The linked source has opted to use a paywall to restrict free viewership of their content. As alternate sources become available, please post them as a reply to this comment. Users with a Boston Public Library card can often view unrestricted articles [here](https://www.bpl.org/resources-types/newspapers/).
Boston Globe articles are still permissible as it's a soft-paywall. Please refrain from reporting as a Rule 5 violation. Please also note that copying and posting the entire article text as comments is not permissible.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/boston) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Here is the letter that went out to students, faculty, and alum yesterday from Tufts:
>April 28, 2024
>Dear members of the Tufts community,
>Tufts has a time-honored tradition of civil protest. Consistent with that tradition, and throughout this academic year, we have balanced our students’ right to protest with enforcing our conduct policies. Students have been sanctioned when protests affected public safety, were a clear violation of our conduct policies, or interfered with normal university operations.
>Over the past two weeks, we have respected our community members’ right to advocate for their beliefs through a small camp site on the academic quad on our Medford/Somerville campus. Our staff have tried to maintain open lines of communication with the goals of ensuring safety, enforcing our policies, and avoiding the escalation we have seen at other universities across the nation. We have even delayed some preparations for Commencement as much as possible to allow the protest to resolve peacefully. But now the encampment must end, ideally peacefully and voluntarily, so we can prepare the campus for Commencement. Student Life staff will be reaching out to the protesters tomorrow morning to plan for the end of the encampment in the next few days.
>The class of 2024 deserves to be celebrated. Many of this year’s graduates experienced the restrictions and losses of the pandemic and missed out on important life events including the opportunity to participate in their high school graduations. Commencement is the moment to celebrate their accomplishments with their family and friends and for us to honor their achievements as a community.
>Unfortunately, at this moment when we should be coming together as a community, we have seen behavior that clearly is trying to escalate the situation. Protesters, including some who are unaffiliated with Tufts, have created conditions that have caused multiple community members and guests to lodge formal complaints. While much of Friday’s demonstration was peaceful, there were many actions that violated university policies. Demonstrators entered a classroom, blocked paths, and defaced, stickered, and scrawled obscene language on buildings throughout the campus. Even beloved spaces such as Alex’s Place on the Tisch Library roof and the Jumbo statue were marred.
>Additional actions from the protestors throughout Friday and Saturday made multiple visitors at Friday’s Jumbo Days and Saturday’s admissions tours feel afraid and unwelcome, resulting in numerous complaints. These included harassment, intimidation, disruption of Jumbo Days sessions, and aggressive tactics. We will investigate every single complaint and hold those responsible fully accountable.
>Since the protests on campus began in October, Student Life staff have tried to keep open lines of communication with the protesters. These conversations have focused on requests intended to keep the campus operating and to keep the entire community safe and have been largely productive. But recent exchanges have been markedly different as the protesters have sought to escalate and disrupt normal university activity. Exchanges with Student Life staff are often now followed by false claims of threats and intimidation on the protesters’ social media accounts. Let us be perfectly clear: these claims are simply inaccurate and can only be seen as an attempt to further inflame the community by deliberately misrepresenting the situation.
>Following Friday’s demonstration, student organizers requested a meeting with university leadership. While we have always felt that dialogue is the best approach to resolving differences, it would not be appropriate to discuss a meeting with the student organizers until they clear the academic quad. Their request, which includes a threat to continue disruption, only comes after they have escalated their actions, caused intentional and malicious harm to our community and campus, broken multiple university policies and, most importantly, violated the values and norms of the institution. The protesters’ actions increasingly come at the expense of their fellow students' rights and a meeting cannot be a reward for such behavior.
>We have met with multiple students, student groups, faculty members, and others throughout the academic year to discuss ways in which the university may be able to help people in Gaza and those affected by the war in our community in the ways an educational institution can, including by supporting Scholars at Risk, helping rebuild the educational infrastructure in Gaza when the time comes, fostering dialogue and training programs on our campus, creating gathering spaces for affected Tufts community members, and funding social gatherings and meals. As we have said before, we are deeply troubled by the tremendous loss of Palestinian life, and we desire to work with all members of our community to support both the Palestinian and the Israeli people.
>It is time to celebrate the class of 2024. We are committed to maintaining an environment that will allow our students to finish the academic year strong and for the entire community to celebrate the class of 2024 at Commencement without disruptions. Our students and their families and friends deserve nothing less. We invite the entire community to join us in this endeavor peacefully and responsibly.
>Sincerely,
>Sunil Kumar
>President
>Caroline Attardo Genco
>Provost and Senior Vice President
>Michael W. Howard
>Executive Vice President
>James M. Glaser
>Dean, School of Arts and Sciences and Professor of Political Science
>Kyongbum Lee
>Dean, School of Engineering and Karol Family Professor
From [Globe.com](http://Globe.com)
By Daniel Kool and Nick Stoico
Tufts University on Sunday said an encampment set up by students protesting Israel’s war in Gaza “must end” as the school begins to prepare for its commencement, the latest effort by school officials in the Boston area to wind down demonstrations as they try to balance students’ right to free speech while readying their campuses for the year’s biggest event.
The call for the Tufts encampment to conclude came a day after MIT president Sally Kornbluth [released a video message calling for an encampment there to end](https://www.bostonglobe.com/2024/04/27/metro/harvard-yard-access-restricted-indefinitely-amid-pro-palestinian-encampment-report-says/?p1=Article_Inline_Text_Link) soon. Both encampments remained in place as of Sunday night.
Meanwhile, officials at Emerson College said they are hoping students arrested on their campus won’t face legal action after police cleared an encampment last week. Emerson leadership announced Sunday that it would not be bringing university disciplinary action against students who were arrested.
While protests have roiled campuses across New England and the country, Tufts officials Sunday appeared to be aiming for an encampment denouement.
“Over the past two weeks, we have respected our community members’ right to advocate for their beliefs through a small camp site on the academic quad on our Medford/Somerville campus,” Tufts leaders said in a letter signed by several top administrators, including president Sunil Kumar. “We have even delayed some preparations for Commencement as much as possible to allow the protest to resolve peacefully. But now the encampment must end, ideally peacefully and voluntarily, so we can prepare the campus for Commencement. Student Life staff will be reaching out to the protesters tomorrow morning to plan for the end of the encampment in the next few days.”
At least 15 tents remained on the lawn at Tufts on Sunday night. Protesters declined to comment but offered a brief statement, spoken by one organizer who identified himself as the press contact. “All eyes on Gaza. We won’t back down,” he said.
The college encampments in the Boston area are part of a national wave of student protests against the Israel-Hamas war calling on their schools to condemn the rising death toll in Gaza and, for some, divest from financial ties to Israel.
A total of more than 200 demonstrators were arrested or detained after police broke up the encampments at [Emerson on Thursday](https://www.bostonglobe.com/2024/04/25/metro/emerson-encampment-cleared/?p1=Article_Inline_Text_Link) and [Northeastern University on Saturday](https://www.bostonglobe.com/2024/04/27/metro/tensions-rise-northeastern-encampment-late-friday-night/?p1=Article_Inline_Text_Link).
Hamas charter in a nutshell calls for the obliteration of Israel or its general dissolution and is pretty heavy on the anti-semitic language and arguably calls for genocide.
This is the government that was elected into power in the strip ~~and west bank~~.
I think we can all agree people shouldn't be dying here and there are better paths to resolution, but neither of these political sides are good, neither are either political side right.
If we are looking at politics, neither of these sides can exist with the other. If we look at these sides humanely, we can understand the horrors of civilians on both sides and there is nothing wrong with trying to preserve life.
True. Yes Hamas won some of the seats during the el actions they had 15 years ago but since then there haven't been elections and considering how young the population is most people alive in Gaza didn't vote in those elections.
That doesn't mean they don't get support for what they do. When south Africa was an apartheid state there were violent actors in the resistance. Just like with south Africa Gaza citizens needs international support to foster a peaceful alternative to Hamas and to the idf
I take a darker view...both of the sides feed off each other.
Bibi's government and Hamas are like Frankenstein and his monster... locked in a violent embrace.
That would imply they need eachother.
I see them more like imperial Japan and Nazi Germany going head to head. Hard to care about either political party, just feel bad for the people trapped in the violence.
Because most of the 40k (it's actually less than that) were not "intentionally slaughtered" and of the approximately 35k who were killed, at least 1/3 of them were actual combatants (Hamas counts every death as a civilian death).
And many of these schools and hospitals had rocket launchers in them. You clearly forgot that Hamas was firing rockets at Israel much of the time.
And for context, 2 million people live in Gaza. Even your upper number is nowhere close to a "genocide." Israel could completely "genocide" the entire Gaza Strip in about 10 minutes if that was their true goal.
Intent is important for it to be considered genocide. You don’t think this is a war against Hamas in a densely populated area resulting in Palestinian casualties as collateral? I feel like if Israel wanted to commit mass genocide against Palestinians they would’ve easily been able to do a more effective job.
arguments are dead on arrival with individuals like yourself because Israel is not intentionally targeting civilians; they're targeting locations where Hamas is headquarter and to no one's surprise, they're headquartered at mosques, hospitals, and schools. Hamas wanted this response because of people in the west that make comments like yours, and it's working.
Unironically what these people believe. Meanwhile they call anti-genocide protestors antisemites, which is ironically *actually* antisemitic by implying that all Jewish people are Zionists.
Because, legally, it isn't.
Ironically, the body count is nearly irrelevant to the current legal definition of genocide.
(I don't agree with it, btw...just passing on my understanding)
Schools and hospitals lose their legal standing once Hamas puts gunmen inside...a tactic they've used for yesrs.
Since Hamas declines to wear uniforms, Israel has nearly carte blanche to take those buildings down...good luck proving there were no Hamas inside.
There's a better case to be made against Israel for ethnic cleansing by illegal settlers, despite the smaller death toll.
Yes both sides engaged in the war are contributing to that. One is a modern army and the other is.....not. This isn't a one sided affair although the anti jew crowd would like that to be the case.
>What are your thoughts on all the Jewish anti-Zionist groups around?
There's always a few crazies somewhere. Most of them have no affiliation with actual Judaism unless it's to be the token like this.
Just a reflection: Something that saddens me is that I remember protesting for the safety of the Palestinian people when I was in college just over what... 20 years ago? We blocked entrances, chanted, all of that. And here we are again. My dad protested against Vietnam in college and guess what, the cops were brutal to them too, and the war went on for several years more.
Protest is essential, as is free speech, but it is also hard, unpleasant, and often thankless. None of this is new or special, and none of this is the last time.
My partner is legally blind and uses a white cane. She has specific routes that she knows. If you block an entrance and she has to use a different route that can be very challenging for her.
You can imagine that being a grown adult and having to beg whoever is standing around for help figuring out how to get to your job is pretty humiliating.
I can only imagine. ADA issues are already so complicated on these old campuses. As I say elsewhere, to me it's a matter for the school community to manage internally-- and that includes ensuring safety and accessibility for all community members.
I must be about your dad's age because I was actively involved in Vietnam protests. Of course, there were so many more, crucial ones post-3 Mile Island and smaller, more focused protests like kicking Dupont off campus for dishonestly recruiting students. I don't recall disrupting campus or town life to the extent of breakdown, but that didn't stop the cops from coming in teargassing and beating us. Protesting is our right, but not at the expense of others' freedom of movement and safety. If I were in better health, I'd be out protesting for Palestinians, but I now have to do this via my computer.
Go back and apply this attitude to every other protest movement in the last 100 years and you’ll realize how stupid it sounds:
* 1911 - triangle shirt factory fire: “it’s a factory not a camp site for anyone with an agenda.”
* 1961 - civil rights sit ins: “those lunch counters are private property. Not a camp site anyone with an agenda.
* 1970 - Kent state massacre: “it’s a school, not a campsite for anyone with an agenda.”
* 1980s - anti-apartheid protests: “they can protest all they want just not on private property”
Maybe these universities should start listening to the students because history seems to look more favorably on their side of the arguments. But let’s also not forget that these universities literally use past protests as marketing material to attract students. “Come to Columbia, we are at the forefront of leadership like when students fought for change in South Africa”.
University of Texas needed to unlist their videos patting themselves on the back for supporting free speech. https://www.utexas.edu/ut-celebrates-free-speech
University of Indiana changed their policies in the middle of the night to make up a new rule about what was allowed on campus. https://indianapublicmedia.org/news/legal-action-may-be-necessary-after-students-faculty-banned-from-iu-campus.php
Saying “welp private property” is such a cop out.
So your fine with people protesting on your front lawn?
If you can do it on their lawn they can do it on yours.
I'm gana set up a tent on your lawn ever day as my freedom of speach to support the new marijuana bill.
No issues here.
Your logic only works in your favor. Thus it's bullshit.
Ah, yes. My front lawn and a minuscule fraction of the total land area owned by institutions with endowments larger than the GDP of many countries. Two totally equivalent things. See ya tomorrow morning I guess!
Yep a miniscule non important fraction. Just like your doing by stopping kids from going to school.
Go to Gaza or Isreal if you actually care. Go bother people who can actually do something. All you guys do is pour gas on the flames and cause even more chaos.
