. And make sure to watch to the end when we find out (surprise, surprise) that the police lied about their justification for arresting sttudents.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TE0vjXxif0
And then there's this:
"At UT, the officers arrested scores of protesters for “trespassing.” But the students don’t appear to have violated school rules. And you can’t trespass on a place where you have the right to be, as students at the public universities they attend clearly do. Even a cameraman for a local news station was tackled and arrested. The next day, the Travis County attorney’s office dropped all of the trespassing charges for lack of probable cause—a telling indicator of the disturbingly authoritarian response."
Not to mention this:
"At Indiana University, administrators rushed out a last-minute, overnight policy change to justify a similar show of force from law enforcement, resulting in 34 arrests."
So when in doubt, change the rules so you can arrest people who are already protesting.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/04/colleges-protests-free-speech/678238/
It's so hard to tell from media reports what the actual situation is. Are the current protests more disruptive than those in the past? Are the cops using more force than necessary to remove them? Are the "newsworthy" incidents just isolated one-offs or more than that?
I can't tell because it's become a media feeding frenzy, with "and now on to the pro-Palestinian protect crisis" having replaced the "and now on to the migrant crisis," which replaced the "and now on to the inflation crisis," and on and on. I suspect that on some campuses the camera crews outnumber the protestors.
But I do wonder (and I'm sure this will elicit howls) why the protestors are universally referred to as "pro-Palestinian" rather than "anti-Israel" when all the demands are "anti" in nature. As far as I can tell, there are no "pro" demands.
Aren't they all pro cease-fire?
Quite a few include that 'pro'. Some are demanding Boycott, Divest, Sanction. Northwestern and Brown negotiated agreements based on disclosure and reviews of investments, and other concessions that appear moderate and reasonable.
Ah, yes.
Will Brown also commit that any other students who occupy public areas for other reasons will get equally favorable treatment? Or are there special rules for anti Israel protesters?
"Pro-Palestinian" means there is no "pro" demands? Well, hasn't that been the problem since 1947? Or maybe 1920?
It is difficult to judge the actions of the various parties; news reports aren't the Kerner Commission report. I am concerned that the Republican/Fox outrage machine is tilting decisions in the direction of 'call the cops' v. keep negotiating.
I doubt that very many Columbia graduates, much less the trustees, watch Fox News. But they might listen to Chuck Schumer.
Since when do Universities negotiate with students who violate school rules?
When we had a kegger and it got a bit rowdy the Campus Police came and dealt with us. There was no negotiation.
Why do anti-Semites get special treatment?
It has nothing to do with antisemites. It has to do with the fact that university culture considers protests to be very different from a kegger. Since when have they done this? At least since I first had significant interactions with a university, which, given that I grew up in an academic family, was pretty early in childhood.
If you wanted to argue that universities are more tolerant of left wing than right wing protests, you could at least make an anecdotal case. But they let all protests cross lines that they don't let rowdy students just amusing themselves do.
Whether you like it or not, universities are steeped in a mentality of allowing protests. They are generally uninclined to break them up unless there are serious safety or damage issues. At least, they were until major donors started throwing their weight around.
Got it. I will tell my kids when they go to college to tell the CPs that their party is a protest against the school's party policy.
Then they can finish their party while they negotiate with the administration.
Heck, if they are at Northwestern they can presumably get a meeting with the trustees, scholarships for partiers, and 5 visiting professorships for professors who can chug a two liter beer bong without puking.
I wish your kids luck with that approach. They'll need it.
I mainly watch MSNBC and the coverage is completely against the protestors and for the cops. I think nationwide there is almost universal outrage against these radical protesters. It’s only other radicals and terrorist supporters that see siding with the protesters.
Feels as if MSNBC is doing a collective Chris Matthews and assuming the events of 1968 were quite transformative for everyone.
Uh, nooo. That was 56 years ago. It would be like assuming that a 1968 audience was deeply scarred by the sinking of the Titanic, or inspired by the 1912 Stockholm Olympics.
They are also acting as if the Democratic National Convention being in Chicago is some harbinger, a mistake the of 1968 that the Dems should no better than to repeat. Except they held a Chicago convention in 1996, and nothing happened.
I call this "Elizabeth Tailoring": Assuming that something which was once significant remains true for everyone forever, such as the mysterious belief that Elizabeth Tailor remained a huge movie star, beloved by all generations, after her last significant role in 1966 until her death 45 years later.
What?! “A tad overweight but violet eyes to die for” according to Doonesbury sometime in the 80s.
I understand these are contentious and confusing times, but I implore you to please leave Elizabeth Taylor alone. (And at the very least, please learn to spell her name.)
She was and remains one of the enduring screen goddesses -- a true legend -- and that's a status with no expiration date.
