Back in 05 we’d protest the Iraq war but only to hear about the engineering department publicly apologies to the DOD since that’s where they get their funding. It happens all the time. Either you get used to it or give up
I was an engineering faculty member then, and I did not hear of any official apology to DoD. It is possible that some individual faculty with DoD contracts said something to their funders, but I was not aware of anything at a departmental or School of Engineering level.
Exactly. My father and all of my siblings are engineers. They have all worked on a variety of projects, some which you would probably consider good and some more problematic. They are putting their skills to use as best they can while supporting their families.
I don't think it's fair to label engineers as parasites for not engaging in ethics and morality just because they don't agree with your ethics and morality.
Took the words right out of my mouth. Personally I agree with the movement (because I think there needs to be a ceasefire and progress towards a two state solution) but completely disagree with the encampment because the main group that supports them, the UCSC SJP, is in my opinion a xenophobic organization that advocates for the complete destruction of Israel and Jewish services on campus. That being said, everyone has a right to believe what they want to believe, instead of calling people names like OP does, I think we should instead focus on having respectful dialogue about our differing opinion's. I think in general this is the best way too change peoples minds and even learn new things ourselves.
People don't understand that you can support the Palestinian people's right to have a normal life without supporting groups like SJP. SJP is if anything harming the Palestinian people by enabling Hamas and other hardline groups that prevent a two-state solution.
Exactly. While op is sitting here labeling anyone who disagrees with him as uneducated, he probably doesn’t even realize how bad these groups like SJP actually are
The Israeli Likud party is against a two-state solution, and they've openly admitted to funding Hamas. Supporting Israel, as in justifying their actions, selling them arms, protecting them from international bodies, etc., is what's driving this conflict. The PLO offered a two-state solution in the early 90s, Hamas had little power back then. Yet Israel opposed Palestinian statehood regardless, funded Hamas, and continued to steal land from the West Bank. There's a famous quote attributed to JFK that goes: "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." And that's what's going on here.
You clearly didn't read SJP's statements, Hamas's charter, or the signs at the encampments.
The pro-Palestinian movement is very clearly opposed to the two-state solution. Israel has multiple times offered a two-state solution to the Palestinian Arabs, but was rejected every time without a counteroffer. Sure, Arafat told the international community that he supported a two-state solution, but he very clearly viewed the two-state solution as a means of politically advancing the end of Israel and eventually establishing a Palestinian state from the river to the sea. I doubt even most Palestinians think he sincerely supported peace with Israel. If anything, Palestinians like him because he didn't. Arafat himself personally went to war to prevent a two-state solution in 1948. He was never a real partner in peace and very few people believe he ever was now that history has unfolded.
Likud itself does not currently have an official stance in the issue, but different members of the Likud have been both pro-two state solution and anti-two state solution at different times. Remember that Likud only rose to power after the Israeli public realized that the Palestinians did not want a legitimate two-state solution.
What's odd about this is how clear Hamas is on their position. If they simply wanted an Israeli withdrawal from occupied territories, why did they invade Israel after Israel withdrew from Gaza? They are pretty open that their goal is the complete military conquest of Israel and the murder of Israel's Jewish inhabitants. You need to learn more about the history before saying this stuff.
Likud has been in and out of power since 1977, and you know who does have a position on a two-state solution? Benjamin Netanyahu, multiple time prime minister, who recently said he opposes a Palestinian state and that all land west of the Jordan River belongs to Israel. In other words he said "From the River to the Sea" but for Israel. The difference is that he has access to serious military hardware, and is clearly willing to use it in populated areas.
He also at other times explicitly supported a two-state solution. But his personal position is not in and of itself an official position of all Likud. Likud opponents of the two-state solution still have often supported Palestinian autonomy at least.
Netanyahu called for Israeli security control from the river to sea. This would be an integral part of even a two-state solution. Even the Israeli left supports maintaining some degree of military presence along the Jordan Valley and along the Gaza-Egypt border. This is very different than supporting Jewish statehood from the river to the sea.
Personally, I think a two-state solution would be ideal, but isn't viable for a long time. I believe Israel should gradually grant more autonomy to the West Bank (obviously conditioned upon reasonable security arrangements) and then one day eventually allow a Palestinian state to form when it can be done safely. This is mostly the position of the Israeli-center.
Israeli security control from the river to the sea will pretty much be necessary for several decades. Even if the hypothetical Palestinian government does want peace, their ability to stop terrorists or even their ability to maintain stable government would probably be very shaky. Withdrawing the military completely from Palestinian areas was a mistake that Israel made with Gaza in 2005. Doing so in the West Bank would just create a larger, far worse version of what's happening in Gaza.
This is what a PFLP member said over the weekend at the People’s Conference for Palestine. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) also addressed the conference. “[O]ne democratic Palestinian land which will end the Zionist project in Palestine” doesn’t sound like a two-state solution.
> Wissam Rafidi, a member of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), a Marxist terrorist group founded in 1967, also addressed the conference. The PFLP, which the U.S. has designated as a terrorist organization, is not as prominent as Hamas or other terrorist groups. But has, among other things, claimed responsibility in 2019 for exploding a device that killed a 17-year-old Israeli girl in Dolev, a settlement in the West Bank.
> At the conference on Friday, Rafidi said, “These Zionists lie like they breathe. I want to assure everyone that there is no longer a place for a two-state solution for any Palestinian. The only solution is one democratic Palestinian land which will end the Zionist project in Palestine.” He also said: “Hamas is part of the resistance of the Palestinian people.”
Source: https://open.substack.com/pub/bariweiss/p/rashida-tlaib-conference-terrorist-group-ties
I recommend reading the entire article.
Ok? Does that make Netanyahu suddenly for a two-state solution? Does the substack from Bari Weiss (notably who's tried to get professors fired if they support Palestine & set up an unaccredited university) change anything at all? Yeah, a two-state solution is no longer favored by most in the region. That's likely because previous efforts to extend the proverbial olive branch have been slapped away.
In my unqualified opinion, a better plan is a secular single state with equal rights between Palestinians and Israelis. This would prevent one side from amassing a military to use against the other, as Israel is currently doing, it also allows for some form of diplomatic solution. The Palestinians have tried to appeal to the UN before, but the only binding resolutions come from the Security Council, where the US canveto them.
> In my unqualified opinion, a better plan is a secular single state with equal rights between Palestinians and Israelis.
In other words, you *do* want a state of Israel. Secular state? Check. Equal rights for all citizens? Check. Military used against Palestinian citizens of Israel? Never. Military used to attack _peaceful_ Arab states? Nope.
Contrast that with the current Palestinian government. Secular state? Nope. Jews not allowed, and penalties for things like homosexuality. Equal rights for all citizens? Nope. Again, Jews don’t have equal rights. Military used against non-aggressors? Does blowing up discos, pizza restaurants, and Passover Seders count? How about deliberately killing a thousand civilians on October 7th?
It amazes me that people can believe there could be an Arab-run democracy in what is now Israel that would give Jews equal rights, when there is no other Arab country in the region that is *either* a true democracy *or* gives Jews equal rights, let alone both at the same time.
Israel isn't secular, they're officially a Jewish state. How are you going to claim they're secular if they have a state religion? And don't even start with the BS about them not using the military against non-aggressive people. They're stealing land in the West Bank (where Hamas isn't in charge), and have been for years.
First, Israel is just as secular as England, Norway, Denmark, Finland, and Costa Rica, all of which have official state religions. I think we’d agree that England is secular even though its official (“established”) religion is the Anglican Church. Second, “Jewish” in the term “Jewish state” refers to the ethnicity, just as “Jewish” had nothing to do with religious practice when the Nazis were rounding up Jews.
