Protests 2024 - Stop Hey What's That Sound...

[Kurth]

Well, Columbia is dropping the boom: Protestors must clear out by 2:00PM ET today or face suspension.

They should have done this first before calling in the police, IMHO.

They're not leaving, and faculty have formed a linked-arms cordon around them. Police are waiting offstage for now.

Note that nothing violent is happening that would/will justify police violence. It's all just speech, however unpleasant some of it is.

Well, then hopefully the administration follows through and the campers will be kissing their Columbia education goodbye! Suspensions for everyone. They have been warned.

[Holman]

One thing that is clear in 95% of these cases is that cops are treating what is, at worst, trespassing as if it is a riot to be put down by force.

The cops are the rioters here.

If someone is trespassing, and they refuse to leave, then the police will remove them by force and arrest them. That's SOP almost everywhere. If someone shows up on your property and you call the police to have them trespassed, and then they refuse, the police will remove them by force and arrest them. Or would you rather the police just ask them, and if they refuse, just leave them on your property to do what they want? Is that how you prefer it to be handled if it was your property?

"If someone is trespassing":

Universities spend a huge amount of social and economic capital attracting students with the promise of community. The U is supposed to be their home, their expansive space, and their opening onto the possibilities of the future. The grounds of the university are the terrain where they are expected to learn and challenge themselves and expand their minds.

Suddenly turning on them and using *fucking riot cops* to eject them is a betrayal of all of that promise.

"If someone shows up on your property":

Really? See above. College students setting up camp to occupy on their own campus? Under normal conditions, they are literally *expected* to be on that property every day. The logic does not apply, and the police response definitely doesn't.

Unless the encampment is rioting (and there is zero evidence that that has been the case), there is no legal difference between students protesting the Gaza War and students throwing frisbees and playing hacky sack.

[Holman]

And this was definitely an overreaction. If I were in some kind of fight with a random stranger and you came up behind us and told us to dial it down, would I be within my rights to turn on you and slam you face down on the pavement? And would you then be charged with assaulting

You are not a police officer executing an arrest so your personal example is totally irrelevant. I’ve seen enough police arrest videos and I can tell you that anyone anywhere getting that close to police officers while they are arresting someone else is going to get themself arrested because 1) they are interfering in police business 2) it is unsafe for officers arresting someone for another person to come up on them and get that close while they are occupied with someone else. I’ve seen it happen any number of times and people that do this get arrested.

So police authority around police violence is self-justifying?

I mean, sure, the police would like to think so. And I guess mere citizens must defer to that.

Regardless of how many police arrests videos you've seen, watch the video in question.

Duh, I've watched the video in question. She comes up on the scene, then makes a sudden lunge towards the officers fighting with the guy on the ground - which regardless of her intent, is a big no-no. She's actively interfering with the arrest at that point. Of course she's going to get arrested and if she resists, of course she's going to have force used on her to effect the arrest. Heck, maybe you should watch the video, because once she in on the ground, she apologizes to the cop and admits that she reacted inappropriately. She admits she was wrong - can't be much clearer than that. We have her own confession.

So this is how things are supposed to be? A citizen calling out cops for excessive violence is subjected to excessive violence? Really?

Let's step back. What was the police violence for? What good did it do? What harm would have resulted had the the police response been softer?

[Smoove_B]

I feel like the strongest possible argument someone could make is one of liability. In other words, colleges aren't likely going to be insured to have students camping out 24/7 on college property and by allowing them to do so, they're potentially putting themselves at risk for lawsuits if students are injured or something happens (a crime in the encampment) that they could have prevented.

That said, I'm not sure any of the above warrants suspensions or sending in goons to rough them up. I guess it seems like these colleges had a number of paths they could have opted for and they largely opted for violence.

[Grifman]

One thing that is clear in 95% of these cases is that cops are treating what is, at worst, trespassing as if it is a riot to be put down by force.

The cops are the rioters here.

If someone is trespassing, and they refuse to leave, then the police will remove them by force and arrest them. That's SOP almost everywhere. If someone shows up on your property and you call the police to have them trespassed, and then they refuse, the police will remove them by force and arrest them. Or would you rather the police just ask them, and if they refuse, just leave them on your property to do what they want? Is that how you prefer it to be handled if it was your property?