There is fame that is fleeting. For example, take Chris Matthews (please!). "Who?" will be the question when his name is mentioned, and soon if not already. Others will not be forgotten, and while they are with us deserve the respect they are paid. Would you scoff at Paul McCartney or Ringo Starr because they have not been Beatles for the past 54 years? I would think not. (Otherwise, please don't answer.)
Assuming that something which was once significant remains true for everyone forever...
Adjacent to this is what I call "Invoking Chamberlain" by which I'm referring to (1) invoking a historical figure or event (like, say, Neville Chamberlain, 1938) to lazily claim that (2) a contemporary situation is similar or nearly identical to the episode from history and that therefore (3) the correct policy is the one I favor.
Uh, no, merely claiming a contemporary event closely mirrors an episode from history is just that..a claim.
I see this technique all the time on the internets. It's maddening. But it's also weak.
It is always September, 1938.
Yeah, this part of the discussion is making me feel old. Don't the Kids These Days learn about how nonviolent resistance works?
The public demonstration of a willingness to go to jail or worse for your cause is the the entire reason it can be so powerful. Whining about it, not so much.
A second major aspect of resistance is not being stupid, something most of these clowns are utterly failing at. MLK didn't waste his blood on bullshit like divestment.
As much as I appreciated his antics, far too many #resistance types are following Abbie Hoffman's example, not more effective ones. Performance art might be fun, and, hey, if that's all they want, whatever. But don't pretend that this is accomplishing anything other than winding up blowhards and and maybe getting administrators fired by demonstrating their incompetence.
In general, the Left has failed to learn the lessons of the period from 1948-68. They overestimate the effectiveness of protest in general, and don't understand why the effective ones worked.
The civil rights movement was, by far, the most effective protest movement in American history. Its leaders inculcated extreme discipline all the way down, and they were exquisitely attuned to how the general public would view their protests. They carefully vetted the individuals, such as Rosa Parks, who took the lead in their actions. They carefully distinguished themselves from organizations with similar goals but more violent tactics. Reading about how they selected those who would take the headline making positions can be cringe inducing in terms of the things that people were discarded for. But it worked.
The Vietnam War protests could not have been more different. Its participants were not disciplined. (Indeed, a significant thread of their ideology was an opposition to imposed discipline.) They took no consideration whatsoever for how it would play with the general public. (Indeed, a significant thread of its ideology was active contempt for the reception by the general public.) The peaceful parts of the movement didn't do much to disassociate themselves from the violent parts. And it was entirely ineffective. By helping to elect Richard Nixon, it prolonged US involvement in the Vietnam War. But, to quote Tom Lehrer, they had all of the good songs!
The pro-Palestinian protests resemble far more the latter movement rather than the former. It starts with Students for Justice in Palestine, which is the primary, though not only, organizer of the campus protests. It is not any sort of peace organization, as its leaders happily call for the slaughter of Israelis and frequently veer into actual antisemitism. Read, for instance, about Berkeley Law School dean Erwin Chemerinsky's report on how they protested against him, personally, for the crime of wanting to have an apolitical gathering of students in his home, complete with posters that trafficked in antisemitic imagery: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/04/campus-protest-first-amendment-berkeley/678186/
The movement defenestrates potential allies for any deviation from the party line. They're cosplaying the Stalinist purges. This does incalculable damage to their cause. They are in strong danger of helping to re-elect Donald Trump. If they do, it will be a spectacular own goal. But, they'll get to feel smugly satisfied with their own refusal to compromise at all, and that's what's really important.
I am reminded once again that the Left has never encountered a circular firing squad that it wasn't desperate to join.
None of that justifies the police response, or the counterprotesters, but I'm fine with them looking like idiots.
This alternative history of the post- war civil rights movement is....well, quite wrong.
It was deeply unpopular with the people it was trying to influence (white America), it used many radicals and extremists (extremist/radical at the time). But it was successful in the long run and that success has caused many to try to clean up and sand down the rough edges of the movement for posterity's sake.
Parks is a good example. She was a professional/trained protester, had interest in the Communist Party, supported Malcolm X and violent armed radicals....and these things are almost always ignored. And thats fine, shes a hero. Pretending that these rough edges dont exist might help the story, but its silly to draw comparisons based on this altered history.
It was deeply unpopular with the people it was trying to influence
It certainly was at first. That became less true over time, because of their tactical approach.
it used many radicals and extremists (extremist/radical at the time).
I never said it didn't. But this wasn't the important part of what I was saying.
But it was successful in the long run and that success has caused many to try to clean up and sand down the rough edges of the movement for posterity's sake.
If you think this wasn't something that they thought about a lot, and tailored their actions towards, you really don't know the subject.
