Campus Protests

[Bonyduck Campersang]

And getting your money worth out of the education you paid for is objectively the superior choice to wasting your time fighting a battle you can't win against an opponent who needs to look at the news to realize he is supposed to be in combat.

1) What do you think the protesters are demanding?

2) Who do you think their 'opponent' is?

 

[PPQ_Purple]

1) What do you think the protesters are demanding?

2) Who do you think their 'opponent' is?

I am talking in general about student protests as a concept. About the only time I ever saw them make sense was when it was related to actual student issues like university politics. But that's not what these are usually about. They are typically about some social or political or world issue that has no relation to the students either in effecting them or being something they can effect.

 

[Joij21]

About the only time I ever saw them make sense was when it was related to actual student issues like university politics.

Well a lot of the protests have sort of taken that angle by attempting to oppose the universities getting funding through Israeli organizations and attempting them to divest.

 

[Joij21]

Honestly, what I don't understand is why throughout recorded history when ever there has been a protest it's usually done by students.

Free place to be loud and cause a ruckus if they weren't invited to the latest party.
Get drunk, smoke weed, burn down campus, & make yourself look like it's for a good cause and your really empathetic so as to pull in a hot protest girl for the night

 

[EgonSpengler]

If you lived through the anti war protests of the 60s, this is all pretty ho hum stuff.

I've been thinking more about the comparisons with Civil Rights and anti-war protests in the '60s, and I'm starting to think that anti-Apartheid university-divestment protests in the '80s might be a better comparison. Obviously, no analogy is ever 1:1.

I must have skipped that stage than.

Why? This is a genuine question by the way. I am not trying to be snippy.

As far as I am concerned I always felt a certain degree of... well for lack of a better term (don't have a proper English word) loathing (a bit too strong a word, but again, English is lame) for what I saw as more or less deluded self righteous fools that have just the right combination of stupidity (well, really just a lack of life experience) to think things can be changed and hubris to think they can be the one to do it. I mean, there is fighting windmills and than there is genuinely, honest to god, believing you are going to protest your way into solving the worlds giant problem.

It's not even hatred though, loathing implies it, but rather just a sort of looking down on how they waste their time on pointless and impractical things as opposed to actually working to make their life better by exploiting the opportunity they have been given to get an education. The thing that comes to mind is an idiom from my native tongue that basically works out to "Someone who has newer been hungry so he has to find some other spoiled brat reason to lash out that just makes serious people groan when they look at the spoiled brat acting out". The poetic beauty is lost in translation unfortunately.

The anti-Apartheid divestment protests on US college campuses in the '80s resulted in over 100 schools withdrawing their investments from S. Africa. Now, whether or how much that contributed at all to the fall of that system, I don't know. But it had to have sent a message.

I was listening to Ezra Klein's podcast last night, and he was talking to an Israeli academic whose name I forget. This guy said that the IDF's approach has been a strategic disaster, whatever else you might think of it, and has fallen right into a trap laid by Hamas. He said "if we win the battle in Khan Yunis, and lose the battle in Harvard Square, we're lost this war."

What does divesting from Israel really mean?

And is it feasible? Plus three other questions about the student protesters’ demands.

www.vox.com

In the 1980s, student activists pushed their universities to divest from firms that supported or profited from South African apartheid. Politically, they were effective: 155 universities ultimately divested. And in 1986, the US government also bowed to pressure from protesters and enacted a divestment policy.

 

[PPQ_Purple]

Depends what we mean by "changed the world", I guess. But I definitely support this freedom of expression regardless of the outcome. People showing that they care is a valid outcome in of itself. Being laser-focused on results in my experience lends itself to limiting the possible outcomes. Soft skills are just as useful as hard skills when it comes to maturing as a person.

I am not saying it should be banned. I just don't get it. Why waste your limited time and energy fighting a fight that does not concern you and which you can newer win? Especially not when you are at one of the if not the most critical parts of your life when you are supposed to be setting the foundations upon which your entire future will be (or fail to be) built?

It's just sort of pointless, senseless wasteful behavior that at best accomplishes nothing and at worst becomes outright self destructive.

The news coverage would suggest the authorities are very much aware, or have you missed them arrested students and beating a professor up?

I think I just missed the part where the authorities changed their mind and did what the students wanted. If anything, what happened underlines my point. All these people did was get them self pointlessly and needlessly into trouble.

When there exists an opponent you can't win against, you should anticipate when next they will engage with you. Does the realization that they exist and that they are not necessarily on your side not trigger any discomfort?

You're on a ranked list and I'm sure you feel extremely comfortable now with your objectively superior choices over the self righteous deluded fools at the moment, but I'm also sure you'll feel very aggrieved should your own turn come about.