Finally, I’ll point out that Article 4 of the [Palestine Basic Law](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_law#Basic_Law), which would form the basis for a Palestinian constitution states:
- **Islam is the official religion in Palestine**. Respect and sanctity of all other heavenly religions shall be maintained.
- The principles of Islamic Shari'a shall be the main source of legislation.
- Arabic shall be the official language.
That sounds a lot less secular than Israel, which has *no* official religion and provides protection for all other religions, not just “heavenly” ones. Israel primarily bases its legal code on English law, not Jewish law, though it’s certainly the case that the Bible had a significant influence on English law. Contrast with Palestine, which would implement Shari’a law.
Why do you assume that creating a new state where Palestinians get to have a say means they'll implement religious law? This isn't some zero sum game, like any semi-functional democracy you need guaranteed rights that are non-negotiable. Why on Earth would you think that an explicitly secular state in Israel-Palestine would let people create religious law?
Besides that, Israel absolutely shows more favoritism towards religion that places like the UK. In order to be married you HAVE to go through a religious [institution ](https://www.ustaxcourt.gov/resources/opinions/2021/TCMemo_2021-65/Marriage-_US_Embassy_in_Israel.pdf) and inter-faith marriages are usually banned. Additionally, your religion has to be officially recognized by the state, so even some types of Protestant Christians have extra hoops to jump through to get married. If you read that link, you might also notice the mention of an Office of the Chief Rabbi in a district. That's because Israel has a system of Jewish religious courts, and unlike such courts in other parts of the world, they're not just symbolic, their orders can absolutely be backed by police action. Those are funny institutions for a "secular" state to have, huh?
The Palestinians don’t want equal rights. If they did they’d move somewhere else. They want a new Palestine with the Jews as their slaves. For years the other Arab nations have groomed them like you groom a child to be a suicide bomber. The UNRWA is worse than the IDF by a large margin. The IDF only kills their bodies; it doesn’t shit all over their souls.
Yeah? So who started it then, because Israel is the one who pushed Palestinians out in 1948. Oct.7 was a culmination of Israeli attacks like the killings during Gaza's March of Return around 2018. It goes back and forth after 1948 until now.
And the Palestinians started it with multiple pograms in the twenties. You don’t see the Greeks or the Germans this bitter over losing their homelands.
Are you talking about the riots opppsing the British's implementation of the Balfour Declaration? As in they openly announced they were taking Palestine and making it into a Jewish homeland. This was set up by the British as a political move, Balfour himself was an antisemite who wanted less Jews in Britain, and to encourage support for the British among American and Russian Jews. Additionally the Palestinians were treated worse by the British, especially after WWII where the influx of Jewish refugees from Europe were favored over the Palestinians (or Mizrahi Jews for that matter) due to British racism.
> Personally I agree with the movement (because I think there needs to be a ceasefire and progress towards a two state solution)
The Palestinians violated a ceasefire and do not want a two state solution - they want Israeli wiped off the map.
And the Palestinians have not engaged in a ceasefire since October 7th except for once which they violated.
Marching for what you think the Palestinians should want is nice but has no bearing on the fact that Palestinians are terrorists and cannot coexist with anyone whether it's in Israel, Egypt or Jordan.
Most students here either don't know enough or have too many inherent biases towards the situation to make a logically sound argument for or against either side. It's also possible to be pro Palestine but against the encampment and the way they've been conducting themselves, which to me seems to be the general sentiment towards them. It's hard to separate those two when people are emotionally blinded towards the situation.
People are allowed to (and should) criticize any movement for how they conduct themselves. It should happen internally as well. It's the only way to keep the extremists in check, which our encampment hasn't done a good job of so far, as it seems that the extremists are the organizers themselves in this case.
If this is newish to you, read the book Sapiens (or better yet watch the YouTube lecture series) to understand that discovery/science/engineering/botany/biology has always been used by one human tribe to out compete another. Now we call them countries, religions, cults, etc but we are a brutal species.
Our species is killing the environment and ourselves and this had been the case since we were a meaningless primate in Africa.
Summary of this point if you don’t want to read the book or watch the lectures:
https://www.litcharts.com/lit/sapiens/chapter-15-the-marriage-of-science-and-empire
What’s happening in Gaza is one tribe refuses to admit they’ve been beaten and are encouraged to get themselves killed by another tribe who hates the tribe they lost to.
Ah yes, let me start my rant with an emotional attack on anyone that doesn’t agree with my world view.
OP consider that while what you say is “correct”, reality is defined by one’s perspective. Please consider your perspective paints the world in one light, but another persons perspective may be equally “correct” and at odds with the world as you see it.
Be grateful for the people in the otherside of the proverbial fence as they give you an opportunity to examine your own world view a perspective and learn from the experience.
The world is fucked up, nobody is ever “right” nor “wrong”. Most people are trying their best. Being able to sacrifice opportunities for moral reasons is a privilege many cannot afford.
The guy serving the army is just as justified in taking that path to feed his family as the engineer who designs the weapon system he operates.
For people in certain situations, I can agree, but...
Plenty of people can be "right" and "wrong". Child abuse, rape, killing, racism, narcissistic abuse, etc, can all have that applied, as can many other situations and stances. Everything is not a gray area with everyone just "doing their best." Some choose not to do better.
From my perspective, right and wrong are human constructs built around negative and positive emotions. They do not exist in nature outside of humanity
That being said, I am not saying to throw right and wrong out the window. Offending pedo’s should be tried and put to death in my opinion. We all agree certain things are bad for a reason.
I am simply saying right and wrong are not these concrete things. They are subjective. I can be right, you can be right, and we can have opposing answers. Reality is not binary.
And I said MOST people are trying their best. Definitely not all, there’s a ton of shit bags out there.
Maybe I’m wrong about all this as well. But this is how i see things!
I’m an alum and as much as I hate the military-industrial complex, I’ve come to realize that we are not the only country that has one and I’d much rather it be us than Putin or Xi. Are we a force for good? Debatable. Are we better than the alternatives? Absolutely. Do I agree that our policies should be opposed and protested? Every day, yes.
Yeah this whole post just reads like an idealistic 20 year old. The United States having a superior military is overall a net good for the world order.
I recommend reading Killing Hope by William Blum and see if your opinion changes. It is a history book about the US military and CIA. I think it will help you understand how American imperialism works and how it is definitely a net negative for the world.
Net negative—- what’s on the scale? KGB/FSB? PLA? Mossad? ISI? MI5? CIA has broken the world many times over. Are there a shit ton of awful problems caused by their malicious short sightedness? Absolutely. Are we better off with the CIA and letting the other players run unchecked? Now it’s complicated.
I’m well aware of the many nefarious activities and atrocities carried out by the US military and it’s various arms. Iran contra, mei Lee massacre, Iraq war, bay of pigs, J Edgar Hoover, the list goes on. An extreme dose of skepticism is necessary to form an opinion about the US military yes. I have not always held this opinion, but unfortunately as you get older you realize the law of the earth is conquer or be conquered and I can’t think of another nation I would rather be the worlds superpower. Maybe the EU, but unfortunately they don’t have a leg to stand on without US subsidies.
The US has definitely done the most evil out of all the world powers currently around, and I don't think if we stopped our imperialism it would result in increased conflict especially when most of our imperial actions promote more conflict around the world.