Parks is a good example. She was a professional/trained protester, had interest in the Communist Party, supported Malcolm X and violent armed radicals
Parks was chosen because she was fairly light-skinned, had an impeccable personal reputation, and could be counted on not to violently resist as she was removed from the bus. Again, this is what was said at the time, including by King. The comparison is made to organizations, using the term loosely, that didn't really have the power to decide who was going to be their faces.
But the only real lesson you are giving us to learn is that it was successful and therefore better.
Because it was successful it means it was 'tactical' and they 'thought about it'.
Insisting that the current protestors arent being tactical, arent thinking enough and arent attuned to how the protests are playing out in public opinion are the EXACT SAME complaints that were made about King and the civil rights movement while it was ongoing.
None of what I am saying is a criticism of King or the civil rights protestors.
Its just a reflection on how we forget what the past was like and how similar your objections to protesters are to the widespread objections to King and the civil rights movement at the time of those widely despised protests. The civil rights movement was seen as doing everything wrong and was a failure (they are hurting black people! enemies of america) right up until they succeeded.
Your capacity for analysis is about a quarter inch deep.
Insisting that the current protestors arent being tactical, arent thinking enough and arent attuned to how the protests are playing out in public opinion are the EXACT SAME complaints that were made about King and the civil rights movement while it was ongoing.
Yes, I am coming to the conclusion that you make dumb arguments. Whether some made the same complaints about the civil rights movement is entirely unimportant. The question is whether or not those complaints were correct. In the case of the civil rights movement, they were not.
But, I guess, in your world, whether something like that is true isn't important.
But the only real lesson you are giving us to learn is that it was successful and therefore better.
If you ignore everything I say, then, sure, that's the only lesson.
Look up The Evergreen State College, 2017. No police, but what an embarrassment on all sides.
... or University of Chicago, 1969: students took over the administration building for over 2 weeks. The administration waited until the students threw in the towel and left. Having identified many of the students who were inside the building during that time, the university expelled 19 and suspended over 5 dozen... No cops, no messy publicity. Just a willingness or ability to be patient and ... strike at a time of one's own choosing.
Both the US (in 2001/2) and Israel (2023-4) would have been better off with this ability.
Yeah, they should have done that on Jan. 6, rather than shooting people, right? Congress could meet somewhere else for a while.
The Jan 6 rioters had already claimed other lives before anyone was shot.
A woman was crushed to death, and another man had a heart attack. An officer had sustained wounds that he'd not survive by then, as well, although he didn't die until later.
1) A university is a very different place than the US Capitol. That's true both in the sense that they have a very different culture, and that the stakes are a lot lower at a campus administration building than in the seat of Congress.
2) The Jan 6 rioters were rioters. If you don't understand the difference between an irritating but functionally harmless protest from an attempt to overthrow the government, you have some pretty major problems.
My real fear is that this will cost Biden the Election...Trump looks strong, strong is good in times of turbulence...Biden has....looked weak, I say this with full knowledge of how much I approve of Biden's handling of Gaza. It still looks weak.
A Trump election will be utter disaster for Palestinians...but ...this is seemingly increasingly probable....as crazy as Trump continues to talk and say things off the rails....it is still working for him. Traveller
I'm convinced that part of why Netanyahu is being so obstructionist vis-a-vis Biden is because he knows it weakens Biden and makes it more likely for Trump to be re-elected. In a very real sense, some of the Israeli actions around Gaza are a form of Israeli interference in the 2024 American elections just like the Russian meddling in 2016.
I have no doubt that Netanyahu wants Trump to win and that he'll do what he can to make that happen.
I have big doubts that he'll be successful, in large part because of the absurdity of the man and the message here:
https://x.com/AccountableGOP/status/1785683669878800814
You couldn't make this stuff up.
Anyone who thinks trump ever looks “strong” is a fucking idiot and that ship sailed a long long time ago. So no need to worry about that.
Unfortunately, there are a lot of idiots, and they vote.
You need to get out more and interact with normal people. If you haven't figured out that there is a very large constituency, not just in this country but in all countries, who will vote for the candidate that promises to bring and end to chaos, you're way behind the times. As in, several millennia behind the times.
The people who buy this shit?
https://jonmcnaughton.com/trump-shrugged-16x20-litho-print-open-edition-signed/
"Biden has....looked weak"
How? Weak on what?
What a stupid statement!
That thing you're worried about? It's not a big deal to me, Kevin Drum.
I must be missing the part where people are surprised about the presence of cops.
What?
Nothing in the quoted tweet has anything about cops. It appears to be scolding people who are pearl-clutching about how Kids These Days (TM) are protesting... which is kinda sorta what this post is doing.
Right. Folks in NYC are making outrageous claims about "outside agitators" as if Hamas was infiltrating Columbia.
Folks like Mayor McSwagger.
During the Apartheid protests in the 80s we sure as heck did occupy buildings.