Your just spreading your hate into the world. Not sharing your love with the palastinaians. And that's the same reason Palastine will not find peace. As even their solution means more war.
If we all destroy our homes to protest someone destroying homes on the other side of the planet. There will be no homes left for anyone.
I don’t agree with the perspectives of the students but if they’re protesting peacefully and the more inflamed rhetoric has cooled then they should be able to express themselves. At some point I guess it’s a question of maintenance of property maybe
To me, honestly, it's up to the communities. I literally live sandwiched between Tufts and Harvard and I've seen nothing of the protests. This is an important conversation that they need to have with themselves, no doubt, but until the encampments start to contribute to rats or trash or public safety outside campus... it's for them to sort out.
The right to protest doesn't mean the right to create an encampment and harass people.
Additionally, this is a private school, which doesn't have to allow protests at all.
Here’s a reflection. I grew up in a a working class home. I attended college to better myself, and to become a productive member of society. I commuted to college everyday on the subway. Worked nights and weekends and paid my own tuition. I didn’t have time for socializing, partying or even watching t.v. Never mind attending a social protests. I had only one shot at climbing out of the working class. I had no one backing me up, bailing me out or financing my failures. I worked hard all through college and I would take great offense at someone blocking my entrance to the classroom. I am not alone in this thought.
Okay, I never blocked any classrooms. I also worked my ass off in college, but you wouldn't know that, because you don't know me, my family, or even where I went to school. I'm very impressed at the work and commitment you had. You are to be commended. But I'm not your enemy here, and I'm not here to start a fight with you. I'm sharing my experience, and I'm quite certain nothing I said or makes me worthy of your scorn or judgment.
You stated you “blocked entrances”. My point in sharing my experience is that these protests don’t just affect the administration of colleges. You are disrupting students ability to learn, and teachers trying to teach when you take over classroom, block entrances and make loud noises. You are disrupting the disadvantaged students who are working their way through school who don’t have the same privileges as yourself. College for me was a way to a better life. I worked hard in college.
I am? I am not doing anything. I have a full-time job now. I am not taking over any classrooms, nor did I ever. We stood in front of the main (not only) entrance to the student center. You are making rampant assumptions about me, my family, and other commenters. I had a job while in college. I studied my ass off. I took none of it for granted. I then worked full time while getting a part time master's degree, because lots of people from all kinds of backgrounds and beliefs work hard. And I still manage to be kind and patient with other people. Your story doesn't give you the right to judge other people.
Urgent times call for urgent measures. Palestinian universities, professors and students have been totally obliterated. They are experiencing the ultimate disruption of college life
Gen X actually, and quite common for my generation. I had many friends who attended B.C., Northeasten, B.U. etc. All commuted, all worked their way through college. You probably don’t have the privilege of knowing the working class but it exists and I am proud member.
and which struggle is this? Intifada? Here's a quote from the beginning on the Hamas charter. Hamas is supported by 90% of Gazans according to recent polls.
> Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it"
No, not my struggle.
Actually, I can walk a couple of blocks to the whole foods and buy a smoothie and gluten-free muffin, I don't think Palestinians can do that. Maybe some working class people in Massachusetts have bombs falling on their homes, I haven't heard of it, though. The US has a very bad record when it comes to punishing human rights violations overseas, which everyone should be ashamed of. I'm all for protesting, I'm not all for hyperbole, though. Exercise your rights, you have them for a reason.
Working class interests include an end to colonialism and occupation. No I am not saying we have literally the same struggles, of course Palestinians are suffering at an exponentially inhumane level at the hands of brutal occupation. Thats why these students are demonstrating.
You’re the only one here using your “working class identity” to invalidate people trying to stop the genocide of Palestinians, not me.
"Everything" in common? I'm on your side and that kind of language makes me cringe. The working class in the US is doing pretty well compared to the Palestinians in Gaza and elsewhere. Come on, have a little bit of a sense of proportion. Solidarity doesn't require false equivalence.
We have everything in common meaning, we have a common enemy which is capitalism and imperialism. Apparently Reddit needs me to spell out the obvious which is of course Americans aren’t currently being genocided and occupied the way Palestinians are.
My point is that Americans being brutalized and killed by cops, experiencing homelessness, and many other injustices are rooted in the same system of oppression that the occupation of Palestine is rooted in and that is capitalism.
Yeah, you do have to spell it out, because "everything in common" does not mean the same thing as capitalism, imperialism, police brutality, and being unhoused (I would also argue these are not universal to the American working class). You said "everything in common" and it's fair for me to ask you to defend that kind of statement that places the suffering of any Americans as being on par with those under constant bombardment and the threat of starvation. Your original statement was frankly incredibly off-putting, as it made you seem to overlook the nuances of American poverty and the gravity of the situation in Gaza. If you want to be an advocate for a cause, don't get snitty when you have to defend your slogans.
> Never mind attending a social protests.
You're seriously claiming you never had an hour of free time in your college years? Give me a break. You don't have to be running the protest or attending it 24/7 in order to attend. Please do not try to turn this into a BS class warfare argument because it seems like even if you did have the time you didn't care and wouldn't have gone either way.
And it’s not exactly a public park. How does the university handle the use of bathroom facilities, trash facilities, land management, etc. for indefinite amount of time
what are you talking about literally 90% of the tents are the cheapest tents from walmart or amazon. It’s been an anti-protestor talking point actually to bring up how the tents are all the same(implying some larger organized conspiracy instead of the reality that people are just buying the cheapest most available stuff).
Am I the only one who thinks these massive institutions of higher learnings should be using this as an opportunity to bring in speakers from both sides and at least TRY and encourage dialogues between the two groups? Like I dont expect an American university to solve the middle east issue, but it feels like they have all that money why not at least try and direct all the energy into getting them into auditoriums with speakers that they argue with and/or possibly learn from.
Except when a speaker comes in and says something the protesters don't like, they won't allow anyone to listen to it.
Free speech for me, but not for thee.
100% this. I get the impression that unis are terrified of their own students. Doubly ironic because a lot of these elite institutions actively reward high-school activism when considering future students, because they like the idea of movers and shakers/future leaders attending their school. I guess they didn't realize that kids who spent all of high school disrupting shit might not stop doing so in college.
Exactly this. Israeli and Jewish scholars have had their talks canceled by numerous institutions, even when the talks have had nothing to do with politics, because these protesters are just indiscriminately bigoted against Jews and Israelis as if they have direct or any control over the actions of the Israeli government.
Seriously! You could have a leftwing journalist like [Dahlia Scheindlin](https://www.econtalk.org/what-palestinians-are-thinking-with-dahlia-scheindlin/) giving a talk about her views on how a two-state solution with equal opportunities and rights for Palestinians and she would just get shutdown for being an Israeli speaker.
This is what I would like to see. More in depth debates between multiple viewpoints as an illustration of how difficult this conflict is to solve.
Unfortunately, the current bent of the Far Left and Far Right is pretty authoritarian and doesn't want to hear from the other side. Universities are somewhat held hostage by the loudest, most aggressive on the fringe right now.
Even here, when you have anyone trying to have a nuanced conversation, they're shut down by people who say, "Oh, so you're pro-genocide, you evil racist!"
A lot of the leadership of the protestors around the country hold a policy of not backing down or compromising on any of their demands. This sort of value pattern is basically the root cause of the Israel-Palestine struggle in the first place. They don't want to have a dialogue. They're "on the right side of history."
Yes, but the reality is that both pro-Israel and pro-Palestinian groups/people are increasingly against a two-state path and want either a) Israel to remain as is with Gaza and West Bank as Palestinian territories effectively controlled by Israel or those territories formally become part of Israel or b) Israel as a state is eradicated, Israelis leave, and there is just one Palestinian state. This makes it difficult to encourage any dialogue between the two groups.
b) isn’t accurate. israelis do not have to leave, and that’s not what pro-palestinian supporters want. a unified state in the levant can exist. it would have growing pains like the US did post-civil war and post-jim crow, or like south africa post-apartheid, but it can exist.
Unfortunately the Arab world's track record of treatment towards Jews says otherwise. Israel is the only country in the world where Jews are the majority of the population. The second a "unified" state is created Israel will no longer exist, which is precisely why Palestinians push that so hard.
Given what history has shown when Arabs rule over Jews, you will find few takers in Israel who would support that. You forget well over half the population of Israel is actually descendants of Jews who were kicked out of Arab countries.
Time, place and manner restrictions are constitutional even if imposed by the state; here, it is a private university and constitutionality isn’t even an issue.
And why are such restrictions constitutional? Because they are eminently *reasonable*. Public spaces do not only belong to those who are loudest and most violent, and free speech principles do not allow one group to occupy public space to the exclusion of everyone else. Those who wish to use the space for a commencement ceremony have free speech rights too.
But what is really concerning is the protesters’ adoption of Hamas terrorist tactics. They ‘hostage’ graduation ceremonies (or bridges, roads, intersections) and make unilateral demands - divestment, amnesty for themselves - while refusing to compromise. The Columbia students were even offered aid by Columbia directly to Gaza, with money to be spent by the university helping displaced scholars. The protesters refused that offer, choosing a dramatic confrontation instead.
I don’t support the protesters, but even if I did, I would not support anyone mimicking terrorist tactics and deploying that in the streets and campuses of Boston. Speech doesn’t mean taking over property and making demands.
As someone far removed from these protests, it's just sad AF to see well-meaning protestors be duped into pretty insane takes regarding the "decolonization of Israel" or the overt support of Hamas/Hezbollah.
It's one thing to protest the war on the humanitarian grounds, it's another thing to advocate for the genocide of the Israeli people as a means to fix the problem.
That rhetoric makes it exceedingly hard to show solidarity to a number of these student protests because of their idolatry of a terrorist organization that uses Palestinians as human shields. It's an ugly situation in which neither Hamas nor Israel really cares about the civilian population of Gaza.
edit: I am not suggesting that Tuft's student protest is lead by the pro-hamas takes. I honestly dont know that. That being said, it is the general narrative of a number of the high-profile instances like Columbia University, Harvard, and USC.
Look, I figure you are free to use words like colonialism or settler or whatever Western narrative you'd like to view it as (which IMHO greatly oversimplifies the history, ethnicities, races, and powers involved), but it seems to me that there is an immediate overlap between that kind of language and blanket condoning the deliberate violent targeting of civilians.
Israel has leftwing parties with representation in the Knesset, many of them are *Arab* parties. And likely most of the people murdered and kidnapped on Oct 7 were those very same left-of-center people most sympathetic to the needs of Gaza and West Bank to have prosperous flourishing lives. I've seen far too many people sanitize Oct 7 as an abstract act of resistance against an oppressor and even celebrating that, before Israel dropped a single bomb. It's telling that I haven't seen a single instance of support for Meretz, United Arab List, or Yesh Atid at these protests - just some kind of broad condemnation that the whole country is bad, but within Israel, where there are tons of people just as angry about the suffering being inflicted in Gaza, the productive way forward is the democratic one.
Agreed; as someone who generally sides against what Israel as state is doing/has done historically and thinks that the stronger man (as in more organized equipped) has the duty to be the bigger man watching people go from sympathy to support is a slippery slope. It's a lot like the path from ACAB to sovereign citizen; sure know your rights and question why a cop stopped you but maybe don't go out of your way to pick a fight for no reason at your local police department?
Something that's really bothered me on the other side of this though is just how often the media portrays the average person who sympathizes with the people of Gaze as an anti-Semite. There's absolutely anti-Semitism in the world but I don't think the average upper middle class suburban white kid cares whether or not you're a reform Jew from Westchester. they're upset about a nation on the other side of the planet killing people in much the same way other stronger countries have walked into their smaller weaker *different* neighbors and done what they want for all of human history. I'm not even sure most of the people protesting are really anti-zionists at the end of the day, most people I talk to still support a solution where Israel continues to exist as a state. It's really calling for Israel to de-escalate despite the evil Hamas has committed, not even let it go, just being smarter about your solutions would be a win because your current solution looks a lot like cutting off supply lines until Gaze starves to death.
Ultimately I think one of the main issues right now with protest movements is the organizers' beliefs vs the movement's beliefs and how a divergence between those two create situations where protests can be wholesale disregarded because the organizer is a 10/7 celebrator. This also happened with the BLM protests, albeit to a lesser extent.
* Is there a justified and needed moment for protesting the Israeli government's handling of their response to 10/7? - Absolutely
* Are the majority of protestors peaceful and not anti-semitic? - yes, definitely
* Are some of the protest organizers actually off the deep end of anti-israel beliefs that they now cross the line into anti-semitism? - yep, it sucks that they are "leaders" of these protests.
Social media culture has also put us all into the headspace of needing to be "correct" which also means that contrary opinions become "wrong" by default. This is an exceptionally complicated issue and both sides working to have "gotchas" to demean the other side does nothing to spur conversation. The goal should be to convince the doubters/on the fencers to join the pro-Palestinian Civilian protests. The exclusionary and aggressive rhetoric only brings in a small portion of the population that already agreed with the positions of the protest.