So I guess you need to ask yourself how far up the list you are and if that event is probable within your lifetime.

I find that there are two kinds of people in this world. Both kinds see the world as a game that's rigged against us. One that is fundamentally unjust, has set rules that are often unfair and difficult to play by. And one that is generally not fun.

One type, my self included accept this and than proceed to learn the rules in order to play as best we possibly can. And with time, and work we achieve some modicum of result. The other just wants to flip the table in the deluded hope that what ever happens after that is going to magically line up to be not just better but specifically rigged in their favor. And if they ever succeed all that ends up happening is that we all loose because we who learned to play the game now have to start from scratch and they just end up with a new, different but equally unfair and rigged game that they still don't know how to play because they wasted their time and energy flipping tables instead of practicing.


Note that as per my initial post here I am talking about general purpose protests here. The sort where the students protest against world injustice or other such nonsense. Something that seems to historically be very common. This obviously excludes situations where the issue at hand is actually something that effects the students directly be that a race issue, the Vietnam draft thing or say changes to the laws regarding educational grants or something. At that point the situation is clear enough as there is an actual issue that effects them and that they can actually effect in turn.

 

[EgonSpengler]

The Harvard Crimson claims that Harvard University pulled $230 million from S. Africa in 1986-1987 after student protests.

Students Protest Investment in Apartheid South Africa | News | The Harvard Crimson

Although Harvard never did fully divest from South Africa, 25 years later the student participants look back proudly on the small role they played in the downfall of the apartheid regime.

www.thecrimson.com

And this says the University of California system divested $3.1 billion from S. Africa and from companies doing business there.

How students helped end apartheid

A small gesture of solidarity by students led to a national movement with far-reaching impact.

www.universityofcalifornia.edu

 

[Senethro]

One type, my self included accept this and than proceed to learn the rules in order to play as best we possibly can. And with time, and work we achieve some modicum of result. The other just wants to flip the table in the deluded hope that what ever happens after that is going to magically line up to be not just better but specifically rigged in their favor. And if they ever succeed all that ends up happening is that we all loose because we who learned to play the game now have to start from scratch and they just end up with a new, different but equally unfair and rigged game that they still don't know how to play because they wasted their time and energy flipping tables instead of practicing.

You're giving the impression that you don't value negotiating skills or even the act of negotiation. Maybe you can't even recognise when negotiating is taking place, or the benefits of past negotiating that have accrued to you.

So no wonder that you think that people are out to flip the table on you. You've given them no other option.

 

[Gorbles]

I am not saying it should be banned. I just don't get it. Why waste your limited time and energy fighting a fight that does not concern you and which you can newer win? Especially not when you are at one of the if not the most critical parts of your life when you are supposed to be setting the foundations upon which your entire future will be (or fail to be) built?

I didn't say you wanted to ban it, sorry.

But like Egon has been pointing out "can never win" is arguable. Goals are arguable. You're saying they can't win, and therefore you can't understand why they're doing it. Maybe they have different criteria to you, and for them it's therefore achievable?

I think I just missed the part where the authorities changed their mind and did what the students wanted. If anything, what happened underlines my point. All these people did was get them self pointlessly and needlessly into trouble.

But the point wasn't the authorities (or government, or whomever) changing their mind. The point was these protests being ignored. They're definitely not being ignored, and the state is (as usual) overreacting because of what is being protested. Much like how the state doesn't give much of a toss when Neo-Nazis parade around Charlottesville or wherever. In fact, they often get police protection.

 

[Gori the Grey]

Unless I am missing something big here nobody ever changed the world by making a fuss on a campus.

I think the financial divestment from South Africa demanded by students is regarded as having helped to end the apartheid state there.

Anti-Vietnam protests have (functionally) put an end to the draft in the US (not that a professionalized army doesn't come with its own downsides).

I think they do sometimes make a difference.

 

[warpus]

I've read reports that many of those protesting (here in Canada at least) aren't even students. That seems a bit suspicious.

The police being so violent in the U.S. and cracking down on the protestors is yet another sign how messed up America is. The cops don't go after far-right demonstrations which display fascist and even nazi symbols, but they crack down on seemingly peaceful protests, with such force? I am really glad I don't live in the U.S. Fun to visit, once you get past the TSA, but to live there.. I'll pass

 

[EgonSpengler]

France, May 1968: Campus protests turned into riots, coupled with a general workers' strike, resulted in the Grenelle Accords.

https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2018/05/29/613671633/in-france-the-protests-of-may-1968-reverberate-today-and-still-divide-the-french

Events that led directly to the revolt of May 1968 began in March on the campus of the University of Paris at Nanterre, on the far western edge of the city. The children of mostly bourgeois Parisians did not have sophisticated political demands. Their spontaneous occupation of some of the administration buildings was partly a demonstration against the Vietnam War, and partly to demand something closer to home: to be able to spend the night in each other's dorm rooms. Several students were arrested and the university was temporarily closed.

