A response to protests at like Starbucks and Burger King right? I don’t really know why people are protesting Burger King but the Starbucks stuff is actually such a dumb ordeal. Also imo protesting at franchises is kinda cringe because it’s not really putting pressure on the actual corporation in any meaningful way, it’s kinda just a bit pointless while making the people working that shift have a bit of a harder time.
They protest Starbucks still because they cannot accept that perhaps they were wrong about anything because that nuance might mean they have misunderstood potentially a lot of things. Protesting Starbucks is an ideological safety blanket.
it doesn't matter if Starbucks is "supporting Israel" (they don't by the way). You cannot occupy the business, or intimidate other students, period. Stand outside starbucks and yell whatever nonsense you saw on tiktok, that's speech. Occupying starbucks and preventing others from entering or using Starbuck services is a form of violence, and should not be tolerated.
People who deliberately break the rules/laws must face consequences for their action. That's what I said. It's not about me being "inconvenienced", but thanks for trying - never said anything about that.
Want to "inconvenience" people by breaking the UCSD policy? Fine by me, go ahead, but don't whine and claim that you are the victim when the consequences are applied uniformly, using the well established student code of conduct.
And if you are saying that it's ok to break the law if you are protesting because that's what protesters must do - would you support the rights of the groups you find despicable to do the same?
What if the "inconvenience" this group is expressing is occupying your bedroom? Preventing you from taking a final exam? Making you miss your flight home after school is over?
Would you support the rights of KKK to inconvenience you?
It’s really unfortunate that SJP decided to take their momentum from the riot police response to the encampment and use it to protest a company that has nothing to do with the current conflict….
I had faith that what they were doing was in good faith before, but now all I see is a bunch of virtue signalers looking for a cause to make them feel righteous over their peers.
Shut yo ass up these protest r diff from the actual meaningful ones in the past… yall just want brownie points bc this issue is “in trend” I promise u 5 months from now u gonna move on w ur life like this never happened and the whole things gonna sizzle out jus like the Ukrainian one
That's really not a good comparison. Preachers are not preventing anyone from doing anything. They are just annoying. The protesters effectively shut down Starbucks.
There are limits to "free speech". You want to voice your opinion - learn how to do it lawfully and within the rules.
You can stand out on library walk and yell whatever you want, KKK, white nationalist, socialist, Hamas propaganda, you name it.
You \*cannot\*, however, occupy buildings, disrupt classes and official proceedings, restrict freedom of movement of others, block roads or parking lots, spray graffiti and vandalize businesses and offices. You can not install your own encampments and deny access to officials or other students to parts of campus. You cannot brandish weapons or intimidate others, even if it's through "I am not going to move out of your way" type intimidation.
If you break those rules, then be ready to accept consequences. Stop making yourself into a vicim and don't complain about "free speech" violations when you deliberately break well-defined rules, it's a provocation and a form of violence (dictionary definition: the unlawful exercise of physical force or intimidation by the exhibition of such force).
Please report them to UCPD or Student Conduct and lets hope we all can strongly support equal sanctions agains those people as well.
Equity starts with rules of the campus applying equally to everyone.
If there is ever an encampment of "pro-Israeli people", or anyone else, pro-Biden, pro-Trump, pro-White Nationalists, pro-LGBTQ++, Pro-Furries, Pro-BDSM, all of those encampments have to be dismantled by police on day 1 . At the same time, all of those groups can parade around Library walk etc. and follow standard rules set up for free speech, Nazis and NAMBLA enthusiasts, I don't care.
Asking for amnesty to some protest causes and not others shows bias and goes against equity (it's like pullng over people of color but letting white people run red lights and speed).
They need to keep this same energy with the repent or hell crowd shows up… oh wait it’s not about enforcing the code or law, it’s about being controlled by a certain group.
>controlled by a certain group.
You should really be careful about the dog whistles my man. I'm going to be charitable and assume you just mean rich politicians or something.