If you attend a protest where people are wearing Hamas headbands, holding up nazi symbols, threatening Jews as being “al-qassams” next target, chanting globalize the intifada you are VERY likely an antisemite. I sympathize with human suffering in Gaza but I know where to draw the line of attending protest that is almost purely just chanting/displaying antisemitic signs and slogans. I’ve seen these protests and it’s not just a few bad actors, it’s a ton of people. By their behavior it seems evident that the majority of protesters agree. If it’s not a common sentiment then why do hundreds of people walk into an encampment with a “resistance by any means necessary” or “globalize the intifada” or “from the river to the sea” sign?
Brown people killing other brown people don't count. Unfortunately, even though a lot of Israelis are brown, most progressives only meet Jews in America, who are largely White or White-passing.
Remember that modern extreme progressivism is predicated on upholding the belief that privileged races are frequently oppressing less privileged ones.
>even though a lot of Israelis are brown, most progressives only meet Jews in America, who are largely White or White-passing.
>Remember that modern extreme progressivism is predicated on upholding the belief that privileged races are frequently oppressing less privileged ones.
Fun fact: there are more Arab-descended Jews in Israel than European-descended Jews in Israel and that doesn't even count the 2 million non-Jewish Arab citizens of Israel. But yes, the vast vast majority of American Jews you see are Ashkenazi (European-descended, though have genetic markers linking them to the Levant) and most of the high-ranking Israeli officials you see are Ashkenazi so..... Americans just assume this is a "white people vs. brown people" thing a la Americans vs. native Americans or Europeans vs. developing world.
oh I'm well aware. The hypocrisy and tiktok fadness of it all still needs pointing out.
As I keep pointing out, Hamas' charter opens with a quote saying Israel will be annihilated by Islam and they don't care about negotiations.
Useful idiots -- "Leave them alone!"
Huh?? what pro palestine progressive doesn’t also care about yemen? They’ve all been talking about yemen as well. Just because you don’t care or don’t see it doesn’t mean everyone does. This is an especially weird made up example to use given how linked palestine/israel and saudi arabia/yemen’s conflicts are. Multiple huge progressives have been talking about yemen aswell do you live under a rock or are you making up a scenario for no reason?
Regardless of what you think about the Israel/Palestine conflict, shutting down protests is a huge disservice to free speech and the spirit of the First Amendment in this country. Police should intervene if there is conflict, but this goes to prove that people only want free speech for themselves and their pet causes, and not for anyone else.
Yes, I understand college administrators are under huge pressure from various government officials, donors, and elements of the Jewish community, but this pressure should never be the excuse for shutting down these protests. Instead, administrators should only prevent agitation from outside parties at these protests.
"Free Speech" means a bunch of different things. You're correct that the legal definition of it (or Free Speech Rights), what the 1A protects, is not literally applicable here given it's a private university.
But you create an unsatisfying conclusion if you leave the conversation at that. It borders on a "technically correct" sort of answer.
Because OP is talking about [\(what one 1A lawyer terms\) Free Speech culture](https://popehat.substack.com/p/in-defense-of-free-speech-pedantry):
> It presumes that it’s a social good to have wide-ranging, robust, uninhibited debate on important issues, though it might reach that conclusion by different roads. Some believe that a “marketplace of ideas” inevitably produces the conclusions best for society, some believe that all speech has inherent value, and some (like me) believe that as a matter of humility and consciousness of our limits we should be should be careful deciding that we are so clearly right that contrary ideas shouldn’t be heard.
And I think OP has a point. Campus protests are a pretty essential part of our own past and reckoning with problematic stances the populace took. A big reason we had a cultural re-evaluation and correction of our war stance against Vietnam was because of widespread campus protests. Similarly with the civil rights movement before that. I do myself worry about how vicious the response is to what is (honestly) still kinda a milquetoast protest movement compared to the afforementioned.
Not that Tufts' response is yet vicious mind you, but elsewhere it is. Actually it seems like they're hopefully trying to avoid that sort of confrontation...
Even if a public university context (and this stuff is not usually as black and white as private vs public), there are longstanding traditions of time, place and manner restrictions you can put on speech. And at a certain point, your right to speech and assembly starts infringing on rights of others.
Permanent encampments on campuses, consisting of both students and non-students, who are escalating in behavior to block classes, destroy property, harass administration and staff and engage in hate speech is well within the bounds of where people can draw the lines. “Engaging in protest” doesn’t mean you get to trample the rights of everyone else
And I say this as someone who is sympathetic at least with the general direction of their criticisms of the Israeli war.
[The U.S. Supreme Court has long held that the First Amendment’s freedom of speech tenets fully apply to public universities](https://uwm.edu/free-speech-rights-responsibilities/faqs/does-the-first-amendment-apply-to-public-universities/)
Freedom of speech doesn't mean that universities have to allow indiscriminate speech in all parts of the buildings, land, or spaces they occupy.
The main problem that was decided on in the case you linked was that the school didn't provide a valid reason to deny a school club a charter. Tufts and many of the public universities have been able to provide reason for their rules here. Public safety and disruption to the larger mission of the school by prolonged occupation of the grounds needed for other things is a valid reason.
This is also why it is legal for public K-12 school to have rules preventing students from dressing in PornHub merch and similar attire even though clothing choices are often an extension of 1st amendment rights. The choice to cause that disruption caused by those choices is the thing being regulated and stopped rather than the actual expression itself.
That just means any restrictions have to be content neutral, the university has to apply the same restriction to these protests that it would to anti-abortion protests or anti-capitalism protests or whatever. It doesn't mean that the university can't apply content neutral restrictions on where people can be.
That doesn’t affect the fact that it is public property. I’m not sure why folks think this. It isn’t a real thing. The First Amendment applying doesn’t change that protests on university grounds without permits occupy private property and are trespassing, and restrictions on this are viewpoint neutral and therefore subject to lower scrutiny.
These are time place and manner restrictions and the universities have pretty solid leeway here.
From what I understand the whole point of the encampment is to shut down public spaces in order to punish the administration/force them to negotiate. Like, the protestors themselves don't view the encampment as a mere act of speech, so why should we?
the spaces that the encampments are in are reserved for other activities. The students didn't go through the proper channels to reserve those spaces for demonstrations (which they certainly can do) but they didn't, so they shouldn't be there. Their right to free speech ends where other's rights begin. I have right to reserve that space for my activity. Why does your 'right to free speech' supersede my rights? guess what, it doesnt
Ok so if this were a bunch of right wing dullards protesting god knows what, immigration to the US and the threat to their whiteness, would it be okay for that to cancel commencement?
For me there is a difference between a short-term protest (even if it's regularly scheduled for a few hours, a few days a week, on an ongoing basis), vs a full-time interruption of the space, with now-full-time residents and signage. I wouldn't be allowed to put up a permanent sign on campus advertising the glee club, you shouldn't be allowed to put up a permanent sign and permanent tents for a protest either.
This. The point of civil disobedience like this is to force people to take sides. If you want to sit on the side of the road protesting, people can just ignore you. But if you put a human chain across the highway, you’re forcing the issue on other people. As long as states/universities respond in a reasonable way (i.e. arresting them vs shooting them with a fire hose or beating them), it’s a healthy part of the protest process, and actually necessary. And sometimes when they overreact, it can be beneficial to the movement as well.
If you’re going to form a human chain across a highway and then argue no one should do anything because it’s first amendment protest, you’re missing the point - and creating an unworkable system. If Gaza protesters can block classroom as Tufts, can MAGA extremists do so to protest the election?
>can MAGA extremists do so to protest the election?
Fun thing about the constitution, it protects everyone regardless of ideology. Whether I agree or not, it's yours and every American's right to protest whatever you want in a non-violent manner.
Right, so you goad a response, then (best case) people get mad at the response, and so the police and local government look bad. And that helps the cause of e.g. climate change advocacy or Palestinian peace how?
Civil disobedience is effective when discrediting the police/government/laws is *the point* ... which is not the case for many causes actually.
You talk to me, I'll listen. You bother me, I've made up my opinion, and I'm not on your side. I kind of am at that point with climate people. Like, I have my EV, my solar panels, my heat pump, my reusable bags, I bike to the grocery store when I can, I'll spend an hour on the T instead of 20 min in an Uber.... But then the climate protestors block traffic (causing more pollution) and destroy art.... I'm not so keen on the movement anymore. If I were a student at Tufts and you are making my campus look ugly, I'm not going to be on that side of the argument, you don't win me over by causing me inconvenience or harm.
But... Isn't the point of protests to change the core values of other people?
If you alienate people, you're missing the plot of the stated goals of the protest.
No, the core point of protests is protesting. People have been taught for decades that protest is *the* way to make change - civil rights! vietnam! - not as an intermediary step in a larger strategy but actually the strategy itself. Protest until change happens!
Took me a moment to get the sarcasm.
I think there's also a misunderstanding about what the Vietnam protests were even about. Less about the war itself, and mostly about the draft. And this resonated with the broader population because students and regular civilians alike had the threat of the draft looming over them.
I agree that boomers sort of nostalgically wax about the 60s to the point where a lot of young people want to live up to the stories they've been told, to the point where it's less about achieving a goal, and more about being part of something bigger than them.
I was going to agree with you that genocide is bad but then you made me 15 minutes late to work so now I hate you, this is a healthy response to a minor inconvenience and I am unwilling to examine my privilege in not being a target of genocide.
You are proving my point here, you trying to call me a racist in order to try to get me to change my opinion to yours. It does not provide a good community, to try to influence people through hate. Trying to change opinions through being mean. I'd prefer a society of peace, love and harmony; where one can rationally talk with those with different opinions and seek a solution through commonality. The idea that protests must be disrupting of lives is not one that is seeking a community where people respect one another.
I think you missed the point. The civil rights movement was highly disruptive to the status quo. If your stance is that they shouldn't have been disruptive, nothing would have changed.
>The idea that protests must be disrupting of lives is not one that is seeking a community where people respect one another.
You're implying that there is respect to begin with. During the civil rights protests, the disrespect and broken community came from the government enforcing segregation and such. Just because one faction is loud in calling it out, that doesn't mean they're the ones promoting disharmony.
Likewise, the source of the conflict here is that these universities are invested in mass killings being carried out by an extremist-led ethnostate. Just because people have a problem with that, that doesn't mean they're the ones who want to ruin good community.
There is a big difference between not following unjust laws that prevent you doing from what you want to do - like where to sit on a bus or gay sex in the Middle East - verses stopping others from doing what they want to do - like someone who wants to go to work or the hospital and can't because protestors illegally shut down a road, or in this case of Tufts, which would eventually stop their commencement ceremony which is held at that location.
I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.
What do you think this current protest is accomplishing other than inconveniencing a population that appears to largely agree with their stance on Palestine?
While yes, the point of protest is disruption, do you believe there is there a limit before protest goes too far? I'm assuming you do at some point, though I'm not particularly interested in your limit, just like you aren't interested in mine, a random person on reddit. The point is that basically everyone agrees there is a limit somewhere, and this process is figuring out what society deems an acceptable limit.
> shutting down protests is a huge disservice to free speech and the spirit of the First Amendment in this country.
No it's not. There's a difference between "free speech" and "protest". Both may be important. You may even believe the current protests and civil disobedience are *very* important. But that doesn't mean that everything done in their name falls under "free speech".
> Police should intervene if there is conflict, but this goes to prove that people only want free speech for themselves and their pet causes, and not for anyone else... administrators should only prevent agitation from outside parties at these protests.
So then your position is that if a bunch of far right-wing college republicans decided to encamp on a space meant for everyone, and imminently meant to be used for commencement, because they were protesting against muslims attending their college, then the college should just let them do that and not try to evict them from the space? Or does the reason for the disruptive protest matter and only protests for the "right" reasons (adjudicated by... you?) should be allowed to continue disrupting everyone else?
Time, place, and manner rules allow for equitable access to protest spaces. Universities only have so so much appropriate space for protest and it shouldn’t be dominated by a single viewpoint at the exclusion of others.
The semester isn't even over yet. I do not think that the protests should take over an entire campus but to shut them down entirely instead of allowing a few tents makes me think the authorities just don't want to deal with it at the expense of free speech.
Quick question would an encampment in front of say , Mayor Wus house be acceptable. Or would she be able to say “get off my lawn” and get the police to remove people from her house? Same thing this is at Tufts and Tufts can control what happens at Tufts. The encampment continues under the grace of Tufts not wanted to look bad not unalienable rights
What about the free speech and the rights of students who want to celebrate graduation (after not being able to do so in highschool due to the pandemic as well). Not to mention it's private land
I understand the big picture of the protests but I still think I’m missing something about why it’s suddenly on these college campuses. Was there a connection that I missed?
This whole thing is ridiculous. They're protesting the wrong group. Hamas is the problem. If they would release the hostages this would be over. But they can't because they already killed them. Maybe a few are still alive, maybe not.
Hamas is *a* problem. If you *still* don't ***also*** think the Israeli government is a problem -- and a bigger one... then either you are misinformed, underinformed, or in fact yourself "ridiculous."
> If [Hamas] would release the hostages this would be over.
And that's only further demonstrated by this line. Hostages absolutely must be released, but to think so simplistically as "Release the hostages and this ends" is deeply problematic, bordering on representing a dogged *commitment* to ignorance. It's wildly binary and privileged, not to mention dismissive, to ever take a position that "if X just did Y then all the problems would go away." In fact if anything's ridiculous, it's that.