Yeah, but you weren't offending major donors.
Did your search not turn up the Michigamua protests of 2000?
https://www.nytimes.com/2000/02/13/us/michigan-students-protest-campus-club-s-indian-relics.html
Kevin will be nonplussed about the admins and cops responding to student protests until someone gets killed, then he’ll be saddened and shocked at “who could’ve predicted it would go so far?” And then he’ll move to dismissing some other topic that he deems unworthy of attention from liberals like he claims to be.
Imaginary evidence is imaginary.
Indeed they are called. What are these university admins supposed to do? Let themselves be disrupted, just like the U.S. Capitol on J6 just because some on staff are sympathetic to them? University and college leaders are in an impossible situation, buffeted by radical Left and Right. Those on the Left see the school as their little playground to play "revolutionary" regardless of the consequences. Yes the whole point of civil disobediance is disruption but it's also about getting arrested in the point of that disruption, protesting what they feel is unjust Those partaking should know the damn game and be ready to play it. University leaders and police can handle that. What they cannot handle is disruption which threatens the safety of the students and employees they are responsible for and that's what they're cracking down on by calling in the authorities well beyond their own security forces. While the optics may be bad, overwhelming shows of force are the only way to prevent a larger, more destructive conflict takes place by a failure to do so.
Then you have those on the Right, those wonderful gross opportunists so damn concerned about free speech on campus they want to call in the National Guard and crack skulls. The Gard has no power to arrest thus their usefulness is limited (not to mention really bad optics if situations get out of hand). But of course, that's the point isn't it? It's just posturing for politics sake. University and college laders are do exactly what these neanderthals want, cracking down and restoring order. Why should they resign or have their funding cut for ultimately doing what they have to, because they don't relish it? Fuck them!
I tell you what, if this whole thing leads to a final rupture between the Far Left and the Democratic Party, bully for that! This whole notion of politics being about the "young people" (many of whom don't attend college or certainly not in Ivy League or other prestigeous schools) being a "key" part of the Democrats' coalition is I think is pure bunk, any more than young people are a key part to the Republican electorate. By God join the Greens or form a new party with Cornel West but leave the Dems in peace from your stupid shit. That will go a long way to showing the Dems are the true center of American politics as they were in '48 when Truman won without the racists and the communists to drag the ticket. Getting of corporate/austerity whores like Mancin and Synema and radicals like West and Kennedy leaving Biden with the remaining sensible people in this country?, hey, I have no problem with that.
What are these university admins supposed to do? At Northwestern and Brown, they negotiated successfully. Students elsewhere may not all be reasonable, but negotiations are certainly worth a try.
If I were a person in authority at a university (Goddess forbid!!), I would bring non-protesting students into the negotiations, on a voluntary basis, of course.
They did try at Columbia and negotiations went nowhere.
They were worth trying, though, weren't they? Or do you just endorse sending in the cops as the first option? Of course you don't, you are one of the reasonable commentators here.
They may well be worth trying but looking at some of the demands, you needn't wonder why these young people still act like children.
Did they, though?
The campus protests weren't stopping classes. They weren't blocking paths. They had a camp that students could join in, a rotating vigil.
Calling the cops on them was unreasonable. Arresting faculty was unreasonable. Allowing white-hooded pro-genocide assailants descend upon them with clubs was unreasonable. Arresting reporters was unreasonable.
If protesters want to use civil disobedience, trespassing and or destruction of property as part of their methodology, then they need to be prepared for arrest and possible prosecution. If you want to protest in the streets and get an appropriate permit, then have at it.
The difference between today an 1968 is that no one in the US is or will be sent to fight in Gaza or Ukraine. If you want to protest US policy, then you have your 1st amendment rights to do so (within such legal limitations / and of course until Jan 20th, 2025 if Il Duce wins and declares martial law).
They weren't trespassing or destroying property when the cops were called on them, though.
As far as I know, Columbia University is private property. When the owners tell you to leave and you don't, its called trespassing.
Not an excessive amount of destruction, but it did happen:
https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/photos-columbia-university-student-protesters-take-over-hamilton-hall/5368935/
About 1/2 arrested at Columbia and CCNY were not students or affiliated with either school:
https://abc7ny.com/columbia-ccny-protesters-arrested-quarter-of-them-not-affiliated-with-schools/14754563/#:~:text=Approximately%20134%20of%20the%20282,not%20affiliated%2C%20and%2068%20were.
The Jewish kids need to start throwing rocks at the Muslim kids. That would be hilarious. Kind of a Jets vs. Sharks vibe.
One of them has already shot and paralyzed a "Palestinian-looking" passerby, and others have sprayed "Palestinian-looking" students with Israeli military-grade irritant spray, which they brought with them to the US.
Happy now?
