Social Crisis' at Columbia University forces classes online, arrests at Yale College campuses are becoming battle grounds for Hamas and Isreal

[HereticBD]

The left has always been ideological. Too ideological, in fact, which is why it so often eats itself, as many have pointed out.

And on that front, an ideology must have consistency. Otherwise it's just chaos. It's not an ideology. It's people arguing over what should command their ideology that they obviously haven't figured out.

Given your response, you must agree that the left does indeed have a problem with hypocrisy and an unfocused end game. I mean, you said it was stupid for anyone to accuse the left of being antisemitic, but then come back and say that they are a bit confused with their stances.

When you're marching with Hamas supporters(not all, but a whole lot), chanting shit like "Gas The Jews!", it kind of throws a wrench into the theory that left wingers can't be antisemitic because of their ideology, and that they're totally laser focused on whatever cause they're championing. They're more like puppets on string at that point, no?

 

[Jacket time]

Why does Israel get a pass on not signing the Non- Proliferation treaty

 

[Poatan Power]

Well, at least the kids care about something important.

 

[Possum Jenkins]

Given your response, you must agree that the left does indeed have a problem with hypocrisy and an unfocused end game. I mean, you said it was stupid for anyone to accuse the left of being antisemitic, but then come back and say that they are a bit confused with their stances.

I never said or implied anything about hypocrisy or confusion. The left often eats itself because many are SO ideological, they become intransigent. They're so dead set on a particular outcome that they reject anything that doesn't perfectly mirror that.

So they'll splinter because a candidate or movement doesn't meet 100% of their vision. Bernie is pretty good but he doesn't say enough about gender issues. Another one might not condemn Israel enough. Another one made a gay joke one time, etc.

But anti-bigotry in general isn't an obscure, nit-picky issue, it's been one of the pillars of the American left for decades. Pretty close to impossible for anti-semitism to be a major motivator for large-scale protests like this. Yeah, you can find individual people saying anything but it's definitely not widespread.

 

[Sinister]

Not all. Some like the splashing water on oneself and posting on social media are really performative. Or wearing a stupid pink ribbon for breast cancer. Accomplishes nothing.

But others like during the Civil Rights movement had an element of the threat of violence. That led to change.

The whole point of a protest it to bring attention to an issue the protesters feel is being ignored. Demonstrating is performative by its very nature because you are out in front of people doing things...performing. Actually initiating violence has another name, revolution.

 

[Sinister]

Sure it will. The only thing allowing this, is soft policing. If they can't remain peaceful, they're just welcoming an authoritarian shut down of them, when they're deemed not so peaceful.

Given the ties that the west has with Israel, I would suggest they tone it down a bit. Their signs and veiled threats aren't gonna change that. Nothing will change that, quite frankly, because no government has anything to gain by taking Palestine's side. They offer nothing. This is why Joe Biden says some pretty words in an attempt to please his hard left whackjobs, and then on the same day, sends billions of dollars in weaponry to Israel.

Oppression breeds rebellion. Heavy censorious action from authoritative entities makes protest movements stronger.

 

[Kassitus]

I support Israel but I also support these protest groups that make supporting Israel more and more of a hairy disputed issue, because it should be. If they are blocking traffic that's a nuisance I don't support, but if they are on a campus harrassing profs who are more than happy to preach about politics, it's all quite poetic.

 

[Hog-train]

The whole point of a protest it to bring attention to an issue the protesters feel is being ignored. Demonstrating is performative by its very nature because you are out in front of people doing things...performing. Actually initiating violence has another name, revolution.

A lot of the efficacy of the protests during the Civil Rights movement was because there was, at least some, implicit threat of violence.

Sure it will. The only thing allowing this, is soft policing. If they can't remain peaceful, they're just welcoming an authoritarian shut down of them, when they're deemed not so peaceful.

Given the ties that the west has with Israel, I would suggest they tone it down a bit. Their signs and veiled threats aren't gonna change that. Nothing will change that, quite frankly, because no government has anything to gain by taking Palestine's side. They offer nothing. This is why Joe Biden says some pretty words in an attempt to please his hard left whackjobs, and then on the same day, sends billions of dollars in weaponry to Israel.