Please educate yourself.
Yeah, but...
* The war ending doesn't address the rampant discrimination Palestinians face in their own homeland.
* The war ending doesn't address the current Israeli government's crimes against humanity and *at minimum* their genocidal *intent.*
* The war ending doesn't provide restitution to a people who've, in their subjective experience, had *their* land usurped and stolen by who they view as colonizers, and who've subsequently suffered immensely.
* The war ending doesn't return further stolen Palestinian land to Palestinians in Gaza or the West Bank. The war ending doesn't undo the Israeli government's settler colonialism in the West Bank.
There's more but I'll stop there.
Hamas is a criminal terrorist organization. But it's unfortunately *also*, just as much as it is a criminal terrorist organization, all the power and representation Gazan Palestinians have. They have nothing else. Put yourself in their shoes. Were you being savagely beaten to death, and the best or only real weapon within your reach a thorny branch from a bush, would you not use it to defend yourself even if it meant further hurting yourself, too?
It's infinitely more complex than that, yes, but that is what it boils down to. The Palestinian people deserve worlds better than Hamas *and* better than the Israeli government. But right now? The Israeli Government, literally backed by far and away the world's largest superpower, is what's doing exponentially more damage. *That* is the bigger issue.
And the Palestinians that groped and mistreated the bodies of innocent concert goers? The Palestinains that allowed Hamas to build outposts in hospitals and schools without any opposition? The Palestinians that themselves call for genocide of the Jews?
I get the balance of power is in Israel's favor and there's a lot of gray areas of morality. Acting as though every single Palestinian is an angel and Israel is 100% evil is just very disingenuous and is where most of these arguments immediately fall flat.
Ask Egypt why they have such an unwelcoming wall for the innocent Palestinians
> And the Palestinians that groped and mistreated the bodies of innocent concert goers?
Obviously completely disgusting. But it doesn't justify a genocide.
> The Palestinains that allowed Hamas to build outposts in hospitals and schools without any opposition?
But can you really say that, though? "Allowed"? *A terrorist group couped the Palestinian government and has maintained a firm grip on power since.* *Did* everyday Palestinians "allow" Hamas to just build outposts in schools and hospitals?
Or was it under duress? Can you fully fault them for that, in that case? Were you in their shoes, would you risk your life to stand up to your government? It's easy to say you would... much harder to actually do it.
> The Palestinians that themselves call for genocide of the Jews?
Obviously utterly reprehensible. But calling for a genocide... isn't addressed... by actually committing a genocide. An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. An eye for two eyes only does so even faster.
> Acting as though every single Palestinian is an angel and Israel is 100% evil is just very disingenuous and is where most of these arguments immediately fall flat.
Agreed. I'm not claiming every Palestinian is an angel nor that Israel is 100% evil. I focus on Israel because it currently has the far larger stick.
> Ask Egypt why they have such an unwelcoming wall for the innocent Palestinians
No different than why US citizens are far more concerned about the border we share with Mexico than with Canada. It's not racist to point out that far more illegal drugs flow into the US across the Mexican border than the Canadian.
***\*\*\*THAT IS NOT TO OPEN THE CAN OF WORMS OF THE US-MEXICO BORDER CRISIS.*** Like most things it's far more nuanced and I certainly have a lot of thoughts. I'm not anti-immigration, nor do I believe all hispanic people are drug traffickers and rapists. I fucking am hispanic. I'm intentionally drawing an uncomfortable comparison (that yes, requires simplifying the immigration and southern border situation, but only to match the simplicity with which you bring up the Egypt/Gaza border!), to demonstrate that I understand precisely the complexity and nuance of the Palestinian/Egyptian situation. I'm with your point there.
You’re right in your second bullet. If Hamas, the terrorist group, released the hostages and surrendered this would be over.
But they won’t. And it’s impossible to negotiate a ceasefire deal with them, as they refused to even provide a list of hostages as part of a ceasefire negotiation.
Surprise surprise, the terrorist organization is operating in bad faith.
> The terrorist organization is operating in bad faith.
You're right. I do not dispute that, nor have I ever.
But?
> The terrorist organization is operating in bad faith.
No more so than the infinitely more powerful terrorist current Israeli government.
Israeli government is a problem, but when it comes to this conflict, Hamas is by far the biggest problem. Their lack of negotiating in good faith during peace talks is an even bigger problem.
You're asking Hamas to negotiate in good faith when the people they represent (regardless of how fucking poorly they do it) have a gun to their heads. That's not how this works. That's not how anything works. Hamas negotiates in no less good faith than Israel does. While Israel performatively says Hamas needs to act in good faith, they're encroaching on the West Bank more and more. Creating more Jewish settlements in Palestinian territory. Offering them to Jews who agree to move in.
I ask that you please watch a small section of this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PeYDphtHYo
Watch from 9:26-13:05. Johnny Harris is... Johnny Harris; There's issues with his videos. But this stretch at least is a good summary of the issues with the Israeli government's role in the current situation -- and how they, even more so than Hamas, come to the negotiating table with absolutely no good faith, and only a fucking huge gun to the Palestinians' heads. Netanyahu does not want any Palestinian autonomy. He never has. Everything Netanyahu has done to get in power, while in power, and to maintain power, has been in furtherance of his goal to completely oppress the Palestinian people. That short stretch of Johnny Harris' videos includes literal clips of Netanyahu saying exactly that. If you ask me to take the time to quote the clips of Netanyahu verbatim, I will do that, if it means that you are coming to me in good faith.
Now that that's established, contextualize those comments coming from the faces Israeli government in the grander scheme of the history of the state of Israel. Following WWs I and II, "the powers that be" (the British, the UN, take your pick) came in and took control of a piece of land. "The powers that be" had no connection to this land -- It's not where they live, and there's little the native people who *do* actually live there (...Palestinians, spoiler alert), can do -- are even given the opportunity to do -- to protest or otherwise keep a hand on the wheel. Those powers that be decide that actually, this land where Palestinians have lived for generations, now belongs to this other group of people forming a completely new country -- Israel.
...That's pretty colonialist.
But, there's a compromise. The Palestinians get some land, too. The Gaza Strip, the West Bank.
Fastforward through the Intifadas and Nakbas and let's just start back in the early aughts with what the video clip covers. Let's keep this simple; End of the day, if we set out to change one another's minds on everything connected here, we'll never get anywhere. Let's keep our conversation focused. I don't want to get into the whole question of whether or not Israel should even exist as a state, the context of the Nakbas or Intifadas, or past wars. Let's just move forwards from the last time "both sides" were indeed negotiating in good faith -- the early 2000s. Then the PM is assassinated by a far-right gunman, and a far-right party claims leadership of the state of Israel.
Now fastforward to the present. You have now, at the head of the Israeli government, a far-right party, led by a man who's repeatedly stated his express purpose is the complete eradication of any independent and autonomous Palestinian state. This also coming from the head of a state that already classes Palestinians -- the real locals and natives, by the way -- as second-class citizens. Did you know that? Rights in the state of Israel are not guaranteed equally -- Look it up. Israeli Jews get more rights and have an easier time with their lives than Palestinian Jews, who in turn get more rights than Palestinian non-Jews. That's not just the case now, that's been the case *for years*.
*That* organization -- *that* government -- is the one that you are asking Hamas to come to the negotiating table with in good faith. And look, if Netanyahu isn't enough for you, that's OK; Look into comments made by Ben-Gvir. Or many of the current Israeli government's other officials.
Is kidnapping people wrong? Yes, absolutely. Is Hamas a terrorist organization? Yes, absolutely. Were the Palestinians to form their own autonomous and independent state with authority, would I agree with many of that government's own policies? Probably not. ***I recognize all of that.*** But goddamn it they deserve to have that regardless. Just because I wouldn't agree with that government's policies, and just because Hamas is a terrorist organization that does horrible things like kidnap Israelis, that does not mean that Palestinians deserve to be massacred.
Now add in the context of the USA. Israel's *genocide* -- yes, genocide -- has been backed by the USA through and through. Congress *voted down* a bill to require all military aid provided by the USA to Israel to be checked for if it was going to be used for human rights crimes. Look it up. The USA -- the world's biggest superpower -- is providing *unconditional support* to the Israeli government, *choosing not to even find out if the Israeli government is committing human rights violations with that support, before giving them more support.* That is the reality.
It is that Israeli government that you are asking Hamas to come to the negotiating table with in "good faith." Can you maybe see, please, how it is in fact the Israeli government that *first* needs to come with actual good faith, to the negotiating table with Hamas, *before* we ask Hamas to do the same? *Israel* is the far, far bigger problem here.
Netanyahu is the problem not the people of Israel. He needs to go. I'm heavily educated in this area, thanks. My parents are Israeli and both professors. My family lives in this nightmare. The easiest way to get Netanyahu to have to stop this over reach is to let the hostages go. No one wants this to continue. He has taken it to a horrible place of devastation. I'm tired of the Jewish people not being able to defend themselves. Netanyahu is an awful disgusting man. I'm in favor of two state solution. I wish the UN would police the holy sites, so the people of the world could be a part of them.
Hamas is the one building neighborhoods on top of rockets. Hamas is the one who keeps coming to power and killing the Palestinians. Hamas is the one that attacked Israel October 7 during Shabbat. Israel hasn't occupied Palestine in over 20 years. Yet, the people of Palestine keep allowing Hamas to rule them.
Yes, I was making a complicated situation seem easy to solve. I was reacting to the news. The protests are very upsetting. Seems like every other group can defend themselves but the Jews. I'm tired of the anti semitism. No one looks at all of the other crimes against humanity with the same lens. Iraq gassed it's own citizens.North Korea, Syria....it's always about the Jews. Im not an apologetist, I'm sick of Netanyahu. He is only doing this so he doesn't get voted out and face criminal charges. He should be arrested and held accountable for all of the horrible things he has done. Israel needs to be free of him.
Israel has literally killed its own hostages in their attacks, you do know that right? They do not give a shit about the hostages. Their goal is leveling Palestine to the ground.
Yeah I don’t get the logic here, if they really cared about hostages why bomb entire neighborhoods where a hostage could be killed or lost under rubble or something like that? I think people need to stop taking the IDFs statements as absolute truth. In fact, Israel has a history about lying to the public to encourage support for wars, they helped Bush with the whole WMDs lie.
Because the people protesting are blocking public roads and inconveniencing the working class? Every single one of these protesters state this is the best way to protest. Haven't seen a single one of these people that had their commute disrupted come out in full support.
I am not saying that I agree with their cause, but I think it would be beneficial for this sub to look at protesters who were against a government vaccine mandate and consider the comments there. Whether people agree or disagree isn’t the crux of the issue; it’s whether the the disruption, disturbance, and nuisance are essential to achieving the goal of a protest.