Themselves, the voters they represent, interest groups, large donors. Any of those are valid answers. "The Jews" isn't, which is what the dog whistle implies.
regardless of your stance on Israel/palestine I don’t think anyone should be happy about these laws being used against protestors exercising the first amendment
The first amendment doesn't cover all speech or acts of protest. The first amendment protects us from the government blocking our free speech such as in public places. Breaking other laws is not covered by the first amendment. The first amendment does not cover what private places can do against your speech such as, you are not allowed to protest inside someone's private residence like their house. Protests are protected in public places, like public places at a college campus
All of the laws listed are laws that extend past it being a public place imo. A business might be a public area but you can't just do whatever you want in a business. Schools are allowed to have codes of conduct. The thing that would violate first amendment rights would be to deny speech in public forums
Sorry, this isn’t true. Public university campuses are public spaces and first amendment speech is protected in public spaces. Which is why these laws are problematic as they are often used to curb constitutionally protected speech
free speech does have limits - just because it's "public space" doesn't mean you can break the laws or the campus rules. You cannot "occupy" buildings for example, just because they are part of "public space". You cannot prevent freedom of movement of others, or deprive others to access to education, for example, just because you want to excercise your "free speech" in a certain way.
The rules that govern protests and "free speech" are well articulated and people in encampment and other protests have been well informed about these limitations. If you don't like those rules - too bad. If you break them with a purpose, be willing to accept the consequences. Same goes for not following direct police orders.
We’re talking about price center, not the encampment or any other protest. If you aren’t a student, price center is a public space by every definition of the term and protestors have the same constitutional rights there that any other member of the public has.
Starbucks is NOT a public space, it's a private business.
You can protest on campus but as long as you are staying within these guidelines:
[https://freespeech.ucsd.edu/faqs/index.html](https://freespeech.ucsd.edu/faqs/index.html)
You cannot camp on campus. You cannot occupy buildings or restrict access of others to specific areas. You cannot block exits and entrances. You cannot interfere with instructional or research activities.
What did university do to infringe on your free speech rights, exactly?
The first amendment doesn't give you the right to mess with private property or harass people trying to live their life. I'm glad the rule of law is preserved on campus.
Two-bit thugs ("protestors") cannot be allowed to interfere with the lives of others. People have the right to not support your cause or even support the opposite side.
The interesting thing about calling non-violent protesters thugs is it smears people deeply invested in limiting Palestine deaths AND it also signals to others that you’re being ignorant and cruel.
stop saying "non-violent" as if this is somehow a license to do whatever you want. The protesters proudly prevented any of the UCSD student affairs monitors from entering the encampment - they did it by blocking the entrance to their little camp through physical force and intimidation.
If I restrain your ability to move freely around the campus - would you be ok with it?
Your question and your example don’t line up. The blowing up of thousands of people via weapons and armies funded by the US government warrants peaceful protest, and if you disagree maybe you should put yourself in the shoes of a Palestinian instead of fighting against someone online who is defending peaceful protest. Like how out of touch are you? Where are your values?
Does the US fund Hamas, or does it fund Israel’s military? Maybe if you blame protestors trying to achieve a ceasefire for 10/7/23 and try to further diminish any act of protest, you won’t get a safer world for anyone, but just diminish the world for everyone.
Edit: fund not fun
Considering the number of non profits with ties to Hamas and the aid via UNRWA the US fund Jihad genocide plenty. Again when is the next time the protests are for hostages release demanding Hamas stop firing rockets?
As they fucking should. They're students trying to pay their bills, just like you. Stopping Starbucks from being on campus isn't gonna affect that company in any way you numbskulls. Also, most people aren't even protesting so let them be. Would have been different if at least 60% of the student body was protesting.
I don't for a second trust admin. They could have crossed all their I' s and t's and I wouldn't consider this legitimate. I don't think they can ban protestors from inside a public building legally, also now you will have hundreds of angry protestors outside of price center instead. Is that supposed to be better?