I’d prefer they all shut up and go home, but since that’s not in the cards, having them beat the crap out of each other will do. Because, of course, there are no good people involved in this ancient war. They all suck.
In the play, Riff, Bernardo, and Tony all die as is required to make the moral of the story.
The Burlington shooter was not a student and so far as I know isn't Jewish.
The spray at Columbia was a joke item called "Fart Spray" which you can buy at novelty stores. The Palestinian outrage machine tells a lot of lies.
And on the other side, the "Jewish students being beaten with sticks" at Columbia that you hear about was one student, who got in an argument with an anti-Israel Jewish girl from Brooklyn, who got so mad she swung a stick at him, which he parried with his hand, suffering--wait for it--a hand abrasion! The horror!
The horror, he was attacked with a weapon?
Maybe, I dunno, don't apologize for pro-genocide assailants.
If a hysterical Jewish girl from Brooklyn is what horrifies you, you have led a very sheltered life.
Hilarious. Not.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/may/01/ucla-campus-violence-protests
The anti-genocide protestors include Jewish students, too, btw.
There will always be kapos.
Well, that certainly wasn't gratuitously offensive.
Agreed. It was a very apropos description of Jews who support people who commit pogroms against Jews.
You ever think about how the public's opinion can change on a dime depending on how the press delineates the cause? Is it antifa or anti-fascist protests? Is it pro-Palestinian, pro-Hamas, or anti-Jewish protests?
Separately, the issue of occupying buildings flips partially on whether these are public or private institutions. If it's public, the 1A becomes entangled. When it's private, it's 'fuck you get off my lawn.'
You know, I'd like to think that in the US, even a private institution of higher learning would think about the example it's setting for its students, who are in the process of learning how to be citizens of a representative democracy ....
Citizens of a representative democracy do not try to take over property that is not theirs.
Of course they do. It happens regularly and is definitely part of a democracy.
Really? Other than badly behaved leftist protesters who oppose democracy because they cannot win at the ballot box and obviously never got spanked as children, who does this?
When I was in college I took a class in what was supposed to be the philosophy of civil disobedience, but doubled as a how to manual. When I wrote a paper that supported civil disobedience in only limited circumstances I got back comments that seemed puzzled that this would not allows support civil disobedience. (I actually used the, at the time unheard of, use of civil disobedience in opposition to abortion, which sadly shortly after became a reality). But some students in the class got arrested for blocking roads, and then complained about getting arrested. College students can be silly. They didn't seem to get the concept. And like the people arrested for storming the capital they believed they were badly mistreated, when they were likely handled with kid gloves.
That said, it isn't clear that the people behind these college protests are confused about what the law is. We have seen some hold their punishment as badges of honor. What Hayes seems to be responding to is that aspects of the protest that are unexceptional are being treated as if they are bringing us to anarchy.
Of course the reason we get this reaction is that the right has an interest in trying to turn these protests into a law and order thing, something which seems less promising for them then the campaign they are now running against murdering illegal immigrants. But in this they are joined by the pro-Israel (or maybe anti-anti-Israel) formerly free speech crowd, which can't actually defend what Israel is doing, and so instead trains its fire on the people criticizing what Israel is doing. This has the bad effect of making the attacks appear bipartisan, and so fair game for the "objective" news.
Thumbs up (since there is no thumbs up thingy here).
Oberlin in 1987: I remember a friend who was going there at the time telling me about this: https://oberlinreview.org/30133/news/decade-of-student-activism-preceded-oberlins-divestment-from-apartheid-era-south-africa/ No surprise though, even though it was the 80s it was Oberlin! 😉
Donald Trump is on trial. I believe it’s the first prosecution of an ex-president in USA history. It should be big news, or at least bigger. It really should be all we’re talking about. It’s a potentially catastrophic blow to Trump’s campaign. It could also help Biden.
Instead? Utterly pointless campus protests that eclipse a news cycle that’s bad for Republicans with one that’s bad for Democrats.
Sorry not sorry: the protestors are morons. Their demands are impractical, their expectations are childish, their understanding of the (admittedly complex) Middle East is reductive, their worldview is simplistic, their tactics are cringe, their strategy is counterproductive, their statements are propaganda, their support among the public is nil, and their constructive accomplishments are zero.
The protests are also, in my opinion, antisemitic in nature. And the number of documented statements the protesting students have made in support of Hamas may be enough to classify their whole movement as evil.
Their main legacy may prove to be distracting the country at the precise moment when Trump finally went on trial. Trump, therefore, is probably one of the biggest fan that those pro-Hamas campus protestors will ever get. And what does that say about them?
Only one moron here and it’s you. You’re a complete jackass if you think the media isn’t choosing to do this.
We already know you’re a complete jackass clown fuckface.
Just LOL ... even ROTFLMAO.