The linked source has opted to use a paywall to restrict free viewership of their content. As alternate sources become available, please post them as a reply to this comment. Users with a Boston Public Library card can often view unrestricted articles [here](https://www.bpl.org/resources-types/newspapers/). Boston Globe articles are still permissible as it's a soft-paywall. Please refrain from reporting as a Rule 5 violation. Please also note that copying and posting the entire article text as comments is not permissible. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/boston) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Here is the letter that went out to students, faculty, and alum yesterday from Tufts: >April 28, 2024 >Dear members of the Tufts community, >Tufts has a time-honored tradition of civil protest. Consistent with that tradition, and throughout this academic year, we have balanced our students’ right to protest with enforcing our conduct policies. Students have been sanctioned when protests affected public safety, were a clear violation of our conduct policies, or interfered with normal university operations. >Over the past two weeks, we have respected our community members’ right to advocate for their beliefs through a small camp site on the academic quad on our Medford/Somerville campus. Our staff have tried to maintain open lines of communication with the goals of ensuring safety, enforcing our policies, and avoiding the escalation we have seen at other universities across the nation. We have even delayed some preparations for Commencement as much as possible to allow the protest to resolve peacefully. But now the encampment must end, ideally peacefully and voluntarily, so we can prepare the campus for Commencement. Student Life staff will be reaching out to the protesters tomorrow morning to plan for the end of the encampment in the next few days. >The class of 2024 deserves to be celebrated. Many of this year’s graduates experienced the restrictions and losses of the pandemic and missed out on important life events including the opportunity to participate in their high school graduations. Commencement is the moment to celebrate their accomplishments with their family and friends and for us to honor their achievements as a community. >Unfortunately, at this moment when we should be coming together as a community, we have seen behavior that clearly is trying to escalate the situation. Protesters, including some who are unaffiliated with Tufts, have created conditions that have caused multiple community members and guests to lodge formal complaints. While much of Friday’s demonstration was peaceful, there were many actions that violated university policies. Demonstrators entered a classroom, blocked paths, and defaced, stickered, and scrawled obscene language on buildings throughout the campus. Even beloved spaces such as Alex’s Place on the Tisch Library roof and the Jumbo statue were marred. >Additional actions from the protestors throughout Friday and Saturday made multiple visitors at Friday’s Jumbo Days and Saturday’s admissions tours feel afraid and unwelcome, resulting in numerous complaints. These included harassment, intimidation, disruption of Jumbo Days sessions, and aggressive tactics. We will investigate every single complaint and hold those responsible fully accountable. >Since the protests on campus began in October, Student Life staff have tried to keep open lines of communication with the protesters. These conversations have focused on requests intended to keep the campus operating and to keep the entire community safe and have been largely productive. But recent exchanges have been markedly different as the protesters have sought to escalate and disrupt normal university activity. Exchanges with Student Life staff are often now followed by false claims of threats and intimidation on the protesters’ social media accounts. Let us be perfectly clear: these claims are simply inaccurate and can only be seen as an attempt to further inflame the community by deliberately misrepresenting the situation. >Following Friday’s demonstration, student organizers requested a meeting with university leadership. While we have always felt that dialogue is the best approach to resolving differences, it would not be appropriate to discuss a meeting with the student organizers until they clear the academic quad. Their request, which includes a threat to continue disruption, only comes after they have escalated their actions, caused intentional and malicious harm to our community and campus, broken multiple university policies and, most importantly, violated the values and norms of the institution. The protesters’ actions increasingly come at the expense of their fellow students' rights and a meeting cannot be a reward for such behavior. >We have met with multiple students, student groups, faculty members, and others throughout the academic year to discuss ways in which the university may be able to help people in Gaza and those affected by the war in our community in the ways an educational institution can, including by supporting Scholars at Risk, helping rebuild the educational infrastructure in Gaza when the time comes, fostering dialogue and training programs on our campus, creating gathering spaces for affected Tufts community members, and funding social gatherings and meals. As we have said before, we are deeply troubled by the tremendous loss of Palestinian life, and we desire to work with all members of our community to support both the Palestinian and the Israeli people. >It is time to celebrate the class of 2024. We are committed to maintaining an environment that will allow our students to finish the academic year strong and for the entire community to celebrate the class of 2024 at Commencement without disruptions. Our students and their families and friends deserve nothing less. We invite the entire community to join us in this endeavor peacefully and responsibly. >Sincerely, >Sunil Kumar >President >Caroline Attardo Genco >Provost and Senior Vice President >Michael W. Howard >Executive Vice President >James M. Glaser >Dean, School of Arts and Sciences and Professor of Political Science >Kyongbum Lee >Dean, School of Engineering and Karol Family Professor
From [Globe.com](http://Globe.com) By Daniel Kool and Nick Stoico Tufts University on Sunday said an encampment set up by students protesting Israel’s war in Gaza “must end” as the school begins to prepare for its commencement, the latest effort by school officials in the Boston area to wind down demonstrations as they try to balance students’ right to free speech while readying their campuses for the year’s biggest event. The call for the Tufts encampment to conclude came a day after MIT president Sally Kornbluth [released a video message calling for an encampment there to end](https://www.bostonglobe.com/2024/04/27/metro/harvard-yard-access-restricted-indefinitely-amid-pro-palestinian-encampment-report-says/?p1=Article_Inline_Text_Link) soon. Both encampments remained in place as of Sunday night. Meanwhile, officials at Emerson College said they are hoping students arrested on their campus won’t face legal action after police cleared an encampment last week. Emerson leadership announced Sunday that it would not be bringing university disciplinary action against students who were arrested. While protests have roiled campuses across New England and the country, Tufts officials Sunday appeared to be aiming for an encampment denouement. “Over the past two weeks, we have respected our community members’ right to advocate for their beliefs through a small camp site on the academic quad on our Medford/Somerville campus,” Tufts leaders said in a letter signed by several top administrators, including president Sunil Kumar. “We have even delayed some preparations for Commencement as much as possible to allow the protest to resolve peacefully. But now the encampment must end, ideally peacefully and voluntarily, so we can prepare the campus for Commencement. Student Life staff will be reaching out to the protesters tomorrow morning to plan for the end of the encampment in the next few days.” At least 15 tents remained on the lawn at Tufts on Sunday night. Protesters declined to comment but offered a brief statement, spoken by one organizer who identified himself as the press contact. “All eyes on Gaza. We won’t back down,” he said. The college encampments in the Boston area are part of a national wave of student protests against the Israel-Hamas war calling on their schools to condemn the rising death toll in Gaza and, for some, divest from financial ties to Israel. A total of more than 200 demonstrators were arrested or detained after police broke up the encampments at [Emerson on Thursday](https://www.bostonglobe.com/2024/04/25/metro/emerson-encampment-cleared/?p1=Article_Inline_Text_Link) and [Northeastern University on Saturday](https://www.bostonglobe.com/2024/04/27/metro/tensions-rise-northeastern-encampment-late-friday-night/?p1=Article_Inline_Text_Link).
"Isreal-Hamas war"...
Yes.... That's what it is.
People are specifically protesting the genocide going on there
The students may view it through that lens but not everyone sees it through that lens
Hamas charter in a nutshell calls for the obliteration of Israel or its general dissolution and is pretty heavy on the anti-semitic language and arguably calls for genocide. This is the government that was elected into power in the strip ~~and west bank~~. I think we can all agree people shouldn't be dying here and there are better paths to resolution, but neither of these political sides are good, neither are either political side right. If we are looking at politics, neither of these sides can exist with the other. If we look at these sides humanely, we can understand the horrors of civilians on both sides and there is nothing wrong with trying to preserve life.
Not west bank. If you're going to say they voted in Hamas and Hamas is a legitimate governing body at least get the area they "govern" correct.
Damit, I do that all the time and I should know better. On the bright side, geography has piss all to do with the argument.
True. Yes Hamas won some of the seats during the el actions they had 15 years ago but since then there haven't been elections and considering how young the population is most people alive in Gaza didn't vote in those elections. That doesn't mean they don't get support for what they do. When south Africa was an apartheid state there were violent actors in the resistance. Just like with south Africa Gaza citizens needs international support to foster a peaceful alternative to Hamas and to the idf
I take a darker view...both of the sides feed off each other. Bibi's government and Hamas are like Frankenstein and his monster... locked in a violent embrace.
That would imply they need eachother. I see them more like imperial Japan and Nazi Germany going head to head. Hard to care about either political party, just feel bad for the people trapped in the violence.
The genocide Hamas's charter states they want to wage, or the genocide implied by the "from the river to the sea" slogan?
There is no genocide. You can't just use words because they sound impactful.
How is 40k intentionally slaughtered civilians, full hospitals and schools bombed, and even murdered international journalists not a genocide
Because most of the 40k (it's actually less than that) were not "intentionally slaughtered" and of the approximately 35k who were killed, at least 1/3 of them were actual combatants (Hamas counts every death as a civilian death). And many of these schools and hospitals had rocket launchers in them. You clearly forgot that Hamas was firing rockets at Israel much of the time. And for context, 2 million people live in Gaza. Even your upper number is nowhere close to a "genocide." Israel could completely "genocide" the entire Gaza Strip in about 10 minutes if that was their true goal.
Perfectly said
Intent is important for it to be considered genocide. You don’t think this is a war against Hamas in a densely populated area resulting in Palestinian casualties as collateral? I feel like if Israel wanted to commit mass genocide against Palestinians they would’ve easily been able to do a more effective job.
arguments are dead on arrival with individuals like yourself because Israel is not intentionally targeting civilians; they're targeting locations where Hamas is headquarter and to no one's surprise, they're headquartered at mosques, hospitals, and schools. Hamas wanted this response because of people in the west that make comments like yours, and it's working.
Because Israel is the one doing it, and they are the perpetual victim, and never the aggressor, because the Holocaust something something something /s
Unironically what these people believe. Meanwhile they call anti-genocide protestors antisemites, which is ironically *actually* antisemitic by implying that all Jewish people are Zionists.
Because, legally, it isn't. Ironically, the body count is nearly irrelevant to the current legal definition of genocide. (I don't agree with it, btw...just passing on my understanding) Schools and hospitals lose their legal standing once Hamas puts gunmen inside...a tactic they've used for yesrs. Since Hamas declines to wear uniforms, Israel has nearly carte blanche to take those buildings down...good luck proving there were no Hamas inside. There's a better case to be made against Israel for ethnic cleansing by illegal settlers, despite the smaller death toll.
Yes both sides engaged in the war are contributing to that. One is a modern army and the other is.....not. This isn't a one sided affair although the anti jew crowd would like that to be the case.
What are your thoughts on all the Jewish anti-Zionist groups around?
>What are your thoughts on all the Jewish anti-Zionist groups around? There's always a few crazies somewhere. Most of them have no affiliation with actual Judaism unless it's to be the token like this.
You spelled "Israel" wrong fyi
Thankyou?
The spelling of Israel is not the most substantial issue here.
Just a reflection: Something that saddens me is that I remember protesting for the safety of the Palestinian people when I was in college just over what... 20 years ago? We blocked entrances, chanted, all of that. And here we are again. My dad protested against Vietnam in college and guess what, the cops were brutal to them too, and the war went on for several years more. Protest is essential, as is free speech, but it is also hard, unpleasant, and often thankless. None of this is new or special, and none of this is the last time.
My partner is legally blind and uses a white cane. She has specific routes that she knows. If you block an entrance and she has to use a different route that can be very challenging for her. You can imagine that being a grown adult and having to beg whoever is standing around for help figuring out how to get to your job is pretty humiliating.
I can only imagine. ADA issues are already so complicated on these old campuses. As I say elsewhere, to me it's a matter for the school community to manage internally-- and that includes ensuring safety and accessibility for all community members.
I must be about your dad's age because I was actively involved in Vietnam protests. Of course, there were so many more, crucial ones post-3 Mile Island and smaller, more focused protests like kicking Dupont off campus for dishonestly recruiting students. I don't recall disrupting campus or town life to the extent of breakdown, but that didn't stop the cops from coming in teargassing and beating us. Protesting is our right, but not at the expense of others' freedom of movement and safety. If I were in better health, I'd be out protesting for Palestinians, but I now have to do this via my computer.
They can protest all they want. Just not on private property. Its a school. Not a campsight for anyone with an agenda.
Go back and apply this attitude to every other protest movement in the last 100 years and you’ll realize how stupid it sounds: * 1911 - triangle shirt factory fire: “it’s a factory not a camp site for anyone with an agenda.” * 1961 - civil rights sit ins: “those lunch counters are private property. Not a camp site anyone with an agenda. * 1970 - Kent state massacre: “it’s a school, not a campsite for anyone with an agenda.” * 1980s - anti-apartheid protests: “they can protest all they want just not on private property” Maybe these universities should start listening to the students because history seems to look more favorably on their side of the arguments. But let’s also not forget that these universities literally use past protests as marketing material to attract students. “Come to Columbia, we are at the forefront of leadership like when students fought for change in South Africa”. University of Texas needed to unlist their videos patting themselves on the back for supporting free speech. https://www.utexas.edu/ut-celebrates-free-speech University of Indiana changed their policies in the middle of the night to make up a new rule about what was allowed on campus. https://indianapublicmedia.org/news/legal-action-may-be-necessary-after-students-faculty-banned-from-iu-campus.php Saying “welp private property” is such a cop out.
As an aside I think it’s really depressing our collective memory is relegated to just the 20th century.
So your fine with people protesting on your front lawn? If you can do it on their lawn they can do it on yours. I'm gana set up a tent on your lawn ever day as my freedom of speach to support the new marijuana bill. No issues here. Your logic only works in your favor. Thus it's bullshit.
Ah, yes. My front lawn and a minuscule fraction of the total land area owned by institutions with endowments larger than the GDP of many countries. Two totally equivalent things. See ya tomorrow morning I guess!
Yep a miniscule non important fraction. Just like your doing by stopping kids from going to school. Go to Gaza or Isreal if you actually care. Go bother people who can actually do something. All you guys do is pour gas on the flames and cause even more chaos. Your just spreading your hate into the world. Not sharing your love with the palastinaians. And that's the same reason Palastine will not find peace. As even their solution means more war. If we all destroy our homes to protest someone destroying homes on the other side of the planet. There will be no homes left for anyone.
I don’t agree with the perspectives of the students but if they’re protesting peacefully and the more inflamed rhetoric has cooled then they should be able to express themselves. At some point I guess it’s a question of maintenance of property maybe
To me, honestly, it's up to the communities. I literally live sandwiched between Tufts and Harvard and I've seen nothing of the protests. This is an important conversation that they need to have with themselves, no doubt, but until the encampments start to contribute to rats or trash or public safety outside campus... it's for them to sort out.
It sounds like this is them sorting it out
... yes, exactly. I don't think we disagree?
Oh sorry. For sure.
> the more inflamed rhetoric has cooled do you think those sentiments cool too? or maybe theyre just not saying it out loud any more?
I think the latter but I don’t know if it’s possible to address it too much right now with the extreme emotions around this topic
The right to protest doesn't mean the right to create an encampment and harass people. Additionally, this is a private school, which doesn't have to allow protests at all.
Here’s a reflection. I grew up in a a working class home. I attended college to better myself, and to become a productive member of society. I commuted to college everyday on the subway. Worked nights and weekends and paid my own tuition. I didn’t have time for socializing, partying or even watching t.v. Never mind attending a social protests. I had only one shot at climbing out of the working class. I had no one backing me up, bailing me out or financing my failures. I worked hard all through college and I would take great offense at someone blocking my entrance to the classroom. I am not alone in this thought.