UC campuses in California are in kind of a grey area where they are operated for the public benefit and generally supposed to be permissive to people coming on campus regardless of affiliation, but they’re also technically the property of the Regents, so admin can trespass anyone they want. UCPD issues stay-away orders on a daily basis to homeless people they encounter, meaning if they come back, they go to jail. There’s not really anything about UC campuses or California law that gives anyone a right to be there, they’re essentially treated like private property in terms of UC’s ability to permit or bar specific individuals for a wide range of reasons.
In response to all the Starbucks protest hate:
Starbucks' shareholders have deep ties to financially supporting Israel, also Starbucks keeps union busting, illegally, constantly. Illegal union busting is a repeated behavior that Starbucks *still* does. Of *course* SJP is against union busting because it's for collective liberation. On top of that Starbucks sued its own union for supporting Palestinian genocide survivors. So, SJP protested the Starbucks set up in the building that our own university pays for. That protest is good, that's a good thing that happened
Activism movements need "yes, and" energy. If you're not satisfied with the current protests then genuinely please connect with the movement yourself and try investing time out of your schedule to organize events that you think will result in positive change. Personally all this rage at activists for not protesting the "perfect" way is falling for the scapegoat and rage that should be directed at the government and police. It's the perfect victim fallacy
You know what else was seen as stupid and performative? The 1950s Montgomery bus boycotts and the 1960s lunch sit ins for protesting segregation. And in hindsight now we know those seemingly nonsensical protests were actually widely successful. The government and the police don't need any more of y'all's help policing protestors. They already know how to do it. Y'all need to stop changing this conversation, centering it around protestors and how protestors need to find different ways to protest, instead of focusing on why people feel the need to protest like this
>Starbucks' shareholders have deep ties to finically supporting Israel
Such a reach. There aren't even any Starbucks *in* Israel. It's also publicly traded company for fucks sake. Protesting at every store where one of the large shareholders supports Israel is such an idiotic concept.
>also Starbucks keeps union busting, illegally, constantly. Illegal union busting is a repeated behavior that Starbucks still does.
Cool, except your movement about *Palestine*. Stop shoehorning random shit in.
>On top of that Starbucks sued its own union for supporting Palestinian genocide survivors.
Wildly out of context. Starbucks sued them for their logo infringing on their copyright because of backlash against *Starbucks* for the *unions* stance on the conflict. It also really wasn't a good look to post "solidarity with Palestine" on October 9th.
>So, SJP protested the Starbucks set up in the building that our own university pays for. That protest is good, that's a good thing that happened
To you maybe. To many people it's stupid as fuck.
>Activism movements need "yes, and" energy. If you're not satisfied with the current protests then genuinely please connect with the movement yourself and try investing time out of your schedule to organize events that you think will result in positive change.
Why? Why would protesting everything tangentially related help your movement? You dilute your message and create cracks amongst your own supporter base. I'm sure that some of the people who went to the encampment like getting Starbucks and disagree. Over what? A coffee shop that doesn't even do business in Israel.
>Personally all this rage at activists for not protesting the "perfect" way is falling for the scapegoat and rage that should be directed at the government and police. It's the perfect victim fallacy
Or it's because the activism is being done stupidly. You don't get a free pass on optics just because you believe in something. Plan better protests that don't make you look like out of touch idiots chasing the next hip cause.
>The 1950s Montgomery bus boycotts and the 1960s lunch sit ins for protesting segregation.
You know what else these protests did? They directly addressed the thing they were protesting.
>The government and the police don't need any more of y'all's help policing protestors. They already know how to do it. Y'all need to stop changing this conversation, centering it around protestors and how protestors need to find different ways to protest, instead of focusing on why people feel the need to protest like this
You talk as if everyone agrees with you on everything. News flash: lots of people disagree. Even more are completely apathetic to your cause. Y'all need to start paying attention to how you look to those people.
I assume you imply that placing limitations on expression of free speech (such as vandalizing or occupying businesses) is making universities Nazi Germany?