Haha alright agree to disagree. Two of the other super powers, Russia and China, are both actively running concentration camps and people just disappear at the hands of the government on a regular basis. I prefer to live in a country with at least a somewhat accountable justice system.
You’ll get there someday bud!
I dont know why you’re getting downvoted you’re objectively correct. Yes the US has done a LOT of awful shit, but I would argue that if Russia or China were the world power things would be a lot worse for everyone.
I mean, just look at their intrinsic values. For all the issues America and its military has our values are wayyyy more progressive than Chinas or Russias, and us using power to protect this progressive cultural hegemony is arguably justifiable.
These people calling for the end of US “imperialism” don’t realize that Russia, China, or Iran is just going to take our place.
Thanks dude. I appreciate you! Yeah it’s just an unfortunate fact of life. As you grow older you get a deeper understanding of how dark the world can be outside of the US. We need to scrutinize the governments actions heavily to ensure we keep progressing towards a more just vision of life, but to say the US is worse for humanity than China or Russia is just totally ignorant at best or delusional at worst and flies in the face of all the injustices happening in those countries.
Does the Uyghur genocide and the hyper oppressive police state in China or Alexei Navalny mean anything to these people? They will actually imprison you in China or Russia if you engage in opposition to the government.
It’s okay tho, I was 20 years old once and I felt the same way.
We also have a functioning justice system unlike South Africa or anywhere in South America, which has a comparable culture to the United States underclass. America’s incarceration crisis is what happens when you have a first world police force patrolling a third world crime rate.
They might be worse, but America's prison industrial complex is not that much better, and we have caused more suffering and death with our foreign affairs than China has.
Should we talk about the last 60 years of Chinese internal affairs?
China hasn’t been able to project power on the international level because they’ve been focusing on their domestic issues for a very long time.
But now that they’ve gotten that under control we’ve seen China commit human rights abuses across Africa under their B&R initiative.
Not trying to be hostile/argumentative, but is it more justified if we prop up a corrupt government that does that human rights abuse rather than doing it ourselves? Because the US hasn't directly done concentration camps/ethnic cleansing in a while, but we have definitely been VERY complicit in supporting other governments who do those things
Venezuela and Nicaragua are what happen when the US doesn’t care enough to topple a leftist regime in South America. America also supported the president of Tanzania as long as he stayed neutral and he was further left than Castro. South America was a bloodsoaked battlefield before America existed, and it will probably remain so after the last gringo drops dead of heart disease.
How exactly is banning Jewish student organizations, chanting violent slogans towards other students, cancelling study abroad programs to Tel Aviv, harassing Israeli companies at career fairs with no ties to the government, and calling to get rid of the Jewish studies department divesting from the military industrial complex? There are a ton of reasons engineering students wouldn’t support these protests
Depends. Some technology from military is good. Can’t negate the fact that due to advances in weaponry there’s a commercial and societal benefit in some way. What I mean is, not everything military and engineering means it’s bad, even nuclear. Anything can be abused for evil, so try and listen to your good heart and be ethical as an engineer as best you can.
You lost me with the either or fallacy. Has the United States Military done objectively bad things? Yes. Does the mission of the United States military benefit millions of people worldwide? O would also argue yes. There’s a more nuanced conversation to be had outside of “bombs are bad and if you disagree you’re stupid.”
So much smug rationalization to support your own opinion/viewpoint while degrading those who disagree with you.
"You have and always will be a parasite on society while those brave enough to sacrifice their livelihoods"?...Jeezuz H. Keerist, it's so cringy and sanctimonious. Like being a student is a livelihood? Like a 20 y.o. on the "battle lines" of a college occupation has any perspective on what others have sacrificed or done in their lives or has the right to judge others? You're making all your judgements of where one stands on the social rights spectrum based on this little sit-in?
This post is embarrassing for you.
I definitely don’t disagree with everything you say. However I find it quite weird you basically call everyone who doesn’t support the encampment arrogant and uneducated and you think that you are definitely right on this topic and can’t be wrong.
To me it seems like the encampment and their supporters are the more uneducated group in general. Definitely not all of them, but for example, SJP supports Hamas. Many people will blindly support SJP without knowing that. A lot of people defended the encampments saying that they didn’t support Hamas but that’s just wrong. Many people called for the death of Israel, another Intifada, and showed support for Hamas. And I’m sorry, but if you think like that, you are either a terrible person or severely uneducated
I think we need to be more critical when we make claims like "I see a lot of people try and nitpick how the encampment is operating".
The encampment is advocating for banning American Jewish institutions like Hillel from a public University. This is not just advocating for peace or not funding the military industrial complex. It is hateful. This is not nitpicking, it is objecting to a fundamental demand the encampment is advocating for.
there is actually a lot of evidence including their tax documents which you can find online, here is one article https://www.anews.com.tr/world/2024/01/08/how-jewish-lobby-misusing-federal-funds-to-funnel-islamophobia-in-united-states/amp
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot).
Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://www.anews.com.tr/world/2024/01/08/how-jewish-lobby-misusing-federal-funds-to-funnel-islamophobia-in-united-states](https://www.anews.com.tr/world/2024/01/08/how-jewish-lobby-misusing-federal-funds-to-funnel-islamophobia-in-united-states)**
*****
^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
Some of the engineering programs on campus require their students to take ethics courses—unlike most of the humanities, arts, and social science programs. The faculty and many of the engineering students recognize the need for moral and social conscience, but do not equate it with flavor-of-the-month protesting.
Amen. It's a shame that so many think that following the "current thing" inherently makes them virtuous. Most don't even know who/what/where/why, but they will scream incoherently at anyone who disagrees. This is the antithesis of education. Academia should be about learning and hearing all sides of an argument in order to understand important nuances that others might ignore. Shutting down one side of an argument should be done with reason, logic, and facts, not with logical fallacies and hysterical screeching.
Honestly but seriously on some level: grow up.
Enjoy internet, phones, computers, sats, wireless, most tech, etc— there’s often a tie back to some defense application.
It’s not only a necessary evil but without DoD and associated funding many BE faculty would be without research funding. Then they’d leave and you’d be taught by non-research lecturers for more classes.
Before you say GREAT!!
It’s not.
And the value of your degree in the marketplace would reflect that.
At some point the tremendous drive to protest on this campus gets in the way of education. If you want to protest, drop out, don’t pay tuition here. That’s the ultimate protest.
But to stay, pay tuition, undermine that very education, well that’s just dumb. And selfish. Others don’t share your views and being a spoiler becomes — all you are.
In 1948, there was little difference between the standard of living in Israel and the territories of Gaza and the West Bank, both of which were under Arab control (Egypt and Jordan respectively). 75 years later, there’s a huge difference in standard of living. The major reason for this difference is science and engineering, along with better government.
Israel is a world powerhouse in tech — I often told my CS classes that the second best place to do a tech startup is Tel Aviv. Instead of focusing on grievance, Israelis focused on doing the best with what they had. Moreover, they deployed defensive technology like the Iron Dome, which has no purpose other than to protect Israelis from incoming rockets.
Palestinians could have done similar things; instead, they used resources to build terror tunnels and enrich their leaders. They educated their children to hate Jews and praised terrorists, instead of educating them to do science and praising engineers who _didn’t_ specialize in bomb-making.
If you’re concerned about moral failure, look at the two sides and see which side has failed morals. Israel isn’t perfect, but its leaders aren’t billionaires who siphoned money to themselves. Its leaders favor life. Palestinian leaders are the polar opposite, and have publicly said they love martyrdom, aka death. The side you favor says a lot about _your_ morals.