Images:

Spoiler :

 

[EgonSpengler]

I've read reports that many of those protesting (here in Canada at least) aren't even students. That seems a bit suspicious.

The police being so violent in the U.S. and cracking down on the protestors is yet another sign how messed up America is. The cops don't go after far-right demonstrations which display fascist and even nazi symbols, but they crack down on seemingly peaceful protests, with such force? I am really glad I don't live in the U.S. Fun to visit, once you get past the TSA, but to live there.. I'll pass

Police responses to demonstrations and protests is less violent than it used to be. I think the proliferation of cell phones with cameras has helped a lot. Famously, the television news coverage of the police assault (on horseback!) on peaceful protestors crossing the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, AL in 1965 is what turned public opinion to the protestors' side, and drew people from across the country to come and participate in the next march. I think before television (1920s? 1930s?) the workers' protests that were met with force by police and private security such as the Pinkerton Agency were pitched battles.

Even so, the deployment of police to places like Columbia University in the last couple weeks has gotten a lot of criticism. Obviously, public opinion is split. Some people say people weren't sent into UCLA soon enough.

The Edmund Pettis Bridge incident as portrayed in the 2014 movie Selma is below. Obviously this is dramatized, with the music and everything, but I'm not sure it's an inaccurate portrayal. I think the B&W scenes that David Oyelowo & co are watching on their tv is the actual television footage.

Spoiler :

 

[Bonyduck Campersang]

The Edmund Pettis Bridge incident as portrayed in the 2014 movie Selma is below. Obviously this is dramatized, with the music and everything, but I'm not sure it's an inaccurate portrayal. I think the B&W scenes that David Oyelowo & co are watching on their tv is the actual television footage. Spoiler :

Video unavailable

 

[warpus]

Even so, the deployment of police to places like Columbia University in the last couple weeks has gotten a lot of criticism. Obviously, public opinion is split. Some people say people weren't sent into UCLA soon enough.

It's not only the violence perpetrated by police that's concerning, but also the fact that they were deployed with riot gear seemingly designed to ward off an armed rebellion. Why is that necessary when facing seemingly peaceful protestors? Why there are so many videos of protestors being assaulted by police? Why do they feel this need to intimidate this particular set of protests, while completely ignoring other problems in the country?

If things have improved, then that's good.. If people have been critical, that's good.. But I still don't see it as good overall.

 

[schlaufuchs]

every leftist movement is a doomed fool’s errand…right up until the moment when it succeeds

 

[EgonSpengler]

Why do they feel this need to intimidate this particular set of protests, while completely ignoring other problems in the country?

Well, police here are right-leaning, if not fully right-wing.

I suppose it's worth pointing out that when municipal police come onto a college campus, it's at the invitation of the college. Most colleges and universities have their own police forces, but they lack the manpower to clear a protest like this, so Columbia and UCLA asked the city police for help. In these cases, the municipal police didn't just suddenly decide to take action. The criticisms about police involvement at places like Columbia aren't even really being leveled at the police themselves, but at the school administrators who called them in (some people are also criticizing these schools for not calling police, or for not calling them in sooner - there's definitely some "darned if you do, darned if you don't"). The police seemingly have behaved themselves, albeit while doing what they do, which is to employ force to control and force compliance. One reporter who noted that someone was throwing some kind of "tear gas" (could've been pepper-spray) made sure to clarify that the chemicals were thrown before police even arrived, so it likely wasn't them who'd done it.

EDIT: For their part, I think the police clearing these encampments have said that the protestors did not resist and were cooperative. In New York, protestors were brought to One Police Plaza on a comfy bus, processed and immediately released.

 

[Bonyduck Campersang]

Why there are so many videos of protestors being assaulted by police? Why do they feel this need to intimidate this particular set of protests, while completely ignoring other problems in the country?

You're making the mistake of assuming that the police (in the US, at least) are there to enforce the rule of law, and not the rule of the elites

 

[warpus]

Most colleges and universities have their own police forces, but they lack the manpower to clear a protest like this, so Columbia and UCLA asked the city police for help. In these cases, the municipal police didn't just suddenly decide to take action.

In all the pictures I've seen it seems that the cops arrived equipped to face an armed militia and not plain-clothed unarmed protestors. This seems to be the norm in the U.S. though, so I'm not surprised... but it's not a good look.

 

[EgonSpengler]

MIT has warned protestors that they'll be expelled from the school. I'm not sure what the deadline is.