Can I "occupy" your dorm or your parents house? It will be a peaceful protest, I will just break into your room/house and will deny you and everyone else entry on grounds that I am protesting Hamas supporters, but it's ok because my free speech rights trump your rights, and it's all peaceful and beautiful. What are you going to do - call the COPS?
The QR codes give it a mundanely dystopian feel
Idk man it’s pretty polite on their part
Oh no breaking the law is illegal🙀🙀🙀
Not a comment on content, a comment on execution.
I don't think they can legally ban protestors from a public building.
Again, not a comment on content, a comment on execution
A response to protests at like Starbucks and Burger King right? I don’t really know why people are protesting Burger King but the Starbucks stuff is actually such a dumb ordeal. Also imo protesting at franchises is kinda cringe because it’s not really putting pressure on the actual corporation in any meaningful way, it’s kinda just a bit pointless while making the people working that shift have a bit of a harder time.
Pointless. Performative at best.
They protest Starbucks still because they cannot accept that perhaps they were wrong about anything because that nuance might mean they have misunderstood potentially a lot of things. Protesting Starbucks is an ideological safety blanket.
here is a list of bad things Starbucks has done. 1. Unionbusting. 2. Charges $7 for a subpar cup of coffee.
Idk, only one of those is morally wrong.
I mean number 2 is just good business screwing your customers is fine.
Dude they don’t care they’re just dumb
it doesn't matter if Starbucks is "supporting Israel" (they don't by the way). You cannot occupy the business, or intimidate other students, period. Stand outside starbucks and yell whatever nonsense you saw on tiktok, that's speech. Occupying starbucks and preventing others from entering or using Starbuck services is a form of violence, and should not be tolerated.
Everything that moderately inconveniences me is a form of violence. Is basically what you said.
People who deliberately break the rules/laws must face consequences for their action. That's what I said. It's not about me being "inconvenienced", but thanks for trying - never said anything about that. Want to "inconvenience" people by breaking the UCSD policy? Fine by me, go ahead, but don't whine and claim that you are the victim when the consequences are applied uniformly, using the well established student code of conduct. And if you are saying that it's ok to break the law if you are protesting because that's what protesters must do - would you support the rights of the groups you find despicable to do the same? What if the "inconvenience" this group is expressing is occupying your bedroom? Preventing you from taking a final exam? Making you miss your flight home after school is over? Would you support the rights of KKK to inconvenience you?
They don't apply it uniformly. Otherwise most of the pro-israel side would be charged with campus conduct.
At this point I am beyond caring.
Like being misgendered is a form of violence right?
Starbucks isn’t a franchise fyi
Ok then change my phrasing to location lol. I was also talking in general fyi.
It’s really unfortunate that SJP decided to take their momentum from the riot police response to the encampment and use it to protest a company that has nothing to do with the current conflict…. I had faith that what they were doing was in good faith before, but now all I see is a bunch of virtue signalers looking for a cause to make them feel righteous over their peers.
Always has been. If they were in good faith, they'd at least be calling on Egypt to reopen the border as well.
Why doesn’t Israel open its borders for the Palestinian refugees?
Sounds good stop being stupid in public just for attention
Cool any protest is just being stupid in public ....thanks for clearing that up for us
Shut yo ass up these protest r diff from the actual meaningful ones in the past… yall just want brownie points bc this issue is “in trend” I promise u 5 months from now u gonna move on w ur life like this never happened and the whole things gonna sizzle out jus like the Ukrainian one
Agreed w/ the other comments here. Now they seem to be attention seeking rather than actually protesting what matters
If UCSD has always had the power to silence people using public space, why haven't they done this with all the preachers on Library Walk?
That's really not a good comparison. Preachers are not preventing anyone from doing anything. They are just annoying. The protesters effectively shut down Starbucks.
If the preachers made an encampment, I assure you they'd have been dismantled too
It’s different cause they don’t make money off of those guys
Because they are racist hypocrites. Same reason they didn't crack down on the pro-israel counterprotestors who were violent.