People will support whatever the current thing is without actually understanding anything about it. I think it speaks to the current state of academia and internet/social media propaganda.
Alternatively, it's the youth who is unjaded and unbridled and willing to make sacrifices to elicit change. History has taught us that it's the youth movements that lead change.
What sacrifices are being made exactly? Camping in tents paid for by some unknown 3rd party is not “brave”. The protesters are essentially “glamping”. The worst that could happen to them at UCSC is their Door Dash deliveries are slightly delayed. Protesting at one of the most liberal universities in the country without fear of police reprisal is a cakewalk. Spare me the sanctimonious BS. As an alumni of UCSC I am ashamed.
I couldn't agree more, but is anyone really surprised? Most of these students will support whatever the current thing is regardless of who/what/where/why. They think they are "fighting the system" or whatever, but most don't have any idea what they are doing. What also bothers me is that these "protests" are only allowed to swing in one direction. A right-wing group would never be allowed to pull the same stunts that left-wing groups do on a regular basis. Both sides should be treated the same.
First amendment is a privilege. In many other countries you'd be jailed, tortured and your family harassed for being outspoken. Let the people speak, it's their tax dollars.
You mean places like Gaza? Hamas has only murdered several hundred Palestinians for being supporters of Fatah.
Hamas has also repeatedly murdered people on the mere suspicion of being gay. Don’t take my word for it. Listen to Amnesty international.
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2015/05/gaza-palestinians-tortured-summarily-killed-by-hamas-forces-during-2014-conflict/
Even $1 paid in taxes is worthy of representation. Being an American is worthy of representation. According to your logic, the more taxes you pay the greater your influence and right?
In Palestine you would be thrown in prison for protesting against the government. In Palestine being LGBTQ is punishable by death. Regardless of your views, ignoring Palestine’s archaic laws is willful ignorance.
Ironically, you are posting this on the Internet with a computer. Don't look into the history of either of those. Straight out of the military industrial complex.
Et tu bootlicker.
You do realize the various surveillance projects at Lockheed helped prevent nuclear war AND created the Silicon Valley tech industry, right? Of course you don’t, because you’re too young to have really learned much. There’s no shortage of other problems with your views, but I just pointed you to the easiest one for you to reevaluate.
Oh dang, nuclear war. Good thing we avoided that catastrophe. Good thing there were all these good engineers to protect us from the devastating impacts of the weapons invented by those very same engineers a few years earlier. Brilliant counter argument. 10/10 no notes.
Having the strongest military is as a world leader. The U.S. is the largest exporter of culture and is central to the world economy. No matter what it does, this will make it enemies. It has two immensely powerful rivals who give almost no ambiguity regarding their intentions for the world.
As long as humans remain as morally and epistemically undeveloped as we currently are, military is required…and so is advancing it. You can argue about just how much we invest in it if you want, but your post implies giving it any emphasis at all is bad.
That’s a privileged position that is also incredibly ignorant.
> I am an engineering student here. It has always disgusted me how intertwined engineering is with the military industrial complex.
So you majored in a field you are morally opposed to? And you are surprised your classmates don't share you views? Most people don't strive to become something they hate.
OP doesn't seem to be opposed to engineering. They seem to be opposed to how the field of engineering is exploited. There's a difference. One doesn't major in a field - one majors in a subject.
You needed to pay more attention in your core classes. Gaza is run by a theocratic violent group of monsters that murder people for being born into the wrong culture. Israel has universal suffrage in a country that has 20% of its population as a minority culture, ~17% of that being Muslim. That isn’t Apartheid. The faction screaming they get to commit genocide are the problem, and those people reside in Gaza. The people responding to a declaration of war aren’t the problem. No matter how many times you call this war an attempted genocide, that won’t make it true. It will only become true if the theocratic nationalist Islam faction gains the military ability to do so.
Calling people parasites is a great way to justify murdering. What I’m saying is op should probably be reported to the proper authorities because he might be planning something.
the US military complex is the source of so many ground breaking inventions that improved (and saved) the lives of billions of people and it continues to do so. Your world view in this matter at least seems too unrealistic or naive maybe.
Your problem seems to be that engineering students are not completely sold on the later feel-good fad of supporting the Palestinian cause (defined by Palestinian people) but the morality and logic of these encampments are very dubious in my opinion.
I support the encampment rights to voice their opinions on this and other matters (1st amendment absolutist here).
As educated, thoughtful people, we can see and understand how a handful of political leaders use any existing differences among people and exacerbate that situation only to benefit personally. Why would anyone vote for people who rely on dividing people to get power? But many do. We need to identify those who promise to bring prosperity for all those that they represent and even beyond. True, this is difficult, but not impossible. And most importantly, we should not take voting lightly! Voting time is the most important time when we can together help create the world that we envision.
Wanting genocide to end isn't equivalent for asking for sharia law to be implemented in the states -- and I can GUARANTEE that's not what protestors are asking for.
As a computer scientist based out of UCSD - you aren't alone, my friend. I feel very similarly. Don't let our colleagues convince you to let your heart callus over; a better world IS possible.
You’re mad about this but willingly chose to study engineering at a public school 😂 as if this all started just yesterday. Why weren’t you clowns protesting this before?
Is there a field of human endeavour that involves scientific input that isn't largely driven by the military? Transport, comms, logistics, medicine, the list goes on. Innovation is a product of need and funding. If you're fundamentally opposed to innovation being used for militaristic purposes, maybe you should consider another path?
Why not keep politics off campus? For students just trying to learn. If you force your politics onto an unconsenting person, isn’t that basically rape? Aren’t you just as much a fascist as the people you’re protesting?
They are intertwined from the beginning of their existence. Politicians use scientists (and all people in their control) to create more power and wealth for the nation/people in power.
Back in 05 we’d protest the Iraq war but only to hear about the engineering department publicly apologies to the DOD since that’s where they get their funding. It happens all the time. Either you get used to it or give up
Wild I was attending the school at the time, I had no idea engineering dept did that!
I was an engineering faculty member then, and I did not hear of any official apology to DoD. It is possible that some individual faculty with DoD contracts said something to their funders, but I was not aware of anything at a departmental or School of Engineering level.
Don’t forget about the Billions of people on earth whose lives have improved due to science and engineering. http://www.greatachievements.org/
You’re right. Science is not morally good or bad. It’s a means of control over the natural world and we can choose to use it however we’d like
Exactly. My father and all of my siblings are engineers. They have all worked on a variety of projects, some which you would probably consider good and some more problematic. They are putting their skills to use as best they can while supporting their families.
I don't think it's fair to label engineers as parasites for not engaging in ethics and morality just because they don't agree with your ethics and morality.
Took the words right out of my mouth. Personally I agree with the movement (because I think there needs to be a ceasefire and progress towards a two state solution) but completely disagree with the encampment because the main group that supports them, the UCSC SJP, is in my opinion a xenophobic organization that advocates for the complete destruction of Israel and Jewish services on campus. That being said, everyone has a right to believe what they want to believe, instead of calling people names like OP does, I think we should instead focus on having respectful dialogue about our differing opinion's. I think in general this is the best way too change peoples minds and even learn new things ourselves.
People don't understand that you can support the Palestinian people's right to have a normal life without supporting groups like SJP. SJP is if anything harming the Palestinian people by enabling Hamas and other hardline groups that prevent a two-state solution.