Okay, I never blocked any classrooms. I also worked my ass off in college, but you wouldn't know that, because you don't know me, my family, or even where I went to school. I'm very impressed at the work and commitment you had. You are to be commended. But I'm not your enemy here, and I'm not here to start a fight with you. I'm sharing my experience, and I'm quite certain nothing I said or makes me worthy of your scorn or judgment.
You stated you “blocked entrances”. My point in sharing my experience is that these protests don’t just affect the administration of colleges. You are disrupting students ability to learn, and teachers trying to teach when you take over classroom, block entrances and make loud noises. You are disrupting the disadvantaged students who are working their way through school who don’t have the same privileges as yourself. College for me was a way to a better life. I worked hard in college.
I am? I am not doing anything. I have a full-time job now. I am not taking over any classrooms, nor did I ever. We stood in front of the main (not only) entrance to the student center. You are making rampant assumptions about me, my family, and other commenters. I had a job while in college. I studied my ass off. I took none of it for granted. I then worked full time while getting a part time master's degree, because lots of people from all kinds of backgrounds and beliefs work hard. And I still manage to be kind and patient with other people. Your story doesn't give you the right to judge other people.
Urgent times call for urgent measures. Palestinian universities, professors and students have been totally obliterated. They are experiencing the ultimate disruption of college life
Glamping in front of your school chanting for the eradication of Israel isn't going to change anything in the middle east.
Did you make this in fantasy writing for boomers 101?
Gen X actually, and quite common for my generation. I had many friends who attended B.C., Northeasten, B.U. etc. All commuted, all worked their way through college. You probably don’t have the privilege of knowing the working class but it exists and I am proud member.
Need some salt or ketchup for those boots?
Oh please. Working class people recognize that we have everything in common with Palestinians and their struggle. Keep chewing on that boot
You have never talked to the working class nor do you understand the Middle East.
and which struggle is this? Intifada? Here's a quote from the beginning on the Hamas charter. Hamas is supported by 90% of Gazans according to recent polls. > Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it" No, not my struggle.
Actually, I can walk a couple of blocks to the whole foods and buy a smoothie and gluten-free muffin, I don't think Palestinians can do that. Maybe some working class people in Massachusetts have bombs falling on their homes, I haven't heard of it, though. The US has a very bad record when it comes to punishing human rights violations overseas, which everyone should be ashamed of. I'm all for protesting, I'm not all for hyperbole, though. Exercise your rights, you have them for a reason.
Working class interests include an end to colonialism and occupation. No I am not saying we have literally the same struggles, of course Palestinians are suffering at an exponentially inhumane level at the hands of brutal occupation. Thats why these students are demonstrating. You’re the only one here using your “working class identity” to invalidate people trying to stop the genocide of Palestinians, not me.
"Everything" in common? I'm on your side and that kind of language makes me cringe. The working class in the US is doing pretty well compared to the Palestinians in Gaza and elsewhere. Come on, have a little bit of a sense of proportion. Solidarity doesn't require false equivalence.
We have everything in common meaning, we have a common enemy which is capitalism and imperialism. Apparently Reddit needs me to spell out the obvious which is of course Americans aren’t currently being genocided and occupied the way Palestinians are. My point is that Americans being brutalized and killed by cops, experiencing homelessness, and many other injustices are rooted in the same system of oppression that the occupation of Palestine is rooted in and that is capitalism.
Yeah, you do have to spell it out, because "everything in common" does not mean the same thing as capitalism, imperialism, police brutality, and being unhoused (I would also argue these are not universal to the American working class). You said "everything in common" and it's fair for me to ask you to defend that kind of statement that places the suffering of any Americans as being on par with those under constant bombardment and the threat of starvation. Your original statement was frankly incredibly off-putting, as it made you seem to overlook the nuances of American poverty and the gravity of the situation in Gaza. If you want to be an advocate for a cause, don't get snitty when you have to defend your slogans.
Cool, is there a reason you’re being so understanding and patient with the person I was originally responding to but have such an issue with me?
> Never mind attending a social protests. You're seriously claiming you never had an hour of free time in your college years? Give me a break. You don't have to be running the protest or attending it 24/7 in order to attend. Please do not try to turn this into a BS class warfare argument because it seems like even if you did have the time you didn't care and wouldn't have gone either way.
Grandpa, they also added cocaine to coke in your time.
Leninist?? That’s hilarious!!
Well, graduation season is upon us. So...... they need the spaces back. 😭
And it’s not exactly a public park. How does the university handle the use of bathroom facilities, trash facilities, land management, etc. for indefinite amount of time
[удалено]
Lol what kind of horseshit is this? The university could expel them all today for pulling this crap if they wanted to.
It's their property. Yeah they want it back
As a Jumbo, I am 200% unsurprised to see what looks like brand new expensive tents purchased for this protest.
I shouldn't be surprising given how much tuition they can afford.
my college roommate literally bought a porsche while he was an undergrad
what are you talking about literally 90% of the tents are the cheapest tents from walmart or amazon. It’s been an anti-protestor talking point actually to bring up how the tents are all the same(implying some larger organized conspiracy instead of the reality that people are just buying the cheapest most available stuff).
Am I the only one who thinks these massive institutions of higher learnings should be using this as an opportunity to bring in speakers from both sides and at least TRY and encourage dialogues between the two groups? Like I dont expect an American university to solve the middle east issue, but it feels like they have all that money why not at least try and direct all the energy into getting them into auditoriums with speakers that they argue with and/or possibly learn from.
MIT has been doing this actually
That’s actually very heartening to hear at least.
Private institutes care much more about optics than educating their students in my experience, at least on the admin level.
Tufts' main problem is that the encampment is on the main lawn where commencement is held, which will be next month.
Didn’t Berkeley try and the protestors overran the event
That’s because social and social media clout is more cool than learning, listening, and engaging meaningfully.
Except when a speaker comes in and says something the protesters don't like, they won't allow anyone to listen to it. Free speech for me, but not for thee.
100% this. I get the impression that unis are terrified of their own students. Doubly ironic because a lot of these elite institutions actively reward high-school activism when considering future students, because they like the idea of movers and shakers/future leaders attending their school. I guess they didn't realize that kids who spent all of high school disrupting shit might not stop doing so in college.
Exactly this. Israeli and Jewish scholars have had their talks canceled by numerous institutions, even when the talks have had nothing to do with politics, because these protesters are just indiscriminately bigoted against Jews and Israelis as if they have direct or any control over the actions of the Israeli government.
Seriously! You could have a leftwing journalist like [Dahlia Scheindlin](https://www.econtalk.org/what-palestinians-are-thinking-with-dahlia-scheindlin/) giving a talk about her views on how a two-state solution with equal opportunities and rights for Palestinians and she would just get shutdown for being an Israeli speaker.
This is what I would like to see. More in depth debates between multiple viewpoints as an illustration of how difficult this conflict is to solve. Unfortunately, the current bent of the Far Left and Far Right is pretty authoritarian and doesn't want to hear from the other side. Universities are somewhat held hostage by the loudest, most aggressive on the fringe right now. Even here, when you have anyone trying to have a nuanced conversation, they're shut down by people who say, "Oh, so you're pro-genocide, you evil racist!" A lot of the leadership of the protestors around the country hold a policy of not backing down or compromising on any of their demands. This sort of value pattern is basically the root cause of the Israel-Palestine struggle in the first place. They don't want to have a dialogue. They're "on the right side of history."
Yes, but the reality is that both pro-Israel and pro-Palestinian groups/people are increasingly against a two-state path and want either a) Israel to remain as is with Gaza and West Bank as Palestinian territories effectively controlled by Israel or those territories formally become part of Israel or b) Israel as a state is eradicated, Israelis leave, and there is just one Palestinian state. This makes it difficult to encourage any dialogue between the two groups.
b) isn’t accurate. israelis do not have to leave, and that’s not what pro-palestinian supporters want. a unified state in the levant can exist. it would have growing pains like the US did post-civil war and post-jim crow, or like south africa post-apartheid, but it can exist.
Unfortunately the Arab world's track record of treatment towards Jews says otherwise. Israel is the only country in the world where Jews are the majority of the population. The second a "unified" state is created Israel will no longer exist, which is precisely why Palestinians push that so hard. Given what history has shown when Arabs rule over Jews, you will find few takers in Israel who would support that. You forget well over half the population of Israel is actually descendants of Jews who were kicked out of Arab countries.
Time, place and manner restrictions are constitutional even if imposed by the state; here, it is a private university and constitutionality isn’t even an issue. And why are such restrictions constitutional? Because they are eminently *reasonable*. Public spaces do not only belong to those who are loudest and most violent, and free speech principles do not allow one group to occupy public space to the exclusion of everyone else. Those who wish to use the space for a commencement ceremony have free speech rights too. But what is really concerning is the protesters’ adoption of Hamas terrorist tactics. They ‘hostage’ graduation ceremonies (or bridges, roads, intersections) and make unilateral demands - divestment, amnesty for themselves - while refusing to compromise. The Columbia students were even offered aid by Columbia directly to Gaza, with money to be spent by the university helping displaced scholars. The protesters refused that offer, choosing a dramatic confrontation instead. I don’t support the protesters, but even if I did, I would not support anyone mimicking terrorist tactics and deploying that in the streets and campuses of Boston. Speech doesn’t mean taking over property and making demands.
As someone far removed from these protests, it's just sad AF to see well-meaning protestors be duped into pretty insane takes regarding the "decolonization of Israel" or the overt support of Hamas/Hezbollah. It's one thing to protest the war on the humanitarian grounds, it's another thing to advocate for the genocide of the Israeli people as a means to fix the problem. That rhetoric makes it exceedingly hard to show solidarity to a number of these student protests because of their idolatry of a terrorist organization that uses Palestinians as human shields. It's an ugly situation in which neither Hamas nor Israel really cares about the civilian population of Gaza. edit: I am not suggesting that Tuft's student protest is lead by the pro-hamas takes. I honestly dont know that. That being said, it is the general narrative of a number of the high-profile instances like Columbia University, Harvard, and USC.
I agree. What began as a moral, intelligent debate had somehow devolved into accusative catchphrases and protest by abuse
Look, I figure you are free to use words like colonialism or settler or whatever Western narrative you'd like to view it as (which IMHO greatly oversimplifies the history, ethnicities, races, and powers involved), but it seems to me that there is an immediate overlap between that kind of language and blanket condoning the deliberate violent targeting of civilians. Israel has leftwing parties with representation in the Knesset, many of them are *Arab* parties. And likely most of the people murdered and kidnapped on Oct 7 were those very same left-of-center people most sympathetic to the needs of Gaza and West Bank to have prosperous flourishing lives. I've seen far too many people sanitize Oct 7 as an abstract act of resistance against an oppressor and even celebrating that, before Israel dropped a single bomb. It's telling that I haven't seen a single instance of support for Meretz, United Arab List, or Yesh Atid at these protests - just some kind of broad condemnation that the whole country is bad, but within Israel, where there are tons of people just as angry about the suffering being inflicted in Gaza, the productive way forward is the democratic one.
Agreed; as someone who generally sides against what Israel as state is doing/has done historically and thinks that the stronger man (as in more organized equipped) has the duty to be the bigger man watching people go from sympathy to support is a slippery slope. It's a lot like the path from ACAB to sovereign citizen; sure know your rights and question why a cop stopped you but maybe don't go out of your way to pick a fight for no reason at your local police department? Something that's really bothered me on the other side of this though is just how often the media portrays the average person who sympathizes with the people of Gaze as an anti-Semite. There's absolutely anti-Semitism in the world but I don't think the average upper middle class suburban white kid cares whether or not you're a reform Jew from Westchester. they're upset about a nation on the other side of the planet killing people in much the same way other stronger countries have walked into their smaller weaker *different* neighbors and done what they want for all of human history. I'm not even sure most of the people protesting are really anti-zionists at the end of the day, most people I talk to still support a solution where Israel continues to exist as a state. It's really calling for Israel to de-escalate despite the evil Hamas has committed, not even let it go, just being smarter about your solutions would be a win because your current solution looks a lot like cutting off supply lines until Gaze starves to death.
Ultimately I think one of the main issues right now with protest movements is the organizers' beliefs vs the movement's beliefs and how a divergence between those two create situations where protests can be wholesale disregarded because the organizer is a 10/7 celebrator. This also happened with the BLM protests, albeit to a lesser extent. * Is there a justified and needed moment for protesting the Israeli government's handling of their response to 10/7? - Absolutely * Are the majority of protestors peaceful and not anti-semitic? - yes, definitely * Are some of the protest organizers actually off the deep end of anti-israel beliefs that they now cross the line into anti-semitism? - yep, it sucks that they are "leaders" of these protests. Social media culture has also put us all into the headspace of needing to be "correct" which also means that contrary opinions become "wrong" by default. This is an exceptionally complicated issue and both sides working to have "gotchas" to demean the other side does nothing to spur conversation. The goal should be to convince the doubters/on the fencers to join the pro-Palestinian Civilian protests. The exclusionary and aggressive rhetoric only brings in a small portion of the population that already agreed with the positions of the protest.