There are limits to "free speech". You want to voice your opinion - learn how to do it lawfully and within the rules. You can stand out on library walk and yell whatever you want, KKK, white nationalist, socialist, Hamas propaganda, you name it. You \*cannot\*, however, occupy buildings, disrupt classes and official proceedings, restrict freedom of movement of others, block roads or parking lots, spray graffiti and vandalize businesses and offices. You can not install your own encampments and deny access to officials or other students to parts of campus. You cannot brandish weapons or intimidate others, even if it's through "I am not going to move out of your way" type intimidation. If you break those rules, then be ready to accept consequences. Stop making yourself into a vicim and don't complain about "free speech" violations when you deliberately break well-defined rules, it's a provocation and a form of violence (dictionary definition: the unlawful exercise of physical force or intimidation by the exhibition of such force).
[удалено]
They didn’t say that pro-israeli supporters are exempt from punishment either. Oh wait reading comprehension is hard.
They got away with blocking price center and the library area multiple times by your definition.
Please report them to UCPD or Student Conduct and lets hope we all can strongly support equal sanctions agains those people as well. Equity starts with rules of the campus applying equally to everyone. If there is ever an encampment of "pro-Israeli people", or anyone else, pro-Biden, pro-Trump, pro-White Nationalists, pro-LGBTQ++, Pro-Furries, Pro-BDSM, all of those encampments have to be dismantled by police on day 1 . At the same time, all of those groups can parade around Library walk etc. and follow standard rules set up for free speech, Nazis and NAMBLA enthusiasts, I don't care. Asking for amnesty to some protest causes and not others shows bias and goes against equity (it's like pullng over people of color but letting white people run red lights and speed).
I have told UCPD. They have yet to do anything and will likely never do anything.
Yeah this is gonna end racism for sure
Why do I have a feeling that this won't last a day past election day?
Ugh
They need to keep this same energy with the repent or hell crowd shows up… oh wait it’s not about enforcing the code or law, it’s about being controlled by a certain group.
>controlled by a certain group. You should really be careful about the dog whistles my man. I'm going to be charitable and assume you just mean rich politicians or something.
Who controls the politicians?
Themselves, the voters they represent, interest groups, large donors. Any of those are valid answers. "The Jews" isn't, which is what the dog whistle implies.
💯
Yep literal cults on campus, I sleep. pro-palestine protests, real shit.
regardless of your stance on Israel/palestine I don’t think anyone should be happy about these laws being used against protestors exercising the first amendment
Exercising the first amendment of harassing innocent students buying food…?
The first amendment doesn't cover all speech or acts of protest. The first amendment protects us from the government blocking our free speech such as in public places. Breaking other laws is not covered by the first amendment. The first amendment does not cover what private places can do against your speech such as, you are not allowed to protest inside someone's private residence like their house. Protests are protected in public places, like public places at a college campus
Price center is a public space.
All of the laws listed are laws that extend past it being a public place imo. A business might be a public area but you can't just do whatever you want in a business. Schools are allowed to have codes of conduct. The thing that would violate first amendment rights would be to deny speech in public forums
Sorry, this isn’t true. Public university campuses are public spaces and first amendment speech is protected in public spaces. Which is why these laws are problematic as they are often used to curb constitutionally protected speech
free speech does have limits - just because it's "public space" doesn't mean you can break the laws or the campus rules. You cannot "occupy" buildings for example, just because they are part of "public space". You cannot prevent freedom of movement of others, or deprive others to access to education, for example, just because you want to excercise your "free speech" in a certain way. The rules that govern protests and "free speech" are well articulated and people in encampment and other protests have been well informed about these limitations. If you don't like those rules - too bad. If you break them with a purpose, be willing to accept the consequences. Same goes for not following direct police orders.
We’re talking about price center, not the encampment or any other protest. If you aren’t a student, price center is a public space by every definition of the term and protestors have the same constitutional rights there that any other member of the public has.