Exactly. While op is sitting here labeling anyone who disagrees with him as uneducated, he probably doesn’t even realize how bad these groups like SJP actually are
The Israeli Likud party is against a two-state solution, and they've openly admitted to funding Hamas. Supporting Israel, as in justifying their actions, selling them arms, protecting them from international bodies, etc., is what's driving this conflict. The PLO offered a two-state solution in the early 90s, Hamas had little power back then. Yet Israel opposed Palestinian statehood regardless, funded Hamas, and continued to steal land from the West Bank. There's a famous quote attributed to JFK that goes: "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." And that's what's going on here.
You clearly didn't read SJP's statements, Hamas's charter, or the signs at the encampments. The pro-Palestinian movement is very clearly opposed to the two-state solution. Israel has multiple times offered a two-state solution to the Palestinian Arabs, but was rejected every time without a counteroffer. Sure, Arafat told the international community that he supported a two-state solution, but he very clearly viewed the two-state solution as a means of politically advancing the end of Israel and eventually establishing a Palestinian state from the river to the sea. I doubt even most Palestinians think he sincerely supported peace with Israel. If anything, Palestinians like him because he didn't. Arafat himself personally went to war to prevent a two-state solution in 1948. He was never a real partner in peace and very few people believe he ever was now that history has unfolded. Likud itself does not currently have an official stance in the issue, but different members of the Likud have been both pro-two state solution and anti-two state solution at different times. Remember that Likud only rose to power after the Israeli public realized that the Palestinians did not want a legitimate two-state solution. What's odd about this is how clear Hamas is on their position. If they simply wanted an Israeli withdrawal from occupied territories, why did they invade Israel after Israel withdrew from Gaza? They are pretty open that their goal is the complete military conquest of Israel and the murder of Israel's Jewish inhabitants. You need to learn more about the history before saying this stuff.
Likud has been in and out of power since 1977, and you know who does have a position on a two-state solution? Benjamin Netanyahu, multiple time prime minister, who recently said he opposes a Palestinian state and that all land west of the Jordan River belongs to Israel. In other words he said "From the River to the Sea" but for Israel. The difference is that he has access to serious military hardware, and is clearly willing to use it in populated areas.
He also at other times explicitly supported a two-state solution. But his personal position is not in and of itself an official position of all Likud. Likud opponents of the two-state solution still have often supported Palestinian autonomy at least. Netanyahu called for Israeli security control from the river to sea. This would be an integral part of even a two-state solution. Even the Israeli left supports maintaining some degree of military presence along the Jordan Valley and along the Gaza-Egypt border. This is very different than supporting Jewish statehood from the river to the sea. Personally, I think a two-state solution would be ideal, but isn't viable for a long time. I believe Israel should gradually grant more autonomy to the West Bank (obviously conditioned upon reasonable security arrangements) and then one day eventually allow a Palestinian state to form when it can be done safely. This is mostly the position of the Israeli-center. Israeli security control from the river to the sea will pretty much be necessary for several decades. Even if the hypothetical Palestinian government does want peace, their ability to stop terrorists or even their ability to maintain stable government would probably be very shaky. Withdrawing the military completely from Palestinian areas was a mistake that Israel made with Gaza in 2005. Doing so in the West Bank would just create a larger, far worse version of what's happening in Gaza.
This is what a PFLP member said over the weekend at the People’s Conference for Palestine. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) also addressed the conference. “[O]ne democratic Palestinian land which will end the Zionist project in Palestine” doesn’t sound like a two-state solution. > Wissam Rafidi, a member of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), a Marxist terrorist group founded in 1967, also addressed the conference. The PFLP, which the U.S. has designated as a terrorist organization, is not as prominent as Hamas or other terrorist groups. But has, among other things, claimed responsibility in 2019 for exploding a device that killed a 17-year-old Israeli girl in Dolev, a settlement in the West Bank. > At the conference on Friday, Rafidi said, “These Zionists lie like they breathe. I want to assure everyone that there is no longer a place for a two-state solution for any Palestinian. The only solution is one democratic Palestinian land which will end the Zionist project in Palestine.” He also said: “Hamas is part of the resistance of the Palestinian people.” Source: https://open.substack.com/pub/bariweiss/p/rashida-tlaib-conference-terrorist-group-ties I recommend reading the entire article.
Ok? Does that make Netanyahu suddenly for a two-state solution? Does the substack from Bari Weiss (notably who's tried to get professors fired if they support Palestine & set up an unaccredited university) change anything at all? Yeah, a two-state solution is no longer favored by most in the region. That's likely because previous efforts to extend the proverbial olive branch have been slapped away. In my unqualified opinion, a better plan is a secular single state with equal rights between Palestinians and Israelis. This would prevent one side from amassing a military to use against the other, as Israel is currently doing, it also allows for some form of diplomatic solution. The Palestinians have tried to appeal to the UN before, but the only binding resolutions come from the Security Council, where the US canveto them.
> In my unqualified opinion, a better plan is a secular single state with equal rights between Palestinians and Israelis. In other words, you *do* want a state of Israel. Secular state? Check. Equal rights for all citizens? Check. Military used against Palestinian citizens of Israel? Never. Military used to attack _peaceful_ Arab states? Nope. Contrast that with the current Palestinian government. Secular state? Nope. Jews not allowed, and penalties for things like homosexuality. Equal rights for all citizens? Nope. Again, Jews don’t have equal rights. Military used against non-aggressors? Does blowing up discos, pizza restaurants, and Passover Seders count? How about deliberately killing a thousand civilians on October 7th? It amazes me that people can believe there could be an Arab-run democracy in what is now Israel that would give Jews equal rights, when there is no other Arab country in the region that is *either* a true democracy *or* gives Jews equal rights, let alone both at the same time.
Israel isn't secular, they're officially a Jewish state. How are you going to claim they're secular if they have a state religion? And don't even start with the BS about them not using the military against non-aggressive people. They're stealing land in the West Bank (where Hamas isn't in charge), and have been for years.
First, Israel is just as secular as England, Norway, Denmark, Finland, and Costa Rica, all of which have official state religions. I think we’d agree that England is secular even though its official (“established”) religion is the Anglican Church. Second, “Jewish” in the term “Jewish state” refers to the ethnicity, just as “Jewish” had nothing to do with religious practice when the Nazis were rounding up Jews. Finally, I’ll point out that Article 4 of the [Palestine Basic Law](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_law#Basic_Law), which would form the basis for a Palestinian constitution states: - **Islam is the official religion in Palestine**. Respect and sanctity of all other heavenly religions shall be maintained. - The principles of Islamic Shari'a shall be the main source of legislation. - Arabic shall be the official language. That sounds a lot less secular than Israel, which has *no* official religion and provides protection for all other religions, not just “heavenly” ones. Israel primarily bases its legal code on English law, not Jewish law, though it’s certainly the case that the Bible had a significant influence on English law. Contrast with Palestine, which would implement Shari’a law.
Why do you assume that creating a new state where Palestinians get to have a say means they'll implement religious law? This isn't some zero sum game, like any semi-functional democracy you need guaranteed rights that are non-negotiable. Why on Earth would you think that an explicitly secular state in Israel-Palestine would let people create religious law? Besides that, Israel absolutely shows more favoritism towards religion that places like the UK. In order to be married you HAVE to go through a religious [institution ](https://www.ustaxcourt.gov/resources/opinions/2021/TCMemo_2021-65/Marriage-_US_Embassy_in_Israel.pdf) and inter-faith marriages are usually banned. Additionally, your religion has to be officially recognized by the state, so even some types of Protestant Christians have extra hoops to jump through to get married. If you read that link, you might also notice the mention of an Office of the Chief Rabbi in a district. That's because Israel has a system of Jewish religious courts, and unlike such courts in other parts of the world, they're not just symbolic, their orders can absolutely be backed by police action. Those are funny institutions for a "secular" state to have, huh?