"If someone is trespassing":

Universities spend a huge amount of social and economic capital attracting students with the promise of community. The U is supposed to be their home, their expansive space, and their opening onto the possibilities of the future. The grounds of the university are the terrain where they are expected to learn and challenge themselves and expand their minds.

Suddenly turning on them and using *fucking riot cops* to eject them is a betrayal of all of that promise.

"If someone shows up on your property":

Really? See above. College students setting up camp to occupy on their own campus? Under normal conditions, they are literally *expected* to be on that property every day. The logic does not apply, and the police response definitely doesn't.

Unless the encampment is rioting (and there is zero evidence that that has been the case), there is no legal difference between students protesting the Gaza War and students throwing frisbees and playing hacky sack.

Sorry, but the students don’t control the campus, they don’t own the campus, they are not responsible for the campus, the university admin is. If the admin says they should not be in a certain area and they refuse to leave, they are trespassing. That’s the law. The idea that they have some right because they pay tuition to go camp out on the university lawn for an indefinite period is isn’t reality.

They are expected to live in their dorms, not the college lawn. Living on a lawn in a tent is nothing like going there to play hacky sack. That’s an absurd comparison. Using your logic a student can go anywhere anytime he wants on campus, but we both know that is absurd. Finally, not only that the law does not agree with your position. I can tell you no judge will accept the argument “This was no different from me playing hacky sack”. Good luck in court with that argument!

We’re not going to agree, so this is all I am going to say. You can have the last word.

[Grifman]

So this is how things are supposed to be? A citizen calling out cops for excessive violence is subjected to excessive violence? Really?

Please stop distorting what happened. She wasn’t arrested for calling out the police. No one touched her until she lunged towards the police in the middle of an arrest and virtually got right up on them. Then a police officer watching the scene as backup moves towards her and places her under arrest, and only then.

Let's step back. What was the police violence for? What good did it do? What harm would have resulted had the the police response been softer?

The police violence only occurred when she resisted arrest, and the arrest only occurred by her own admission, by reacting impulsively. There would have been no violence if she had submitted peacefully, and no arrest if she had kept her distance. If police try to cuff you and you pull away, then police will become physical every time.

Now I am done. I’ve said all I have to say about this particular incident.

[Smoove_B]

Apparently they deployed chemical agents against students last night in Virginia.



Reminds me of when those white supremacists marched through the Charlottesville campus with all their tiki torches back in 2017. When the police went after them, it was just as crazy.

[gilraen]

At UCLA, protesters are blocking Jewish students' access to certain areas, building doors, access to class, etc. Demanding "wristbands" and to know whether the person is a "Zionist" before they let them pass. Police is refusing to interfere. So I'm all for Columbia saying enough is enough. Your civil rights do not include trespassing on private property but of course these snowflakes stick to university campus because it's easier than, say, organizing a protest or a march down a public street.

[Grifman]

At UCLA, protesters are blocking Jewish students' access to certain areas, building doors, access to class, etc. Demanding "wristbands" and to know whether the person is a "Zionist" before they let them pass. Police is refusing to interfere. So I'm all for Columbia saying enough is enough. Your civil rights do not include trespassing on private property but of course these snowflakes stick to university campus because it's easier than, say, organizing a protest or a march down a public street.

Yep:



And this:



And this:

[hepcat]

Are these students or outside agitators? In either case, absolutely horrible behavior. If they were actually interested in peace, they'd engage with dialog, not white supremacist tactics. The student in the second video came across as the voice of reason and sanity in that confrontation.

[Kurth]

Are these students or outside agitators? In either case, absolutely horrible behavior. If they were actually interested in peace, they'd engage with dialog, not white supremacist tactics. The student in the second video came across as the voice of reason and sanity in that confrontation.

Dollars to doughnuts, those are UCLA students in those videos. So fucked up.

I don’t hate them, but I really do hate their ignorance.