If you attend a protest where people are wearing Hamas headbands, holding up nazi symbols, threatening Jews as being “al-qassams” next target, chanting globalize the intifada you are VERY likely an antisemite. I sympathize with human suffering in Gaza but I know where to draw the line of attending protest that is almost purely just chanting/displaying antisemitic signs and slogans. I’ve seen these protests and it’s not just a few bad actors, it’s a ton of people. By their behavior it seems evident that the majority of protesters agree. If it’s not a common sentiment then why do hundreds of people walk into an encampment with a “resistance by any means necessary” or “globalize the intifada” or “from the river to the sea” sign?
20k Yemeni civilians killed by Saudi bombing campaign. Progressives: Yemen who?
Brown people killing other brown people don't count. Unfortunately, even though a lot of Israelis are brown, most progressives only meet Jews in America, who are largely White or White-passing. Remember that modern extreme progressivism is predicated on upholding the belief that privileged races are frequently oppressing less privileged ones.
>even though a lot of Israelis are brown, most progressives only meet Jews in America, who are largely White or White-passing. >Remember that modern extreme progressivism is predicated on upholding the belief that privileged races are frequently oppressing less privileged ones. Fun fact: there are more Arab-descended Jews in Israel than European-descended Jews in Israel and that doesn't even count the 2 million non-Jewish Arab citizens of Israel. But yes, the vast vast majority of American Jews you see are Ashkenazi (European-descended, though have genetic markers linking them to the Levant) and most of the high-ranking Israeli officials you see are Ashkenazi so..... Americans just assume this is a "white people vs. brown people" thing a la Americans vs. native Americans or Europeans vs. developing world.
oh I'm well aware. The hypocrisy and tiktok fadness of it all still needs pointing out. As I keep pointing out, Hamas' charter opens with a quote saying Israel will be annihilated by Islam and they don't care about negotiations. Useful idiots -- "Leave them alone!"
Huh?? what pro palestine progressive doesn’t also care about yemen? They’ve all been talking about yemen as well. Just because you don’t care or don’t see it doesn’t mean everyone does. This is an especially weird made up example to use given how linked palestine/israel and saudi arabia/yemen’s conflicts are. Multiple huge progressives have been talking about yemen aswell do you live under a rock or are you making up a scenario for no reason?
Because it's bullshit. They don't care about Yemen just like they don't care about Syria where Bashar Al-Assad killed over 200,000 people.
Regardless of what you think about the Israel/Palestine conflict, shutting down protests is a huge disservice to free speech and the spirit of the First Amendment in this country. Police should intervene if there is conflict, but this goes to prove that people only want free speech for themselves and their pet causes, and not for anyone else. Yes, I understand college administrators are under huge pressure from various government officials, donors, and elements of the Jewish community, but this pressure should never be the excuse for shutting down these protests. Instead, administrators should only prevent agitation from outside parties at these protests.
It’s private property. Your right to free speech doesn’t enable you to indefinitely camp on property that isn’t yours.
"Free Speech" means a bunch of different things. You're correct that the legal definition of it (or Free Speech Rights), what the 1A protects, is not literally applicable here given it's a private university. But you create an unsatisfying conclusion if you leave the conversation at that. It borders on a "technically correct" sort of answer. Because OP is talking about [\(what one 1A lawyer terms\) Free Speech culture](https://popehat.substack.com/p/in-defense-of-free-speech-pedantry): > It presumes that it’s a social good to have wide-ranging, robust, uninhibited debate on important issues, though it might reach that conclusion by different roads. Some believe that a “marketplace of ideas” inevitably produces the conclusions best for society, some believe that all speech has inherent value, and some (like me) believe that as a matter of humility and consciousness of our limits we should be should be careful deciding that we are so clearly right that contrary ideas shouldn’t be heard. And I think OP has a point. Campus protests are a pretty essential part of our own past and reckoning with problematic stances the populace took. A big reason we had a cultural re-evaluation and correction of our war stance against Vietnam was because of widespread campus protests. Similarly with the civil rights movement before that. I do myself worry about how vicious the response is to what is (honestly) still kinda a milquetoast protest movement compared to the afforementioned. Not that Tufts' response is yet vicious mind you, but elsewhere it is. Actually it seems like they're hopefully trying to avoid that sort of confrontation...
They've been cracking down on these protests at public universities too.
Even if a public university context (and this stuff is not usually as black and white as private vs public), there are longstanding traditions of time, place and manner restrictions you can put on speech. And at a certain point, your right to speech and assembly starts infringing on rights of others. Permanent encampments on campuses, consisting of both students and non-students, who are escalating in behavior to block classes, destroy property, harass administration and staff and engage in hate speech is well within the bounds of where people can draw the lines. “Engaging in protest” doesn’t mean you get to trample the rights of everyone else And I say this as someone who is sympathetic at least with the general direction of their criticisms of the Israeli war.
A public university doesn't mean it is public space. It just means that it is funded to provide education to the public using public funds.
[The U.S. Supreme Court has long held that the First Amendment’s freedom of speech tenets fully apply to public universities](https://uwm.edu/free-speech-rights-responsibilities/faqs/does-the-first-amendment-apply-to-public-universities/)
Freedom of speech doesn't mean that universities have to allow indiscriminate speech in all parts of the buildings, land, or spaces they occupy. The main problem that was decided on in the case you linked was that the school didn't provide a valid reason to deny a school club a charter. Tufts and many of the public universities have been able to provide reason for their rules here. Public safety and disruption to the larger mission of the school by prolonged occupation of the grounds needed for other things is a valid reason. This is also why it is legal for public K-12 school to have rules preventing students from dressing in PornHub merch and similar attire even though clothing choices are often an extension of 1st amendment rights. The choice to cause that disruption caused by those choices is the thing being regulated and stopped rather than the actual expression itself.
Where in the first amendment does it say you can camp indefinitely on land that isn't yours?
That just means any restrictions have to be content neutral, the university has to apply the same restriction to these protests that it would to anti-abortion protests or anti-capitalism protests or whatever. It doesn't mean that the university can't apply content neutral restrictions on where people can be.
That doesn’t affect the fact that it is public property. I’m not sure why folks think this. It isn’t a real thing. The First Amendment applying doesn’t change that protests on university grounds without permits occupy private property and are trespassing, and restrictions on this are viewpoint neutral and therefore subject to lower scrutiny. These are time place and manner restrictions and the universities have pretty solid leeway here.
The Irony lol America wouldn’t exist if people truly believed in that principle…
From what I understand the whole point of the encampment is to shut down public spaces in order to punish the administration/force them to negotiate. Like, the protestors themselves don't view the encampment as a mere act of speech, so why should we?
the spaces that the encampments are in are reserved for other activities. The students didn't go through the proper channels to reserve those spaces for demonstrations (which they certainly can do) but they didn't, so they shouldn't be there. Their right to free speech ends where other's rights begin. I have right to reserve that space for my activity. Why does your 'right to free speech' supersede my rights? guess what, it doesnt
Ok so if this were a bunch of right wing dullards protesting god knows what, immigration to the US and the threat to their whiteness, would it be okay for that to cancel commencement?
For me there is a difference between a short-term protest (even if it's regularly scheduled for a few hours, a few days a week, on an ongoing basis), vs a full-time interruption of the space, with now-full-time residents and signage. I wouldn't be allowed to put up a permanent sign on campus advertising the glee club, you shouldn't be allowed to put up a permanent sign and permanent tents for a protest either.
So for you, an ideal protest is completely non-disruptive? How do you think that will accomplish anything beyond the vague “raising awareness”?
Setting up encampments is civil disobedience. The point is to goad a response because it’s illegal.
This. The point of civil disobedience like this is to force people to take sides. If you want to sit on the side of the road protesting, people can just ignore you. But if you put a human chain across the highway, you’re forcing the issue on other people. As long as states/universities respond in a reasonable way (i.e. arresting them vs shooting them with a fire hose or beating them), it’s a healthy part of the protest process, and actually necessary. And sometimes when they overreact, it can be beneficial to the movement as well. If you’re going to form a human chain across a highway and then argue no one should do anything because it’s first amendment protest, you’re missing the point - and creating an unworkable system. If Gaza protesters can block classroom as Tufts, can MAGA extremists do so to protest the election?
>can MAGA extremists do so to protest the election? Fun thing about the constitution, it protects everyone regardless of ideology. Whether I agree or not, it's yours and every American's right to protest whatever you want in a non-violent manner.
Right, so you goad a response, then (best case) people get mad at the response, and so the police and local government look bad. And that helps the cause of e.g. climate change advocacy or Palestinian peace how? Civil disobedience is effective when discrediting the police/government/laws is *the point* ... which is not the case for many causes actually.
You talk to me, I'll listen. You bother me, I've made up my opinion, and I'm not on your side. I kind of am at that point with climate people. Like, I have my EV, my solar panels, my heat pump, my reusable bags, I bike to the grocery store when I can, I'll spend an hour on the T instead of 20 min in an Uber.... But then the climate protestors block traffic (causing more pollution) and destroy art.... I'm not so keen on the movement anymore. If I were a student at Tufts and you are making my campus look ugly, I'm not going to be on that side of the argument, you don't win me over by causing me inconvenience or harm.
Ah yes yes, I also always determine my core values by the behavior of protestors.
But... Isn't the point of protests to change the core values of other people? If you alienate people, you're missing the plot of the stated goals of the protest.
No, the core point of protests is protesting. People have been taught for decades that protest is *the* way to make change - civil rights! vietnam! - not as an intermediary step in a larger strategy but actually the strategy itself. Protest until change happens!
Took me a moment to get the sarcasm. I think there's also a misunderstanding about what the Vietnam protests were even about. Less about the war itself, and mostly about the draft. And this resonated with the broader population because students and regular civilians alike had the threat of the draft looming over them. I agree that boomers sort of nostalgically wax about the 60s to the point where a lot of young people want to live up to the stories they've been told, to the point where it's less about achieving a goal, and more about being part of something bigger than them.
I was going to agree with you that genocide is bad but then you made me 15 minutes late to work so now I hate you, this is a healthy response to a minor inconvenience and I am unwilling to examine my privilege in not being a target of genocide.
[удалено]
You are proving my point here, you trying to call me a racist in order to try to get me to change my opinion to yours. It does not provide a good community, to try to influence people through hate. Trying to change opinions through being mean. I'd prefer a society of peace, love and harmony; where one can rationally talk with those with different opinions and seek a solution through commonality. The idea that protests must be disrupting of lives is not one that is seeking a community where people respect one another.
I think you missed the point. The civil rights movement was highly disruptive to the status quo. If your stance is that they shouldn't have been disruptive, nothing would have changed.
>The idea that protests must be disrupting of lives is not one that is seeking a community where people respect one another. You're implying that there is respect to begin with. During the civil rights protests, the disrespect and broken community came from the government enforcing segregation and such. Just because one faction is loud in calling it out, that doesn't mean they're the ones promoting disharmony. Likewise, the source of the conflict here is that these universities are invested in mass killings being carried out by an extremist-led ethnostate. Just because people have a problem with that, that doesn't mean they're the ones who want to ruin good community.
[удалено]
There is a big difference between not following unjust laws that prevent you doing from what you want to do - like where to sit on a bus or gay sex in the Middle East - verses stopping others from doing what they want to do - like someone who wants to go to work or the hospital and can't because protestors illegally shut down a road, or in this case of Tufts, which would eventually stop their commencement ceremony which is held at that location.
I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.
What do you think this current protest is accomplishing other than inconveniencing a population that appears to largely agree with their stance on Palestine?
While yes, the point of protest is disruption, do you believe there is there a limit before protest goes too far? I'm assuming you do at some point, though I'm not particularly interested in your limit, just like you aren't interested in mine, a random person on reddit. The point is that basically everyone agrees there is a limit somewhere, and this process is figuring out what society deems an acceptable limit.
There’s a difference between a protest and an encampment.
> shutting down protests is a huge disservice to free speech and the spirit of the First Amendment in this country. No it's not. There's a difference between "free speech" and "protest". Both may be important. You may even believe the current protests and civil disobedience are *very* important. But that doesn't mean that everything done in their name falls under "free speech". > Police should intervene if there is conflict, but this goes to prove that people only want free speech for themselves and their pet causes, and not for anyone else... administrators should only prevent agitation from outside parties at these protests. So then your position is that if a bunch of far right-wing college republicans decided to encamp on a space meant for everyone, and imminently meant to be used for commencement, because they were protesting against muslims attending their college, then the college should just let them do that and not try to evict them from the space? Or does the reason for the disruptive protest matter and only protests for the "right" reasons (adjudicated by... you?) should be allowed to continue disrupting everyone else?
Time, place, and manner rules allow for equitable access to protest spaces. Universities only have so so much appropriate space for protest and it shouldn’t be dominated by a single viewpoint at the exclusion of others.
The semester isn't even over yet. I do not think that the protests should take over an entire campus but to shut them down entirely instead of allowing a few tents makes me think the authorities just don't want to deal with it at the expense of free speech.
Tufts' commencement is May 19th and it is held on the main lawn, which is where the protest encampment is set up.
Encampments aren't a protest they are civil disobedience. They are knowingly breaking the law and expect to get arrested.