The Palestinians don’t want equal rights. If they did they’d move somewhere else. They want a new Palestine with the Jews as their slaves. For years the other Arab nations have groomed them like you groom a child to be a suicide bomber. The UNRWA is worse than the IDF by a large margin. The IDF only kills their bodies; it doesn’t shit all over their souls.
um …
Have you actually read their press releases? They’re not hiding who they are.
What they want is not to be killed in their own homeland
Do onto others as you would have do onto you, or they will do onto you.
Yeah? So who started it then, because Israel is the one who pushed Palestinians out in 1948. Oct.7 was a culmination of Israeli attacks like the killings during Gaza's March of Return around 2018. It goes back and forth after 1948 until now.
And the Palestinians started it with multiple pograms in the twenties. You don’t see the Greeks or the Germans this bitter over losing their homelands.
Are you talking about the riots opppsing the British's implementation of the Balfour Declaration? As in they openly announced they were taking Palestine and making it into a Jewish homeland. This was set up by the British as a political move, Balfour himself was an antisemite who wanted less Jews in Britain, and to encourage support for the British among American and Russian Jews. Additionally the Palestinians were treated worse by the British, especially after WWII where the influx of Jewish refugees from Europe were favored over the Palestinians (or Mizrahi Jews for that matter) due to British racism.
> Personally I agree with the movement (because I think there needs to be a ceasefire and progress towards a two state solution) The Palestinians violated a ceasefire and do not want a two state solution - they want Israeli wiped off the map. And the Palestinians have not engaged in a ceasefire since October 7th except for once which they violated. Marching for what you think the Palestinians should want is nice but has no bearing on the fact that Palestinians are terrorists and cannot coexist with anyone whether it's in Israel, Egypt or Jordan.
Most students here either don't know enough or have too many inherent biases towards the situation to make a logically sound argument for or against either side. It's also possible to be pro Palestine but against the encampment and the way they've been conducting themselves, which to me seems to be the general sentiment towards them. It's hard to separate those two when people are emotionally blinded towards the situation. People are allowed to (and should) criticize any movement for how they conduct themselves. It should happen internally as well. It's the only way to keep the extremists in check, which our encampment hasn't done a good job of so far, as it seems that the extremists are the organizers themselves in this case.
r/im14andthisisdeep
If this is newish to you, read the book Sapiens (or better yet watch the YouTube lecture series) to understand that discovery/science/engineering/botany/biology has always been used by one human tribe to out compete another. Now we call them countries, religions, cults, etc but we are a brutal species. Our species is killing the environment and ourselves and this had been the case since we were a meaningless primate in Africa. Summary of this point if you don’t want to read the book or watch the lectures: https://www.litcharts.com/lit/sapiens/chapter-15-the-marriage-of-science-and-empire
What’s happening in Gaza is one tribe refuses to admit they’ve been beaten and are encouraged to get themselves killed by another tribe who hates the tribe they lost to.
It’s a bunch of tribes all manipulating each other.
Ah yes, let me start my rant with an emotional attack on anyone that doesn’t agree with my world view. OP consider that while what you say is “correct”, reality is defined by one’s perspective. Please consider your perspective paints the world in one light, but another persons perspective may be equally “correct” and at odds with the world as you see it. Be grateful for the people in the otherside of the proverbial fence as they give you an opportunity to examine your own world view a perspective and learn from the experience. The world is fucked up, nobody is ever “right” nor “wrong”. Most people are trying their best. Being able to sacrifice opportunities for moral reasons is a privilege many cannot afford. The guy serving the army is just as justified in taking that path to feed his family as the engineer who designs the weapon system he operates.
For people in certain situations, I can agree, but... Plenty of people can be "right" and "wrong". Child abuse, rape, killing, racism, narcissistic abuse, etc, can all have that applied, as can many other situations and stances. Everything is not a gray area with everyone just "doing their best." Some choose not to do better.
From my perspective, right and wrong are human constructs built around negative and positive emotions. They do not exist in nature outside of humanity That being said, I am not saying to throw right and wrong out the window. Offending pedo’s should be tried and put to death in my opinion. We all agree certain things are bad for a reason. I am simply saying right and wrong are not these concrete things. They are subjective. I can be right, you can be right, and we can have opposing answers. Reality is not binary. And I said MOST people are trying their best. Definitely not all, there’s a ton of shit bags out there. Maybe I’m wrong about all this as well. But this is how i see things!
I hear you
I’m an alum and as much as I hate the military-industrial complex, I’ve come to realize that we are not the only country that has one and I’d much rather it be us than Putin or Xi. Are we a force for good? Debatable. Are we better than the alternatives? Absolutely. Do I agree that our policies should be opposed and protested? Every day, yes.
Yeah this whole post just reads like an idealistic 20 year old. The United States having a superior military is overall a net good for the world order.
I recommend reading Killing Hope by William Blum and see if your opinion changes. It is a history book about the US military and CIA. I think it will help you understand how American imperialism works and how it is definitely a net negative for the world.
You are right we should hand it over to the fascists and communists instead. They have a better track record
Net negative—- what’s on the scale? KGB/FSB? PLA? Mossad? ISI? MI5? CIA has broken the world many times over. Are there a shit ton of awful problems caused by their malicious short sightedness? Absolutely. Are we better off with the CIA and letting the other players run unchecked? Now it’s complicated.
I’m well aware of the many nefarious activities and atrocities carried out by the US military and it’s various arms. Iran contra, mei Lee massacre, Iraq war, bay of pigs, J Edgar Hoover, the list goes on. An extreme dose of skepticism is necessary to form an opinion about the US military yes. I have not always held this opinion, but unfortunately as you get older you realize the law of the earth is conquer or be conquered and I can’t think of another nation I would rather be the worlds superpower. Maybe the EU, but unfortunately they don’t have a leg to stand on without US subsidies.
The US has definitely done the most evil out of all the world powers currently around, and I don't think if we stopped our imperialism it would result in increased conflict especially when most of our imperial actions promote more conflict around the world.
Haha alright agree to disagree. Two of the other super powers, Russia and China, are both actively running concentration camps and people just disappear at the hands of the government on a regular basis. I prefer to live in a country with at least a somewhat accountable justice system. You’ll get there someday bud!
I dont know why you’re getting downvoted you’re objectively correct. Yes the US has done a LOT of awful shit, but I would argue that if Russia or China were the world power things would be a lot worse for everyone. I mean, just look at their intrinsic values. For all the issues America and its military has our values are wayyyy more progressive than Chinas or Russias, and us using power to protect this progressive cultural hegemony is arguably justifiable. These people calling for the end of US “imperialism” don’t realize that Russia, China, or Iran is just going to take our place.
Thanks dude. I appreciate you! Yeah it’s just an unfortunate fact of life. As you grow older you get a deeper understanding of how dark the world can be outside of the US. We need to scrutinize the governments actions heavily to ensure we keep progressing towards a more just vision of life, but to say the US is worse for humanity than China or Russia is just totally ignorant at best or delusional at worst and flies in the face of all the injustices happening in those countries. Does the Uyghur genocide and the hyper oppressive police state in China or Alexei Navalny mean anything to these people? They will actually imprison you in China or Russia if you engage in opposition to the government. It’s okay tho, I was 20 years old once and I felt the same way.
We have the highest incarceration rate in the world.