[hepcat]

Which begs the questions: who establishes a doughnut to USD exchange rate? And more importantly, can sprinkles be considered change?

[Kurth]

Which begs the questions: who establishes a doughnut to USD exchange rate? And more importantly, can sprinkles be considered change?

We need a new blog: Deep Thoughts by hepcat.

[Kurth]

Well, Columbia is dropping the boom: Protestors must clear out by 2:00PM ET today or face suspension.

They should have done this first before calling in the police, IMHO.

They're not leaving, and faculty have formed a linked-arms cordon around them. Police are waiting offstage for now.

Note that nothing violent is happening that would/will justify police violence. It's all just speech, however unpleasant some of it is.

Well, then hopefully the administration follows through and the campers will be kissing their Columbia education goodbye! Suspensions for everyone. They have been warned.

Now it's gone from suspension to expulsion. Good.

Columbia students occupying Hamilton Hall face expulsion, the university said in a statement Tuesday. “Protesters have chosen to escalate to an untenable situation ... and we are following through with the consequences we outlined yesterday," university spokesperson Ben Chang said.

[Dogstar]

If Biden and the DNC want to completely avoiding torpedoing his chances in November, they better be prepared for protests at the DNC, and those protests best not end in physical confrontation/violence. Student loan forgiveness and the slight deregulation of marijuana aren't going to matter as much for young voters in terms of motivating them to get out to the polls, and older voters are probably going to side against an administration that let a situation foster which features clashes between young people and police. Ugh.

[Unagi]

Wow.
Um.

There is nothing good at all about this.

[GreenGoo]

At UCLA, protesters are blocking Jewish students' access to certain areas, building doors, access to class, etc. Demanding "wristbands" and to know whether the person is a "Zionist" before they let them pass. Police is refusing to interfere. So I'm all for Columbia saying enough is enough. Your civil rights do not include trespassing on private property but of course these snowflakes stick to university campus because it's easier than, say, organizing a protest or a march down a public street.

Wait. UCLA is having issues that need addressing, so Columbia gets a free pass on overreacting? That's your logic on this?

Campuses are *traditional* locations for protests. This is literally where I would have protested if I had something to protest when I was in school. This tradition is decades, if not centuries old. I realize protests are tricky to get right for both sides, but you guys are crazy if you think police using force is the correct approach for a college, or for society in general, as far as protests go.

Let's say BH is correct and that police did everything by the book. Then the fucking book needs to be amended, because oppressing students at their learning establishment is hardly what I would call an open and free society. Particularly at schools receiving public funding. And losing their tuition? Are you serious? Are these places of higher learning or businesses, because apparently they can't be both.

Maybe bring in some state guard, to really show them who's in charge.

If cops can't handle student protests without instigating violence, then they need to be removed from policing campus'.

I don't even *agree* with these protests and am outraged that Jewish students are being targeted, and I know enough not to start busting heads and filling the paddy wagon.

[Apollo]

If Biden and the DNC want to completely avoiding torpedoing his chances in November, they better be prepared for protests at the DNC, and those protests best not end in physical confrontation/violence. Student loan forgiveness and the slight deregulation of marijuana aren't going to matter as much for young voters in terms of motivating them to get out to the polls, and older voters are probably going to side against an administration that let a situation foster which features clashes between young people and police. Ugh.

I disagree about older voters being turned off. I don't want people beaten but I do want Law and Order to prevail in some form at the unruly protests where they have ignored orders to leave or are blocking and/or harassing other students. But it's like the withdrawal from Afghanistan: Even a good idea will look like folly if it's not done correctly, so in that sense I do agree.

I think the Elites who comprise most of the Far Left and who seem to run the Democratic Party these days have made a huge strategic error in hitching their horse to young voters while abandoning the working class. Young people are fickle voters and tend to embrace radical (and unpopular) political ideas while working class voters usually want things, like universal health care, safer working conditions or better wages, that help (almost) everyone and are much easier to sell to the public. Working class voters are also much more likely to vote regularly and aren't as likely to be put off voting by the latest controversy.

As I've said before, I believe the Progressive movement in the Democratic Party would much rather be the majority in a minority party than the other way around.