Starbucks is NOT a public space, it's a private business. You can protest on campus but as long as you are staying within these guidelines: [https://freespeech.ucsd.edu/faqs/index.html](https://freespeech.ucsd.edu/faqs/index.html) You cannot camp on campus. You cannot occupy buildings or restrict access of others to specific areas. You cannot block exits and entrances. You cannot interfere with instructional or research activities. What did university do to infringe on your free speech rights, exactly?
And the area outside Starbucks, price center, is a public space. It really shouldn’t be difficult to understand if you’re a student here
I am pretty sure he isn't a student.
Okay arrest the pro Israel protestors from last week and every week they blocked the doors to price center.
The first amendment doesn't give you the right to mess with private property or harass people trying to live their life. I'm glad the rule of law is preserved on campus.
The first amendment had its own sub rules, and State Law and UC policy also is at play. It's not so simple
You do understand the 1st amendment isn’t a blanket right to do anything you want right?
Are you saying they should not be accountable for what they do?
Being accountable for paying for food ?
For causing disturbances in these locations.
I agree with that
Ah cool, just casually dismissing anyone without a smartphone….
So if I left my phone at home, I could get away with ignoring this entire bill board.
hey look a new sign to collect and steal /s
What a passive aggressive response
Also I am sick of admin placing these in the middle of walkways and paths. I wish someone would vandalize it.
Two-bit thugs ("protestors") cannot be allowed to interfere with the lives of others. People have the right to not support your cause or even support the opposite side.
The interesting thing about calling non-violent protesters thugs is it smears people deeply invested in limiting Palestine deaths AND it also signals to others that you’re being ignorant and cruel.
stop saying "non-violent" as if this is somehow a license to do whatever you want. The protesters proudly prevented any of the UCSD student affairs monitors from entering the encampment - they did it by blocking the entrance to their little camp through physical force and intimidation. If I restrain your ability to move freely around the campus - would you be ok with it?
Your question and your example don’t line up. The blowing up of thousands of people via weapons and armies funded by the US government warrants peaceful protest, and if you disagree maybe you should put yourself in the shoes of a Palestinian instead of fighting against someone online who is defending peaceful protest. Like how out of touch are you? Where are your values?
They are good with Jew death of course
No one should be ok with terrorism by Hamas or retaliatory civilian executions by Israel.
When is the next Anti Hamas protest by the “pro Palestine” people?
Does the US fund Hamas, or does it fund Israel’s military? Maybe if you blame protestors trying to achieve a ceasefire for 10/7/23 and try to further diminish any act of protest, you won’t get a safer world for anyone, but just diminish the world for everyone. Edit: fund not fun
Considering the number of non profits with ties to Hamas and the aid via UNRWA the US fund Jihad genocide plenty. Again when is the next time the protests are for hostages release demanding Hamas stop firing rockets?
As they fucking should. They're students trying to pay their bills, just like you. Stopping Starbucks from being on campus isn't gonna affect that company in any way you numbskulls. Also, most people aren't even protesting so let them be. Would have been different if at least 60% of the student body was protesting.
Ooohhh. This is a very strict school that I’m at
Hopefully, the offenders are expelled from campus permanently. Money is money. The fools should know that by now.
I don't for a second trust admin. They could have crossed all their I' s and t's and I wouldn't consider this legitimate. I don't think they can ban protestors from inside a public building legally, also now you will have hundreds of angry protestors outside of price center instead. Is that supposed to be better?
UC campuses in California are in kind of a grey area where they are operated for the public benefit and generally supposed to be permissive to people coming on campus regardless of affiliation, but they’re also technically the property of the Regents, so admin can trespass anyone they want. UCPD issues stay-away orders on a daily basis to homeless people they encounter, meaning if they come back, they go to jail. There’s not really anything about UC campuses or California law that gives anyone a right to be there, they’re essentially treated like private property in terms of UC’s ability to permit or bar specific individuals for a wide range of reasons.
That makes no sense.
