protesting on public areas or on the lawns is fine as long as they’re not disrupting students, making students uncomfortable, chanting antisemitic slogans, or causing classes to be disrupted.
the protests at rutgers and brown did that just fine
You didn’t answer my question unless you think protesting on public areas on lawns in a way that doesn’t disrupt students, make students feel uncomfortable or causing classes to be disrupted will achieve their goals. Will it?
As far as chanting antisemitic slogans, very little of that has been going on. As a Jew, I’m pretty damn sensitive to antisemitism and I’ve been paying close attention to these protests. Criticism of Israel is not antisemitism.
You didn’t answer my question unless you think protesting on public areas on lawns in a way that doesn’t disrupt students, make students feel uncomfortable or causing classes to be disrupted will achieve their goals. Will it?
the protests at rutgers and brown did that.
but they also realise that the school is not obligated to listen or grant 100% of their demands
Rutgers and Brown are left-wing progressive schools. The University of Mississippi is not.
And even left-wing Columbia University was a segregated school until students occupied the same building they recently occupied and their demands were met.
Your idea that peaceful, respectful protest always gets people what they want is not borne out by history. If it were, SCOTUS would not have struck down Roe v. Wade.
You still haven’t told me what they should have done to actually achieve their goals.
You’ve told me they should have politely protested but the university didn’t have to listen to them. Looks like the university is listening now.
So, again, what should they have done to actually achieve their goals?
Don’t tell me what you wanted them to do or what you don’t like them doing. Tell me how they should have gone about it in order to have a good chance of success.
Like occupying the administration building? Because that’s exactly what Columbia students did. Didn’t seem to achieve their goals. It did get them a bunch of violent police reprisals though.
No shit it got violent police reprisals. The students are just easy targets because they know that if they actually pick useful targets, they will get a police response. This entire thing is a show at the students’ expense.
How exactly would you suggest they get the university to divest itself? Ask politely?
protesting on public areas or on the lawns is fine as long as they’re not disrupting students, making students uncomfortable, chanting antisemitic slogans, or causing classes to be disrupted.
the protests at rutgers and brown did that just fine
You didn’t answer my question unless you think protesting on public areas on lawns in a way that doesn’t disrupt students, make students feel uncomfortable or causing classes to be disrupted will achieve their goals. Will it?
As far as chanting antisemitic slogans, very little of that has been going on. As a Jew, I’m pretty damn sensitive to antisemitism and I’ve been paying close attention to these protests. Criticism of Israel is not antisemitism.
the protests at rutgers and brown did that.
but they also realise that the school is not obligated to listen or grant 100% of their demands
Rutgers and Brown are left-wing progressive schools. The University of Mississippi is not.
And even left-wing Columbia University was a segregated school until students occupied the same building they recently occupied and their demands were met.
Your idea that peaceful, respectful protest always gets people what they want is not borne out by history. If it were, SCOTUS would not have struck down Roe v. Wade.
This story is about the University of Michigan. 😉
What’s your point?
yeah, and causing a scene, committing violence, and holding up classes sure worked well for the students at university of mississippi.
You still haven’t told me what they should have done to actually achieve their goals.
You’ve told me they should have politely protested but the university didn’t have to listen to them. Looks like the university is listening now.
So, again, what should they have done to actually achieve their goals?
Don’t tell me what you wanted them to do or what you don’t like them doing. Tell me how they should have gone about it in order to have a good chance of success.
If they want to achieve goals against the university administration, they should protest in a way that disrupts the administration, not the students.
Like occupying the administration building? Because that’s exactly what Columbia students did. Didn’t seem to achieve their goals. It did get them a bunch of violent police reprisals though.
No shit it got violent police reprisals. The students are just easy targets because they know that if they actually pick useful targets, they will get a police response. This entire thing is a show at the students’ expense.