[gilraen]

Then the fucking book needs to be amended, because oppressing students at their learning establishment is hardly what I would call an open and free society.

But it's okay for one group of students to oppress another group of students?

Also, I was never talking about police action, I was responding to the post about Columbia suspending and expelling protesters. (edit: I'm confused now as to which post I was responding to because I was reading some of it here and some of it on Twitter). I'm totally fine with Columbia calling the police, btw, but obviously the cops acted like asses, as usual, which it not the university's responsibility to deal with.

Like I said before, your civil rights do not include taking away someone else's rights. At no point during the actual Civil Rights protests did the protesters prevent people from peacefully going about their business and accessing public areas. And with Columbia being a private institution, they are well within their rights.

[Alefroth]

Wow.
Um.

There is nothing good at all about this.

Except where he jiu-jitsu'd the big guy at the beginning. That was cool.

[Grifman]

As I've said before, I believe the Progressive movement in the Democratic Party would much rather be the majority in a minority party than the other way around.

They are the left’s equivalent of the right’s Freedom Party.

And as an aside, if this keeps up, this election may end up looking a lot like Humphrey vs. Nixon, and we all know how well they turned out.

[El Guapo]

Then the fucking book needs to be amended, because oppressing students at their learning establishment is hardly what I would call an open and free society.

But it's okay for one group of students to oppress another group of students?

Also, I was never talking about police action, I was responding to the post about Columbia suspending and expelling protesters. (edit: I'm confused now as to which post I was responding to because I was reading some of it here and some of it on Twitter). I'm totally fine with Columbia calling the police, btw, but obviously the cops acted like asses, as usual, which it not the university's responsibility to deal with.

Like I said before, your civil rights do not include taking away someone else's rights. At no point during the actual Civil Rights protests did the protesters prevent people from peacefully going about their business and accessing public areas. And with Columbia being a private institution, they are well within their rights.

I am curious about what options are available for universities. Clearly calling in the police should be a last resort, but if you have students who are occupying a building or impeding other students' ability to get an education, presumably it has to be one option, right? The case for using police against students camping out on a quad or other outdoor common area seems weaker, but if they're occupying buildings gets stronger I would imagine.

But I don't really know, maybe (hopefully) there are better options.

[GreenGoo]

Any protestor that puts their hands on another student including other protestors should be removed from campus. That still doesn't mean tackling them and grinding face into the ground though. Only true violence should be met with forceful police action.

In Canada, yelling hate at people is also a crime, and I would treat those students with the same approach as students putting hands on other students. In the US? Let them scream hate, I guess? Freest free country in the world and all that.

Everything is a case by case basis though. Turd in the quad wants to scream hate and push people around, the he gets escorted away. Protestor in front of the admin building shouting "free Palestine" and physically occupying the doorway? They should be moved, as gently as possible, to the side. And that's it. Repeatedly. I'm dead serious. No pepper spray, no billy clubs, no losing their fucking tuition (holy shit this one is mind boggling to me). Peaceful protests does not mean silent sit-ins only. Screaming is not violence. Being in the way is not violence.

What does "occupying a building" mean in this context? Because they don't have guns or hostages, so...what, exactly? Barricades? Tear them down. No violence from students? No violence from cops. Period.

The whole concept of students protesting is not new. Not even protesting unpopular sides of things. None of this is new. That colleges don't have a literal handbook on handling these situations is mind boggling to me.

Campus is literally where we as a society have all agreed that the next generation gets to voice their disapproval at the current generations. It's been going on for decades. How is this any different? *This* protest is special somehow? Give me a break.

[Isgrimnur]

I hear the Ohio State National Guard had some bad ideas once.

[GreenGoo]

To be clear, I don't have all the answers, nor should anyone here be expected to either.

All I know is that protesting is not rioting, and is not predestined to become rioting.

[GreenGoo]

I hear the Ohio State National Guard had some bad ideas once.

Or good! Depending on which side of the protest you are on, I guess.