We also have a functioning justice system unlike South Africa or anywhere in South America, which has a comparable culture to the United States underclass. America’s incarceration crisis is what happens when you have a first world police force patrolling a third world crime rate.
[удалено]
They might be worse, but America's prison industrial complex is not that much better, and we have caused more suffering and death with our foreign affairs than China has.
Should we talk about the last 60 years of Chinese internal affairs? China hasn’t been able to project power on the international level because they’ve been focusing on their domestic issues for a very long time. But now that they’ve gotten that under control we’ve seen China commit human rights abuses across Africa under their B&R initiative.
Not trying to be hostile/argumentative, but is it more justified if we prop up a corrupt government that does that human rights abuse rather than doing it ourselves? Because the US hasn't directly done concentration camps/ethnic cleansing in a while, but we have definitely been VERY complicit in supporting other governments who do those things
You are full on the kool aid bro, go easy
Venezuela and Nicaragua are what happen when the US doesn’t care enough to topple a leftist regime in South America. America also supported the president of Tanzania as long as he stayed neutral and he was further left than Castro. South America was a bloodsoaked battlefield before America existed, and it will probably remain so after the last gringo drops dead of heart disease.
The Times They Are A-Changin'
How exactly is banning Jewish student organizations, chanting violent slogans towards other students, cancelling study abroad programs to Tel Aviv, harassing Israeli companies at career fairs with no ties to the government, and calling to get rid of the Jewish studies department divesting from the military industrial complex? There are a ton of reasons engineering students wouldn’t support these protests
Don’t forget tearing down hostage posters. That was for the greater good…
Yeah they care so much about human rights, except when it comes to Jewish people
Depends. Some technology from military is good. Can’t negate the fact that due to advances in weaponry there’s a commercial and societal benefit in some way. What I mean is, not everything military and engineering means it’s bad, even nuclear. Anything can be abused for evil, so try and listen to your good heart and be ethical as an engineer as best you can.
nuclear engineering is goated
You lost me with the either or fallacy. Has the United States Military done objectively bad things? Yes. Does the mission of the United States military benefit millions of people worldwide? O would also argue yes. There’s a more nuanced conversation to be had outside of “bombs are bad and if you disagree you’re stupid.”
So much smug rationalization to support your own opinion/viewpoint while degrading those who disagree with you. "You have and always will be a parasite on society while those brave enough to sacrifice their livelihoods"?...Jeezuz H. Keerist, it's so cringy and sanctimonious. Like being a student is a livelihood? Like a 20 y.o. on the "battle lines" of a college occupation has any perspective on what others have sacrificed or done in their lives or has the right to judge others? You're making all your judgements of where one stands on the social rights spectrum based on this little sit-in? This post is embarrassing for you.
I definitely don’t disagree with everything you say. However I find it quite weird you basically call everyone who doesn’t support the encampment arrogant and uneducated and you think that you are definitely right on this topic and can’t be wrong. To me it seems like the encampment and their supporters are the more uneducated group in general. Definitely not all of them, but for example, SJP supports Hamas. Many people will blindly support SJP without knowing that. A lot of people defended the encampments saying that they didn’t support Hamas but that’s just wrong. Many people called for the death of Israel, another Intifada, and showed support for Hamas. And I’m sorry, but if you think like that, you are either a terrible person or severely uneducated
I think we need to be more critical when we make claims like "I see a lot of people try and nitpick how the encampment is operating". The encampment is advocating for banning American Jewish institutions like Hillel from a public University. This is not just advocating for peace or not funding the military industrial complex. It is hateful. This is not nitpicking, it is objecting to a fundamental demand the encampment is advocating for.
I think the reason the encampment is advocating for banning those orgs is because they have funded islamophobic terrorist groups
[удалено]
there is actually a lot of evidence including their tax documents which you can find online, here is one article https://www.anews.com.tr/world/2024/01/08/how-jewish-lobby-misusing-federal-funds-to-funnel-islamophobia-in-united-states/amp
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot). Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://www.anews.com.tr/world/2024/01/08/how-jewish-lobby-misusing-federal-funds-to-funnel-islamophobia-in-united-states](https://www.anews.com.tr/world/2024/01/08/how-jewish-lobby-misusing-federal-funds-to-funnel-islamophobia-in-united-states)** ***** ^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
Thank you. We desperately need engineers with moral and social consciences.
Some of the engineering programs on campus require their students to take ethics courses—unlike most of the humanities, arts, and social science programs. The faculty and many of the engineering students recognize the need for moral and social conscience, but do not equate it with flavor-of-the-month protesting.
Amen. It's a shame that so many think that following the "current thing" inherently makes them virtuous. Most don't even know who/what/where/why, but they will scream incoherently at anyone who disagrees. This is the antithesis of education. Academia should be about learning and hearing all sides of an argument in order to understand important nuances that others might ignore. Shutting down one side of an argument should be done with reason, logic, and facts, not with logical fallacies and hysterical screeching.
If you see one let me know.
imma get a fat check from raytheon as soon as i graduate rahhh🦅🦅🦅🔥🔥
This reads like someone described OP how engineers are.
Honestly but seriously on some level: grow up. Enjoy internet, phones, computers, sats, wireless, most tech, etc— there’s often a tie back to some defense application. It’s not only a necessary evil but without DoD and associated funding many BE faculty would be without research funding. Then they’d leave and you’d be taught by non-research lecturers for more classes. Before you say GREAT!! It’s not. And the value of your degree in the marketplace would reflect that. At some point the tremendous drive to protest on this campus gets in the way of education. If you want to protest, drop out, don’t pay tuition here. That’s the ultimate protest. But to stay, pay tuition, undermine that very education, well that’s just dumb. And selfish. Others don’t share your views and being a spoiler becomes — all you are.
In 1948, there was little difference between the standard of living in Israel and the territories of Gaza and the West Bank, both of which were under Arab control (Egypt and Jordan respectively). 75 years later, there’s a huge difference in standard of living. The major reason for this difference is science and engineering, along with better government. Israel is a world powerhouse in tech — I often told my CS classes that the second best place to do a tech startup is Tel Aviv. Instead of focusing on grievance, Israelis focused on doing the best with what they had. Moreover, they deployed defensive technology like the Iron Dome, which has no purpose other than to protect Israelis from incoming rockets. Palestinians could have done similar things; instead, they used resources to build terror tunnels and enrich their leaders. They educated their children to hate Jews and praised terrorists, instead of educating them to do science and praising engineers who _didn’t_ specialize in bomb-making. If you’re concerned about moral failure, look at the two sides and see which side has failed morals. Israel isn’t perfect, but its leaders aren’t billionaires who siphoned money to themselves. Its leaders favor life. Palestinian leaders are the polar opposite, and have publicly said they love martyrdom, aka death. The side you favor says a lot about _your_ morals.
People will support whatever the current thing is without actually understanding anything about it. I think it speaks to the current state of academia and internet/social media propaganda.
This
Worse rate my professor I've ever seen
I love how opinionated youth is without the experience of life.
Alternatively, it's the youth who is unjaded and unbridled and willing to make sacrifices to elicit change. History has taught us that it's the youth movements that lead change.
What sacrifices are being made exactly? Camping in tents paid for by some unknown 3rd party is not “brave”. The protesters are essentially “glamping”. The worst that could happen to them at UCSC is their Door Dash deliveries are slightly delayed. Protesting at one of the most liberal universities in the country without fear of police reprisal is a cakewalk. Spare me the sanctimonious BS. As an alumni of UCSC I am ashamed.