Leo is one of the most cogent commentators here. We learned nothing about Leo's position but we learned a lot about your temperament and lack of critical thinking skills.
So ... thanks for being so transparent!
I have an online subscription to the New York Times; there were multiple articles today about Trump's trials. CNN is running moment-by-moment trial coverage at times.
Further: "their worldview is simplistic"? Pot, meet kettle.
I noted above that Brown and Northwestern both negotiated successfully with protesters, whose demands I thought were not unreasonable. Some protestors are Jewish. Some are calling for a cease-fire, hardly a fringe position. Yet you are ready to write every one of the protestors off as 'evil', 'morons', "anti-Semitic".
Grow up. See the world in its complexity. Or go away; this site is for adults.
@ KenSchulz:
LOL. Take a sedative. And think first before typing. That’s good advice even for the online world.
Above, I say that I believe the campus protests are antisemitic in nature. I also point out the cold, hard, objective fact that many of the protestors are on the record voicing their support for Hamas (a genocidal terrorist organization).
Now, there can certainly be a debate about those issues, but you discredit yourself with this strawman response:
“Yet you are ready to write every one of the protestors off as 'evil', 'morons', "anti-Semitic".
Grow up. See the world in its complexity. Or go away; this site is for adults.”
Well, to be fair, I DO think that the protestors mostly consist of morons, though I also feel I backed up that assertion pretty well.
However, at no point do I assert that every protestor is antisemitic or evil. I say that the protests are antisemitic in nature.
There’s a difference. In fact, it’s an important difference. It’s a difference the protestors may very well want to consider, because the non-antisemites among them may ultimately regret who they decided to associate themselves with.
Also, it’s just not a good look to tell others to grow up while whining that you wan them to go away and stop writing ideas you don’t like. Kind of hyprocritical 😉
"…the cold, hard, objective fact that many of the protestors are on the record…"
Is three to five considered "many"?
Well, many people are saying....
Great points Lol008!! /s
I've even heard some of those protesters say "level the place" and "finish the job" which is clearly criminal in intent.
...oh wait, those quotes are from US senators talking about what Israel should do to Gaza.
"I also point out the cold, hard, objective fact that many of the protestors are on the record voicing their support for Hamas"
Ah, your cold, hard facts. So reliable.
Don't forget that you wrote 'pro-Hamas' without any evidence.
What do you think chants of "Gaza, Gaza, make us proud!" mean?
Probably about the same as calls to settle "Judea and Samaria," but you aren't concerned with Israeli terrorism.
Really? Can you please be explicit because at first glance they seem to have very different meanings.
Anyway, you seem to be conceding my point - that many of the student protesters are chanting support for Hamas and apparently you are OK with that.
Love these types of responses.
"If you don't engage with my misdirection and dishonesty then that means you have conceded my point! I WIN!"
Lol, people are so funny.
Really? Can you please be explicit because at first glance they seem to have very different meanings.
The Israelis shouting about settling Judea and Samaria are every bit as committed to large scale ethnic cleansing as Hamas is. And the Israeli government is every bit as committed to allowing those who want to force Palestinians to leave free rein as Hamas is.
The primary difference is that the Israeli terrorists are in a position to actually put their desires into effect.
https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/twilight-zone/2023-07-08/ty-article-magazine/.highlight/settlers-invade-private-land-the-palestinian-owners-are-arrested-another-outpost-is-born/00000189-340d-d145-a1e9-377fde310000
https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/twilight-zone/2023-03-04/ty-article-magazine/.highlight/shock-rage-and-despair-in-hawara-in-wake-of-settler-pogrom/00000186-a298-d6e6-a3af-fbdc8e1b0000
https://www.972mag.com/palestinians-west-bank-settler-pogroms/
Anyway, you seem to be conceding my point - that many of the student protesters are chanting support for Hamas and apparently you are OK with that.
I strongly recommend that you actually read my comments before declaring what I am and am not okay with. jdubs can probably give you a hint.
"with one that’s bad for Democrats."
Again, I get so tired of this silly "conventional wisdom". Democrat politicians have condemned the violent, anti-Semitic behavior of some of the protestors. University admins and the police have cleared encampments and made arrests. What more do you want them to do? They actually are doing shit instead of preening before TV cameras demanding the National Guard, something that's utterly impractical. Gov. Abbott of Texas has operated in the same manner in his home state. Is that bad for the GOIP? Hmmm? Please, lets stop with this nonsense.
It is not surprising that the Republicans want to distract from Trump's trials. What i interesting is that the people who are unbothered by the slaughter of Palestinians, I notice that doesn't even make it into your list of relevant factors, are playing the Republicans game by pretending that it is anti-Semitic to oppose the slaughter of civilians by a Jewish state. It is actually somewhat offensive to Judaism to think that it is an attack on Judaism to oppose the slaughter of civilians.