I disagree that no government has anything to gain by taking the Palestinian's side. The US's staunch support of Israel is only hurting their standing in the world.

 

[fica]

love the protest and it is hilarious how much media and politicans are bringing all the previously bullet proff accusations to discredit the protesters. lol i mean they waving hesbolah flags hams flags chant they are hamas and more more and more colleges are getting into it they even told the police you have unleashed hads to man handle the protresters with violance. now at media sites there is no word palestinian at all in headlines now it is israel and hamas war. they think with that they will somehow make people forget about people/palestininans being in harms way

 

[fica]

there is a reason older generations are called golden generations here. older gen was told be a puppet spend billions to go to college to make billions for billioneres and support israel.this new generation is not interested in that rat race they do not want to spend billions to make billions for billioneres and call israel what they are so for that reason they are called troublesome lazy and anti semite because how there they not be little ship like every other generation was

 

[The_Renaissance]

I initially thought all these college protests were performative and wouldn't accomplish much.

But now I think I'm starting to change my mind. There's a ton of media coverage all over mainstream news about this. So there is visibility about the issue and all this pushback will definitely have an effect in the social discourse.

There were massive pro Palestine protests in the UK a few months ago, they barely got coverage. Don't even know if they're still happening.

The exact same thing was said about BLM. Which was WAY bigger than this. Cities were being torched. What did it change? Where is it now? Nowhere. That's where. The only coverage BLM gets now is when their higher ups get convicted of embezzlement and fraud.

 

[DiddlyDoodly]

So you have nothing, then? Just a steaming pile of empty rhetoric?

This was all at just one school

Berkeley protests of Yiannopoulos caused $100,000 in damage​

Berkeley protests: Hundreds rally after Coulter talk canceled, at least 6 arrested​

9 Arrests During Protests Over Ben Shapiro Appearance At UC Berkeley​

 

[Madmick]

Why does Israel get a pass on not signing the Non- Proliferation treaty

Maybe nobody cares because Iran signed it, and look how much that turned out to mean. North Korea & Libya signed it, too.

But if you're obsessed with treaties signed in invisible ink, I guess you do you.

 

[meauneau]

Looming peace deals. One was incoming with Saudi Arabia etc etc. Things were going in the right direction. But.... nope. Some dork from Hamas was like, "what?? peace? damn it NOOOOO!!! We can't have that! Kalid! Get that para glider ready. I got an idea!"

Yes and the Israelis had nothing to do with it. They didn't know it was gonna happen, they didn't take their time to respond, etc., etc.,

 

[meauneau]

What? Like Hamas being terrorists and using schools, hospitals and such, along with hoarding Palestinian aid?

No like Israel expelling people from their homes and lands and killing them when they fight back and calling them terrorists for resisting. Years and years of this. 7th October is nothing compared to 75 years of Israeli terrorism on Palestinians.

 

[I Am Legion]

Oppression breeds rebellion. Heavy censorious action from authoritative entities makes protest movements stronger.

So why don't the people of Gaza revolt against Hamas, who have run things since Jews left in 2006? Plenty of Lefties in here claim Gazans had no choice but to follow Hamas because they are so oppressive. They know the leaders of Hamas are rich while they are poor. They know Hamas did not invest in infrastructure or education, instead choosing military to defeat a neighbor that they never could possibly defeat. True Gazans know who is behind their suffering.

 

[Madmick]

Not all. Some like the splashing water on oneself and posting on social media are really performative. Or wearing a stupid pink ribbon for breast cancer. Accomplishes nothing.

But others like during the Civil Rights movement had an element of the threat of violence. That led to change.

The only change they seem to be accomplishing with such tactics, is welcoming the authorities to bust their heads and shut them down. These are not protests that will do any good for their movement. Not when there is a very healthy element of rabid antisemitism accompanying them.

Most recent headline is "Protest organizer expelled for threatening to kill Jews." That's gonna effect some change alright....

Indeed. It can't be denied we are witnessing change. Finally, thank God. This is what happens when there is an implied "threat of violence".

Google's Gaza conflict: Why more bosses are cracking down on Israel-Hamas war protesters​

For years as part of a progressive work culture that prized free expression and open debate, Google encouraged employees to bring their whole selves to work.