[hepcat]

I see wrong on both sides, to be honest. The response from the police being called in can be too extreme, in my opinion. While the actions of students physically confronting anyone they believe is Jewish or associated with Israel in any way smacks of Hitler Youth style zeal at times.

But in both cases, I'm hoping I'm just seeing isolated instances and not widespread bad behavior.

[Holman]

I am curious about what options are available for universities. Clearly calling in the police should be a last resort, but if you have students who are occupying a building or impeding other students' ability to get an education, presumably it has to be one option, right? The case for using police against students camping out on a quad or other outdoor common area seems weaker, but if they're occupying buildings gets stronger I would imagine.

But I don't really know, maybe (hopefully) there are better options.

I agree with you. Impeding other students from access to educational resources like the library or classrooms is not a good thing (although that doesn't mean it merits being bodyslammed onto hard pavement by steroid-frothing state troopers).

At the same time, the Gaza war and our nation's response to it is an ethical crisis. On a campus where unrest is happening, few professors or instructors are holding classes as usual. They're just not. That's not how universities work, and an administration that invites cop violence in order to pretend otherwise is doing far more harm than any protester is.

[Grifman]

Protesting ain’t what it used to be with the DoorDash/Grubhub generation in charge now:

[hepcat]

Samuel L. Jackson laughs at this generation.

[Grifman]

The irony is that a Hamas is a militant Islamic organization, under which both women and gays are oppressed. But let’s take down the U.S. flag and put up the Palestinian flag instead.

[Smoove_B]

I guess if they fly the Hamas flag, we can wag our fingers at them.

On the spectrum of things college students could be doing to protest what's happening in Gaza, raising the Palestinian flag in support doesn't even register on my outrage meter here.

[Kurth]

You and your facts!

[Smoove_B]

I get that it's disruptive and maybe a little scary. But I'm firmly of the opinion that a peaceful assembly (even one that lasts 24/7) should be given a wide berth in terms of how a college responds.

Now, if they're harassing people not involved with the protest (by blocking or intimidating them), that's not acceptable. I get that civil disobedience exists and things like blocking traffic or public spaces happens, but I'm not sure that's appropriate here (if I'm allowed to judge).

By applying negative pressure (sending in police, making threats, etc...) the college administration is absolutely escalating the event, and not in a good way.

Had they instead simply offered general guidelines - including that blocking buildings or harassing anyone wouldn't be tolerated, I'm guessing most of these protests would have fizzled out at some point over the next week or so. Instead, they've angered and motivated the participants to dig in and resist. As someone that was in a public protest of sorts a year ago for about a week, I can tell you it's absolutely energizing to hear what you're doing is having an impact.

Anyway, I'm hoping cooler heads prevail here and the various schools opt to de-escalate things because otherwise I fear it's going to get real ugly.

[Isgrimnur]

The popular Visegrád 24 Twitter account pretends to be a news agency, but just repackages material with a conservative spin

[waitingtoconnect]

It is now evident that the present Administration has fully embraced, for political advantage, McCarthyism. I am not referring to the Senator from Wisconsin. He is only important in that his name has taken on the dictionary meaning of the word. It is the corruption of truth, the abandonment of the due process law. It is the use of the big lie and the unfounded accusation against any citizen in the name of Americanism or security. It is the rise to power of the demagogue who lives on untruth; it is the spreading of fear and the destruction of faith in every level of society.

We need to remember none of this is new. Truman said the above in 1953. Such behaviour led to Nixon. We can’t fall into the mistakes of the 1950s and blacklists and cancelling people with false allegations.

That being said violence and blockading is not free speech. Those doing that need to be charged.

[Holman]

The irony is that a Hamas is a militant Islamic organization, under which both women and gays are oppressed. But let’s take down the U.S. flag and put up the Palestinian flag instead.

The Palestinian flag is not the Hamas flag.

Do you think the protesters are more devoted to supporting Hamas' oppressive ideology or to preventing the suffering of innocent Palestinians? Or does the latter equate to the former?

C'mon, man.

[waitingtoconnect]

The irony is that a Hamas is a militant Islamic organization, under which both women and gays are oppressed. But let’s take down the U.S. flag and put up the Palestinian flag instead.