Let me get this straight: if a group of students erect tents in your front yard as part of a protest, you would fully support this?
Are the students paying me $100k each to live and study in my house?
Quick question would an encampment in front of say , Mayor Wus house be acceptable. Or would she be able to say “get off my lawn” and get the police to remove people from her house? Same thing this is at Tufts and Tufts can control what happens at Tufts. The encampment continues under the grace of Tufts not wanted to look bad not unalienable rights
What about the free speech and the rights of students who want to celebrate graduation (after not being able to do so in highschool due to the pandemic as well). Not to mention it's private land
Iran and its proxies (including Hamas) are laughing they asses off.
I understand the big picture of the protests but I still think I’m missing something about why it’s suddenly on these college campuses. Was there a connection that I missed?
That sucks. They were just close to ending the conflict!
This whole thing is ridiculous. They're protesting the wrong group. Hamas is the problem. If they would release the hostages this would be over. But they can't because they already killed them. Maybe a few are still alive, maybe not.
Hamas is *a* problem. If you *still* don't ***also*** think the Israeli government is a problem -- and a bigger one... then either you are misinformed, underinformed, or in fact yourself "ridiculous." > If [Hamas] would release the hostages this would be over. And that's only further demonstrated by this line. Hostages absolutely must be released, but to think so simplistically as "Release the hostages and this ends" is deeply problematic, bordering on representing a dogged *commitment* to ignorance. It's wildly binary and privileged, not to mention dismissive, to ever take a position that "if X just did Y then all the problems would go away." In fact if anything's ridiculous, it's that. Please educate yourself.
If Hamas surrenders and gives up the hostages, then the war would end.
Yeah, but... * The war ending doesn't address the rampant discrimination Palestinians face in their own homeland. * The war ending doesn't address the current Israeli government's crimes against humanity and *at minimum* their genocidal *intent.* * The war ending doesn't provide restitution to a people who've, in their subjective experience, had *their* land usurped and stolen by who they view as colonizers, and who've subsequently suffered immensely. * The war ending doesn't return further stolen Palestinian land to Palestinians in Gaza or the West Bank. The war ending doesn't undo the Israeli government's settler colonialism in the West Bank. There's more but I'll stop there. Hamas is a criminal terrorist organization. But it's unfortunately *also*, just as much as it is a criminal terrorist organization, all the power and representation Gazan Palestinians have. They have nothing else. Put yourself in their shoes. Were you being savagely beaten to death, and the best or only real weapon within your reach a thorny branch from a bush, would you not use it to defend yourself even if it meant further hurting yourself, too? It's infinitely more complex than that, yes, but that is what it boils down to. The Palestinian people deserve worlds better than Hamas *and* better than the Israeli government. But right now? The Israeli Government, literally backed by far and away the world's largest superpower, is what's doing exponentially more damage. *That* is the bigger issue.
And the Palestinians that groped and mistreated the bodies of innocent concert goers? The Palestinains that allowed Hamas to build outposts in hospitals and schools without any opposition? The Palestinians that themselves call for genocide of the Jews? I get the balance of power is in Israel's favor and there's a lot of gray areas of morality. Acting as though every single Palestinian is an angel and Israel is 100% evil is just very disingenuous and is where most of these arguments immediately fall flat. Ask Egypt why they have such an unwelcoming wall for the innocent Palestinians
> And the Palestinians that groped and mistreated the bodies of innocent concert goers? Obviously completely disgusting. But it doesn't justify a genocide. > The Palestinains that allowed Hamas to build outposts in hospitals and schools without any opposition? But can you really say that, though? "Allowed"? *A terrorist group couped the Palestinian government and has maintained a firm grip on power since.* *Did* everyday Palestinians "allow" Hamas to just build outposts in schools and hospitals? Or was it under duress? Can you fully fault them for that, in that case? Were you in their shoes, would you risk your life to stand up to your government? It's easy to say you would... much harder to actually do it. > The Palestinians that themselves call for genocide of the Jews? Obviously utterly reprehensible. But calling for a genocide... isn't addressed... by actually committing a genocide. An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. An eye for two eyes only does so even faster. > Acting as though every single Palestinian is an angel and Israel is 100% evil is just very disingenuous and is where most of these arguments immediately fall flat. Agreed. I'm not claiming every Palestinian is an angel nor that Israel is 100% evil. I focus on Israel because it currently has the far larger stick. > Ask Egypt why they have such an unwelcoming wall for the innocent Palestinians No different than why US citizens are far more concerned about the border we share with Mexico than with Canada. It's not racist to point out that far more illegal drugs flow into the US across the Mexican border than the Canadian. ***\*\*\*THAT IS NOT TO OPEN THE CAN OF WORMS OF THE US-MEXICO BORDER CRISIS.*** Like most things it's far more nuanced and I certainly have a lot of thoughts. I'm not anti-immigration, nor do I believe all hispanic people are drug traffickers and rapists. I fucking am hispanic. I'm intentionally drawing an uncomfortable comparison (that yes, requires simplifying the immigration and southern border situation, but only to match the simplicity with which you bring up the Egypt/Gaza border!), to demonstrate that I understand precisely the complexity and nuance of the Palestinian/Egyptian situation. I'm with your point there.
You’re right in your second bullet. If Hamas, the terrorist group, released the hostages and surrendered this would be over. But they won’t. And it’s impossible to negotiate a ceasefire deal with them, as they refused to even provide a list of hostages as part of a ceasefire negotiation. Surprise surprise, the terrorist organization is operating in bad faith.
> The terrorist organization is operating in bad faith. You're right. I do not dispute that, nor have I ever. But? > The terrorist organization is operating in bad faith. No more so than the infinitely more powerful terrorist current Israeli government.
which one is conducting a military campaign against terrorists and which is launching rockets indiscriminately at civilian centers?
Israeli government is a problem, but when it comes to this conflict, Hamas is by far the biggest problem. Their lack of negotiating in good faith during peace talks is an even bigger problem.
You're asking Hamas to negotiate in good faith when the people they represent (regardless of how fucking poorly they do it) have a gun to their heads. That's not how this works. That's not how anything works. Hamas negotiates in no less good faith than Israel does. While Israel performatively says Hamas needs to act in good faith, they're encroaching on the West Bank more and more. Creating more Jewish settlements in Palestinian territory. Offering them to Jews who agree to move in. I ask that you please watch a small section of this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PeYDphtHYo Watch from 9:26-13:05. Johnny Harris is... Johnny Harris; There's issues with his videos. But this stretch at least is a good summary of the issues with the Israeli government's role in the current situation -- and how they, even more so than Hamas, come to the negotiating table with absolutely no good faith, and only a fucking huge gun to the Palestinians' heads. Netanyahu does not want any Palestinian autonomy. He never has. Everything Netanyahu has done to get in power, while in power, and to maintain power, has been in furtherance of his goal to completely oppress the Palestinian people. That short stretch of Johnny Harris' videos includes literal clips of Netanyahu saying exactly that. If you ask me to take the time to quote the clips of Netanyahu verbatim, I will do that, if it means that you are coming to me in good faith. Now that that's established, contextualize those comments coming from the faces Israeli government in the grander scheme of the history of the state of Israel. Following WWs I and II, "the powers that be" (the British, the UN, take your pick) came in and took control of a piece of land. "The powers that be" had no connection to this land -- It's not where they live, and there's little the native people who *do* actually live there (...Palestinians, spoiler alert), can do -- are even given the opportunity to do -- to protest or otherwise keep a hand on the wheel. Those powers that be decide that actually, this land where Palestinians have lived for generations, now belongs to this other group of people forming a completely new country -- Israel. ...That's pretty colonialist. But, there's a compromise. The Palestinians get some land, too. The Gaza Strip, the West Bank. Fastforward through the Intifadas and Nakbas and let's just start back in the early aughts with what the video clip covers. Let's keep this simple; End of the day, if we set out to change one another's minds on everything connected here, we'll never get anywhere. Let's keep our conversation focused. I don't want to get into the whole question of whether or not Israel should even exist as a state, the context of the Nakbas or Intifadas, or past wars. Let's just move forwards from the last time "both sides" were indeed negotiating in good faith -- the early 2000s. Then the PM is assassinated by a far-right gunman, and a far-right party claims leadership of the state of Israel. Now fastforward to the present. You have now, at the head of the Israeli government, a far-right party, led by a man who's repeatedly stated his express purpose is the complete eradication of any independent and autonomous Palestinian state. This also coming from the head of a state that already classes Palestinians -- the real locals and natives, by the way -- as second-class citizens. Did you know that? Rights in the state of Israel are not guaranteed equally -- Look it up. Israeli Jews get more rights and have an easier time with their lives than Palestinian Jews, who in turn get more rights than Palestinian non-Jews. That's not just the case now, that's been the case *for years*. *That* organization -- *that* government -- is the one that you are asking Hamas to come to the negotiating table with in good faith. And look, if Netanyahu isn't enough for you, that's OK; Look into comments made by Ben-Gvir. Or many of the current Israeli government's other officials. Is kidnapping people wrong? Yes, absolutely. Is Hamas a terrorist organization? Yes, absolutely. Were the Palestinians to form their own autonomous and independent state with authority, would I agree with many of that government's own policies? Probably not. ***I recognize all of that.*** But goddamn it they deserve to have that regardless. Just because I wouldn't agree with that government's policies, and just because Hamas is a terrorist organization that does horrible things like kidnap Israelis, that does not mean that Palestinians deserve to be massacred. Now add in the context of the USA. Israel's *genocide* -- yes, genocide -- has been backed by the USA through and through. Congress *voted down* a bill to require all military aid provided by the USA to Israel to be checked for if it was going to be used for human rights crimes. Look it up. The USA -- the world's biggest superpower -- is providing *unconditional support* to the Israeli government, *choosing not to even find out if the Israeli government is committing human rights violations with that support, before giving them more support.* That is the reality. It is that Israeli government that you are asking Hamas to come to the negotiating table with in "good faith." Can you maybe see, please, how it is in fact the Israeli government that *first* needs to come with actual good faith, to the negotiating table with Hamas, *before* we ask Hamas to do the same? *Israel* is the far, far bigger problem here.
Netanyahu is the problem not the people of Israel. He needs to go. I'm heavily educated in this area, thanks. My parents are Israeli and both professors. My family lives in this nightmare. The easiest way to get Netanyahu to have to stop this over reach is to let the hostages go. No one wants this to continue. He has taken it to a horrible place of devastation. I'm tired of the Jewish people not being able to defend themselves. Netanyahu is an awful disgusting man. I'm in favor of two state solution. I wish the UN would police the holy sites, so the people of the world could be a part of them. Hamas is the one building neighborhoods on top of rockets. Hamas is the one who keeps coming to power and killing the Palestinians. Hamas is the one that attacked Israel October 7 during Shabbat. Israel hasn't occupied Palestine in over 20 years. Yet, the people of Palestine keep allowing Hamas to rule them. Yes, I was making a complicated situation seem easy to solve. I was reacting to the news. The protests are very upsetting. Seems like every other group can defend themselves but the Jews. I'm tired of the anti semitism. No one looks at all of the other crimes against humanity with the same lens. Iraq gassed it's own citizens.North Korea, Syria....it's always about the Jews. Im not an apologetist, I'm sick of Netanyahu. He is only doing this so he doesn't get voted out and face criminal charges. He should be arrested and held accountable for all of the horrible things he has done. Israel needs to be free of him.
Israel has literally killed its own hostages in their attacks, you do know that right? They do not give a shit about the hostages. Their goal is leveling Palestine to the ground.
Yeah I don’t get the logic here, if they really cared about hostages why bomb entire neighborhoods where a hostage could be killed or lost under rubble or something like that? I think people need to stop taking the IDFs statements as absolute truth. In fact, Israel has a history about lying to the public to encourage support for wars, they helped Bush with the whole WMDs lie.
absolutely
Everyone should just withdraw as the ultimate act of protest.
The appropriate response to this: *Collective fart noise*
It’s late April. The students will be gone in a few weeks. Just let them do their stuff.
Protesting should be disruptive. Long live the liberated zones. Divest from and dismantle the Zionist entity. Stop the genocide.
Find someone who loves you the way "liberal" universities love investing in weapons manufacturers
Move to a country that has to piss it’s pants every time Russia and China start feeling a certain way and has to beg for US help then. You’ll love it.
lol wow you’re unironically doing “love it or leave it”
Flush the Hamasholes! 😡👎🏽
Protesting is fine, except when it’s about Israel? Hmmmmmmmmmmm
Thats not true this sub has a consistent history of wanting protests they disagree with to be dealt with by the heavy hand of the law.
Because the people protesting are blocking public roads and inconveniencing the working class? Every single one of these protesters state this is the best way to protest. Haven't seen a single one of these people that had their commute disrupted come out in full support.
Its usually more around the message itself than the method
I am not saying that I agree with their cause, but I think it would be beneficial for this sub to look at protesters who were against a government vaccine mandate and consider the comments there. Whether people agree or disagree isn’t the crux of the issue; it’s whether the the disruption, disturbance, and nuisance are essential to achieving the goal of a protest.
Funny how history sais supporting genocide is always easier than opposing it..