It is certainly true that it is to the advantage of the Republicans that only some Democrats care about the slaughter of civilians using US weapons. But it is childish to pretend that the problem is that the left refuses to stop protesting this slaughter rather than that the center-left feels the need to provide cover for Israel as it slaughters civilians.
Obviously the left/center left is shorthand for the two groups. But the Republican attacks would be less successful if the anti-anti-Israel side was not in alliance with them.
I saw what should be a mindblowing example of this, but unfortunately is just business as usual. Currently the US position with regard to a cease fire is that it is essential that Hamas agree to free hostages so that Israel does not invade Rafah with the humanitarian nightmare that would involved. Hamas' stated position is that they will free hostages in return for a ceasefire that would avoid the humanitarian disaster of an invasion of Rafah. Israel's offer is that if Hamas agrees to release hostages, Israel will agree to a month long cease fire and then invade Rafah, which would create a humanitarian nightmare. Secretary of State Blinken's description of this is that we cannot reach a cease fire because Hamas will not accept Israel's offer. Note Israel's offer is monstrous. It is a stated determination to create yet another humanitarian nightmare. And yet Blinken is willing to pretend that Israel is doing what the US wants and Hamas is not. That is a good way to not get a cease fire. And the reason seems to be that not criticizing Israel is more important to him than preventing a humanitarian nightmare.
Maybe, and this is just maybe, you're not honest.
Being anti-genocide isn't anti-semitic.
And definitely support pro-genocide protestors is not a good look, Mr bigotry.
There was a wave of student occupations during the mid 1980s over divestment in South Africa. Students at my school (Reed College) seized the administration building and offices of the president for a few days. I think similar stuff happened around the country including Harvard and Columbia.
Yep, there were lots of those. Just as a small example, I watched Jamie Raskin lead one when he was at Harvard Law School.
These protests are just more culture war proxy, far left variety.
Do these kids give a flying fuck about Ukraine?
So they cant protest an issue unless they protest all the issues? Lol, ok sure.
Even ignoring that silliness, your choice of Ukraine makes zero sense.
Obviously the difference is the role that the US is playing in the two conflicts. As the US is taking very different stances in these two conflicts, it makes perfect sense that people have different reactions to the role that the US is playing in each.
@hughJass:
Contrary to the comment from JDubs, the question about Ukraine is insightful and relevant.
It does not, in fact, make sense for the campus protestors to call out the Israeli invasion of Gaza without also calling out the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
The inconsistency, in my opinion, speaks for itself. But I’ll add that President Biden asked for more Ukraine aid six months ago. And Republicans stalled that aid until last week.
So, if the campus protestors really were concerned about innocent civilians in a foreign country who face a cruel and vicious assault involving massive casualties, they should have been protesting FOR Biden’s Ukraine aid and AGAINST Republican obstruction.
But of course there were no such protests. We can’t know why for certain. But this fact does at the least call into question any ostensible sincerity, let alone consistency, on the part of the campus protesters.
I personally suspect that the above disparity is explained by the fact that the ongoing campus protests are at least in part inspired by anti-Semitism. A lot of the protests are also simply a fad: they have caught on, so to speak.
And underlying these factors may be a reductive world view that reflexively supports the “right” identities and neglects the “wrong” sort of people.
They are protesting to get their universities to divest from Israel and other vedors who are benefitting from the desctuction in Gaza. What exactly would be the protest re: Russia/Ukraine given that few universities were invested in Russia and many of those that were invested took unilateral action to disivenst?
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2022/03/09/colleges-cut-financial-ties-russia
So let me give you a little life advice "Leo" and "Hugh Jass". .Just shut the fuck up. Yoiu're both clueless twits....
"We can’t know why for certain. "
JFC how much dumber can you be?
What is there to protest against regarding Ukraine? In that conflict the US government position has been one of full support (despite the reneging of the Moscow Representatives in Congress), and academic institutions, companies, and pretty much everyone who is not a hardcore MAGA cult member has tried to do their part to support Ukraine and distance themselves from Russia.
It is precisely because Israel has not been treated like Russia (which they should given their horrific record of recent war crimes and long term human right abuses predating October 7) that so many students are protesting now.
“What is there to protest against regarding Ukraine? In that conflict the US government position has been one of full support (despite the reneging of the Moscow Representatives in Congress)”
You are contradicting yourself, and, frankly, wasting everyone’s time.
The position of the US government has not been one of full support, as you yourself indicate.
Hence, the need for protests, as I already related in detail above. Please read and think more carefully before responding.
This might be your dumbest argument yet. And that's saying something.
"The position of the US government has not been one of full support, as you yourself indicate."
I ask again, how stupid can you be?
Policy is set by the President you gigantic ignoramus.