And Google employees did.

On internal message boards and the streets, they agitated for change around the globe and inside their own company.

Googlers – as they are known – held a walkout to challenge how the company treated executives accused of sexual misconduct, pressured Google not to renew a contract with the Pentagon, battled plans to build a censored search engine for China, lobbied for Google not to bid on a contract working with U.S. Customs and Border Protection and joined shareholder activists in pushing Google to increase the diversity of its workforce.

That has become...

https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/23/tech/google-fires-employees-protest-israel/index.html

Google has fired an additional 20 workers that it says were involved in protests last week over the company’s cloud-computing contract with the Israeli government, bringing the total number of workers fired to 50, according to the group organizing the demonstrations.

Google CEO Sundar Pichai addressed the protests in an April 18 corporate realignment announcement on Google's blog:

"...ultimately we are a workplace and our policies and expectations are clear: this is a business, and not a place to act in a way that disrupts coworkers or makes them feel unsafe, to attempt to use the company as a personal platform, or to fight over disruptive issues or debate politics," Pichai continued. "This is too important a moment as a company for us to be distracted."

Yep, the "threat of violence" is changing things.

“This is certainly a U-turn from a few years ago when activist employees seemed to be gaining the upper hand,” said Jerry Davis, a professor of business administration and sociology at the University of Michigan.

Julia Hobsbawm, author of “Working Assumptions,” says Google's hard line on the Gaza protesters marks a turning point and will open the door to more organizations shutting down employee activists.

Because:

Mixing work with politics can be distracting in the office and lower productivity. And workplace surveys show few kumbaya moments.

More than half (51%) of workers recently surveyed by ResumeHelp said they never or rarely discuss politics at work. What’s more, 45% have regretted talking about politics at work and 51% said workplace discussions hurt the work environment.

How misguided to believe the "threat of violence" is what gave the Civil Rights era protests their power. There was actual violence during those protests. Many times. Just as there was during #BLM's protests. That isn't what changed anything, it didn't win the sympathies of the American majority; if anything, it slowed the movement's progress. In fact, violence had the opposite effect. It was the actions of the police during the Watts Riot in Los Angeles and at the 1968 Democratic Convention in Chicago that shocked people, tuning into their televisions, and steered them to empathize with the protesters. Because the cops were the violent ones. To believe that the threat of violence gave MLK his power is to believe the side that would be throttled in an open, violent confrontation wins concessions with the threat of its overwhelmed position. Of course not! There's no leverage there.

No, this simple exchange between young protest leader James Whale and deputy L.C. Crocker more succinctly distills why the Civil Rights protesters won the culture war than anything else you'll ever see.


For the same reason, it's why #BLM and BDS never will prevail (or January 6th, for that matter). You tune into those protests, and it isn't the people wearing uniforms who are running around cracking heads, or terrifying uninvolved passerby civilians. It's so ironic when you listen to these protesters talk about themselves within the context of that history. They don't realize which historical role on the TV they're playing.

 

[tenniswhiz]

So you have nothing, then? Just a steaming pile of empty rhetoric?

No, I explained it clearly. You have a tendency to not hear things you don’t like.

 

[iwannabeadored]

https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/some-us-officials-say-internal-memo-israel-may-be-violating-international-law-2024-04-27/

The assessment from the four bureaus said Israel's assurances were "neither credible nor reliable." It cited eight examples of Israeli military actions that the officials said raise "serious questions" about potential violations of international humanitarian law.


The assessment from the four bureaus also cited 11 instances of Israeli military actions the officials said "arbitrarily restrict humanitarian aid," including rejecting entire trucks of aid due to a single "dual-use" item, "artificial" limitations on inspections as well as repeated attacks on humanitarian sites that should not be hit.



@kflo I thought Israel wasn’t stopping aid?

 

[evansusmc2]

Yes and the Israelis had nothing to do with it.

whaaaaaat?? It's not like the Israelis were trying to stop it either.

They didn't know it was gonna happen, they didn't take their time to respond, etc., etc.,

They absolutely did and it was in the works. What are you talking about??

Edit: Mike Baker was on the JRE podcast a while back and pretty much mirrored what I am saying. So I am not sure where you are getting your info.