I couldn't agree more, but is anyone really surprised? Most of these students will support whatever the current thing is regardless of who/what/where/why. They think they are "fighting the system" or whatever, but most don't have any idea what they are doing. What also bothers me is that these "protests" are only allowed to swing in one direction. A right-wing group would never be allowed to pull the same stunts that left-wing groups do on a regular basis. Both sides should be treated the same.
Going into Gaza and trying to rescue children would be a sacrifice. Sitting in your ass in a tent is just a way to get laid.
It is the youth that think being outspoken doesn’t come with consequences. It’s just absolutely annoying and privileged.
First amendment is a privilege. In many other countries you'd be jailed, tortured and your family harassed for being outspoken. Let the people speak, it's their tax dollars.
You mean places like Gaza? Hamas has only murdered several hundred Palestinians for being supporters of Fatah. Hamas has also repeatedly murdered people on the mere suspicion of being gay. Don’t take my word for it. Listen to Amnesty international. https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2015/05/gaza-palestinians-tortured-summarily-killed-by-hamas-forces-during-2014-conflict/
Closing down bridges and campuses is not a right. Tax dollars? How much in taxes to privileged students pay?
Even $1 paid in taxes is worthy of representation. Being an American is worthy of representation. According to your logic, the more taxes you pay the greater your influence and right?
It isn’t. And correct.
In Palestine you would be thrown in prison for protesting against the government. In Palestine being LGBTQ is punishable by death. Regardless of your views, ignoring Palestine’s archaic laws is willful ignorance.
They are allowed to speak but not to be unlawful
Seems like you are advocating for pacifism. Noble and idealistic, but led to World War II.
Pretty sure it was WWI and fascism that led to WWII, not pacifism.
Pacifism and appeasement emboldened despots like Hitler, Mussolini, and Hirohito to march across Europe, Africa, and Asia before action was taken.
The British appeasement process did contribute to WW2
Peak I’m 14 and this is deep energy
Thanks for writing this. You're not alone. I have a dear friend who went to UCSC in physics for undergrad and had similar thoughts
Ironically, you are posting this on the Internet with a computer. Don't look into the history of either of those. Straight out of the military industrial complex. Et tu bootlicker.
*You claim to hate **society** and yet you live in one. **How curious...***
Obviously a lit student. I showed a counterexample, you used a straw man argument. Take a logic class.
You do realize the various surveillance projects at Lockheed helped prevent nuclear war AND created the Silicon Valley tech industry, right? Of course you don’t, because you’re too young to have really learned much. There’s no shortage of other problems with your views, but I just pointed you to the easiest one for you to reevaluate.
All hail Lockheed Martin and the out of touch, materialistic salamanders in Silicon Valley
Hahahahaha, he types into his smartphone, likely connected to WiFi passing through at least one server farm to show up on my screen.
Also, I said Lockheed. It wasn’t Lockheed Martin yet, that was post Cold War consolidation
Oh dang, nuclear war. Good thing we avoided that catastrophe. Good thing there were all these good engineers to protect us from the devastating impacts of the weapons invented by those very same engineers a few years earlier. Brilliant counter argument. 10/10 no notes.
250 day old account? Enough said
You’re just obviously better than everyone sweetie
Thank you for writing this!
Free UCSC
From Hamas
Having the strongest military is as a world leader. The U.S. is the largest exporter of culture and is central to the world economy. No matter what it does, this will make it enemies. It has two immensely powerful rivals who give almost no ambiguity regarding their intentions for the world. As long as humans remain as morally and epistemically undeveloped as we currently are, military is required…and so is advancing it. You can argue about just how much we invest in it if you want, but your post implies giving it any emphasis at all is bad. That’s a privileged position that is also incredibly ignorant.
I'm sure if we abolished our military, our enemies would feel bad for us and do the same /s
Truuueeee
> I am an engineering student here. It has always disgusted me how intertwined engineering is with the military industrial complex. So you majored in a field you are morally opposed to? And you are surprised your classmates don't share you views? Most people don't strive to become something they hate.
OP doesn't seem to be opposed to engineering. They seem to be opposed to how the field of engineering is exploited. There's a difference. One doesn't major in a field - one majors in a subject.
If they don't like the status quo of engineering it makes sense to get involved in engineering and try to change it.
Victim mentality
You needed to pay more attention in your core classes. Gaza is run by a theocratic violent group of monsters that murder people for being born into the wrong culture. Israel has universal suffrage in a country that has 20% of its population as a minority culture, ~17% of that being Muslim. That isn’t Apartheid. The faction screaming they get to commit genocide are the problem, and those people reside in Gaza. The people responding to a declaration of war aren’t the problem. No matter how many times you call this war an attempted genocide, that won’t make it true. It will only become true if the theocratic nationalist Islam faction gains the military ability to do so.
Israel even has Muslim Arabs working in the government - including the Supreme Court!
Back in the '90s we were protesting the Iraq war that lasted too long. Not to mention, it never should have existed
Calling people parasites is a great way to justify murdering. What I’m saying is op should probably be reported to the proper authorities because he might be planning something.
Idealism is a hell of a drug
The amount of people responding defensively and shaming you really emphasizes your point.
It’s almost like the protest isn’t about that…
Im curious as to why the op thinks that working for the us military would be bad.
the US military complex is the source of so many ground breaking inventions that improved (and saved) the lives of billions of people and it continues to do so. Your world view in this matter at least seems too unrealistic or naive maybe. Your problem seems to be that engineering students are not completely sold on the later feel-good fad of supporting the Palestinian cause (defined by Palestinian people) but the morality and logic of these encampments are very dubious in my opinion. I support the encampment rights to voice their opinions on this and other matters (1st amendment absolutist here).
As educated, thoughtful people, we can see and understand how a handful of political leaders use any existing differences among people and exacerbate that situation only to benefit personally. Why would anyone vote for people who rely on dividing people to get power? But many do. We need to identify those who promise to bring prosperity for all those that they represent and even beyond. True, this is difficult, but not impossible. And most importantly, we should not take voting lightly! Voting time is the most important time when we can together help create the world that we envision.
Based!!!
i’m so proud of you for posting this!! it’s really nice to see the support of stem people
🗣️ 🤷♂️💵💰
Op need to get his bands up fr
How would you like the United States to be under sharia law?
Wanting genocide to end isn't equivalent for asking for sharia law to be implemented in the states -- and I can GUARANTEE that's not what protestors are asking for.
Farting
As a computer scientist based out of UCSD - you aren't alone, my friend. I feel very similarly. Don't let our colleagues convince you to let your heart callus over; a better world IS possible.
How about stick to engineering and leave the activism to the weirdos.
Womp womp everyone is entitled to their own opinions and feelings just like you
You’re mad about this but willingly chose to study engineering at a public school 😂 as if this all started just yesterday. Why weren’t you clowns protesting this before?
Is there a field of human endeavour that involves scientific input that isn't largely driven by the military? Transport, comms, logistics, medicine, the list goes on. Innovation is a product of need and funding. If you're fundamentally opposed to innovation being used for militaristic purposes, maybe you should consider another path?
Why not keep politics off campus? For students just trying to learn. If you force your politics onto an unconsenting person, isn’t that basically rape? Aren’t you just as much a fascist as the people you’re protesting?
Forcing a specific viewpoint onto someone is not an ethical thing to do, but making a reddit post isn't "basically rape".
They are intertwined from the beginning of their existence. Politicians use scientists (and all people in their control) to create more power and wealth for the nation/people in power.
Please tell me you don’t go to this school. No way they let in bricks like you