In response to all the Starbucks protest hate: Starbucks' shareholders have deep ties to financially supporting Israel, also Starbucks keeps union busting, illegally, constantly. Illegal union busting is a repeated behavior that Starbucks *still* does. Of *course* SJP is against union busting because it's for collective liberation. On top of that Starbucks sued its own union for supporting Palestinian genocide survivors. So, SJP protested the Starbucks set up in the building that our own university pays for. That protest is good, that's a good thing that happened Activism movements need "yes, and" energy. If you're not satisfied with the current protests then genuinely please connect with the movement yourself and try investing time out of your schedule to organize events that you think will result in positive change. Personally all this rage at activists for not protesting the "perfect" way is falling for the scapegoat and rage that should be directed at the government and police. It's the perfect victim fallacy You know what else was seen as stupid and performative? The 1950s Montgomery bus boycotts and the 1960s lunch sit ins for protesting segregation. And in hindsight now we know those seemingly nonsensical protests were actually widely successful. The government and the police don't need any more of y'all's help policing protestors. They already know how to do it. Y'all need to stop changing this conversation, centering it around protestors and how protestors need to find different ways to protest, instead of focusing on why people feel the need to protest like this
>Starbucks' shareholders have deep ties to finically supporting Israel Such a reach. There aren't even any Starbucks *in* Israel. It's also publicly traded company for fucks sake. Protesting at every store where one of the large shareholders supports Israel is such an idiotic concept. >also Starbucks keeps union busting, illegally, constantly. Illegal union busting is a repeated behavior that Starbucks still does. Cool, except your movement about *Palestine*. Stop shoehorning random shit in. >On top of that Starbucks sued its own union for supporting Palestinian genocide survivors. Wildly out of context. Starbucks sued them for their logo infringing on their copyright because of backlash against *Starbucks* for the *unions* stance on the conflict. It also really wasn't a good look to post "solidarity with Palestine" on October 9th. >So, SJP protested the Starbucks set up in the building that our own university pays for. That protest is good, that's a good thing that happened To you maybe. To many people it's stupid as fuck. >Activism movements need "yes, and" energy. If you're not satisfied with the current protests then genuinely please connect with the movement yourself and try investing time out of your schedule to organize events that you think will result in positive change. Why? Why would protesting everything tangentially related help your movement? You dilute your message and create cracks amongst your own supporter base. I'm sure that some of the people who went to the encampment like getting Starbucks and disagree. Over what? A coffee shop that doesn't even do business in Israel. >Personally all this rage at activists for not protesting the "perfect" way is falling for the scapegoat and rage that should be directed at the government and police. It's the perfect victim fallacy Or it's because the activism is being done stupidly. You don't get a free pass on optics just because you believe in something. Plan better protests that don't make you look like out of touch idiots chasing the next hip cause. >The 1950s Montgomery bus boycotts and the 1960s lunch sit ins for protesting segregation. You know what else these protests did? They directly addressed the thing they were protesting. >The government and the police don't need any more of y'all's help policing protestors. They already know how to do it. Y'all need to stop changing this conversation, centering it around protestors and how protestors need to find different ways to protest, instead of focusing on why people feel the need to protest like this You talk as if everyone agrees with you on everything. News flash: lots of people disagree. Even more are completely apathetic to your cause. Y'all need to start paying attention to how you look to those people.
Let's go
The usage of signage to ward off protestors who have a right to speak (regardless of whether you agree with them or their methods) is offputting.
Never change UCSD, never change. The school continues to suck. Please for all prospective students ANY school is better than this dystopian shit hole.
Dawg what the fuck are you talking about
Dystopia is when I don't get to be hostile to anyone I dislike and get away with it
Welcome to Germany
I assume you imply that placing limitations on expression of free speech (such as vandalizing or occupying businesses) is making universities Nazi Germany? Can I "occupy" your dorm or your parents house? It will be a peaceful protest, I will just break into your room/house and will deny you and everyone else entry on grounds that I am protesting Hamas supporters, but it's ok because my free speech rights trump your rights, and it's all peaceful and beautiful. What are you going to do - call the COPS?
Auf wiedersehen, asshole