The Palestinian flag is not the Hamas flag.

Do you think the protesters are more devoted to supporting Hamas' oppressive ideology or to preventing the suffering of innocent Palestinians? Or does the latter equate to the former?

C'mon, man.

But it is in this context. Palestinians are directly represented by Hamas who commit awful crimes.

And Hamas wants to kill all Jews and would happily put all of these idiots to the sword or keep them as sex slaves.

The left need to admit to themselves the root cause for this is because they are antisemitic and this is the root of their protest. If it wasn’t they’d be protesting Isis, Sudan, Syria, the Uguyrs and Ukraine as well.

The right needs to admit it only supports Israel because of some lunatic belief in the apocalypse.

[Holman]

The left need to admit to themselves the root cause for this is because they are antisemitic and this is the root of their protest. If it wasn’t they’d be protesting Isis, Sudan, Syria, the Uguyrs and Ukraine as well.

I hate what Israel is doing in Gaza and I am not antisemitic. My wife is Jewish and my kids identify as Jewish. We attended a Passover Seder last week, as we do every year.

I hate what's going on with Isis, Sudan, Syria, and the Uguyrs. Supporting Ukraine against Russia is my single biggest foreign-policy concern.

Tell me again how straightforward this all is.

[Blackhawk]

Good lord, don't keep caught up, and look what happens.

You're exactly right in everything you say, Blackhawk. People are just ignorant of how police are trained to act in these circumstances, and the trouble people make for themselves when they try to intervene in a police situation and then resist. She wasn't "beaten" as was claimed, she was forced to the ground where handcuffs could be place on her, a person who was actively resisting. arrest I've seen people who never got as close as she got to the police get arrested by the police for interference - she was definitely too close and that last second lunge she made towards the police was a very bad decision on her part.

A lot of people don't realize that what they're reacting to isn't attitude or ego, it's being surrounded and overwhelmed by actively hostile people and having someone charge at them. No, you can't wait until they actually attack the officers, because if they're capable of inflicting harm, that harm would already be inflicted.

I feel like the strongest possible argument someone could make is one of liability. In other words, colleges aren't likely going to be insured to have students camping out 24/7 on college property and by allowing them to do so, they're potentially putting themselves at risk for lawsuits if students are injured or something happens (a crime in the encampment) that they could have prevented.

That's a huge part of it. Working in a place with thousands of members of the public, often exhausted and drunk, my #1 purpose, and the second reason my job existed was liability (the first was that state law mandates it.) Everything else I was trained on was in service to liability control. If you want to distinguish the 'good guy' universities from the 'bad guy' universities, look for the ones that tried to talk to students, to allow them to protest within certain limits. Look at the ones who have declared an effective academic amnesty for non-violent arrests vs those who are destroying academic careers for college students doing what college students have always done (not counting the agitators and extremists.)

It is likely something that their hands are tied on.

Let's say BH is correct and that police did everything by the book. Then the fucking book needs to be amended, because oppressing students at their learning establishment is hardly what I would call an open and free society. Particularly at schools receiving public funding. And losing their tuition? Are you serious? Are these places of higher learning or businesses, because apparently they can't be both.

Whether BH is correct or not has to take into account the fact that Blackhawk was referring to the arrested professor that started this, and no other police or university action. I wasn't giving them a carte blanche excuse, I was arguing that one of the examples being used to show police misconduct was different from what people are reading into it.

And yeah, the book needs to be rewritten in a lot of ways. But in that situation, faced with what those cops were faced with, I'm not sure that there was a better solution than to take her into custody. And once that has begun, they're required to follow through, and they're limited in what they can do. In that *one and only one* situation they were within those limits.

A big chunk of the rest of what I've seen related to the police response is, in fact, over-the-top bullshit, and I am just as pissed off as anyone else about it.

And nothing I've seen so far pisses me off as much as watching mask-wearing thugs actively interfering with people because they happen to be Jewish. If I were a bystander, I'd have probably ended up in jail, too. I will say this, indirectly related to what I said earlier: A lot of those students are going to have civil rights cases against the universities and/or responding police departments.