A lot of people aren't aware that, strictly speaking, "the government" means the executive branch. Given his general ignorance, I suspect Leo is one of them.
poor, dishonest Leo is strugglung in this thread
My college years were during the Vietnam era. Protests included hundreds or sometimes thousands of students. You want to talk about disruptive? There were sit-ins where the police were called to bodily carry them out. There was the Weather Underground planting bombs. Abbie Hoffman and the Yippies. Kent State. I could go on and on. I mention all this to explain why I'm rather bemused by people losing their shit over a few dozen students sitting around chanting. Most of the people getting hysterical would be just fine if they were pro-Trump rallies, so it's the message they're really objecting to.
They're not hurting anyone. Just leave them alone.
I was watching a local news show interviewing pro-Palestinian protesters at UCLA. They were complaining that the police waited too long to intervene when pro-Israel counter protesters arrived. While being interviewed they were holding “cops off campus” signs.
I was in school during the 60’s and 70’s. The anti-war protesters gave us Nixon. We’ll see what happens in November. Quite frankly, I think if we get Trump again there is no turning back. This country will be much worse than a Netanyahu led Israel.
The more I think about it and what has happened in the past decade, the more I realize this “fact” about the campus protests giving us Nixon is a myth. Racism gave us Nixon. LBJ got 61.1% of the vote in 1964. Nixon and Wallace got 56.9% four years later. The Civil Rights Acts of 1964, 1965, and 1968 were too much for many white and especially southern whites. Blaming it on the anti-war protesters is a national whitewashing.
Bingo.
“We’ve lost the south for a generation.” LBJ
And yet Jimmy Carter won in 1976. And he won the Southern states.
The 1968 election was close enough that a lot of things were of sufficient magnitude that they affected the outcome. That racism was one of them is indisputable. However, the atmosphere of violence and chaos also was determinative for enough votes to tip the election to Nixon.
We can get into whether it makes sense to hold Democrats responsible for the behavior of people who held the Democratic Party in contempt and attacked it as viciously as they did Republicans. But a breakdown in public order will always favor the right, no matter who causes it.
Or maybe it’s the opposite and that this kind of thing happens so frequently that it’s not picked up by the newspapers, especially pre 2000.
Example: Bates College students took over some buildings in 1995 to protest admissions practices. “WHAT?! How can that BE, it wasn’t in Kevin’s no doubt thorough search of printed college newspapers in the late 90s!?!?!”
But it happened, I was there, and it lasted about 2 days. The school and students found agreement on some new proposed policies, and the students left the buildings and life resumed.
I wonder how often that’s happened at schools not in the purview of a few select big city papers..?
Just posted my comment and realized I should have just concurred with yours instead. Completely agree. No one realized that administrative building takeovers were a GRAVE NATIONAL CRISIS back then.
Well, anecdotally administrative building takeovers happened when I was in college (Vassar, 1989) and grad school (UMASS Amherst 1995). Somehow neither required the police to come and arrest everyone. My guess is that it was in fact so ubiquitous and not-a-big-deal that it wasn’t covered in the press.
It happened on a smaller scale, in far fewer places at a single time, without the kind of rhetoric that SJP engages in. So, it never became as big a deal.
So far the police seem to be handling things fairly professionally. Certainly more professionally than the Charlotte police managed to handle a single person holed up in a house with two weapons. Four officers killed and four hospitalized. I cannot imagine that they handled the situation competently with an outcome like that.
Feels as if MSNBC is doing a collective Chris Matthews and assuming the events of 1968 were quite transformative for everyone
It's called "Boomer Brain".
I am watching, on and off, the massive blobs of people at UCLA...I came to work at my desk at 9pm...it is after 11 now and....nothing is happening.
Like many, I am a veteran of this stuff, Vietnam, Occupy Wall Street, the Los Angeles Riots, (twice) student protests in London one year, Paris the next...I am just lucky I guess...and on and on, Brazil and the Philippines where i was detained as a "Sparrow," a communist infiltrator, in truth, I was there looking for stolen Mercedes Benz's , a gang of thieves shipping them out of Los Angeles...But enough of this silliness...Protesting is fun, social bonding...full of endorphins being released in your body...But enough...UCLA
I know there is a fiscal cost to this, physical also....but seriously good advice to the LAPD....I know you've got your horses and what not, remembered from Occupy Wall Street....but in this instance...
Wait for sunup...pass out some chairs to police and wait...tomorrow is going to be a hot day...
LAPD do nothing. (maybe at 9am when any remaining protestors are exhausted...do some arrests, but for now, Nada)
Be Smart.
Best Wishes, Traveller
It might be "extremely normal", that doesn't make it a good idea.
Pingback: Bohrleute 74 - Die Gaza-Proteste, mit Ariane Sophie - Deliberation Daily