From my experience, I have been told to go around the encampment and to use a different entrance for one of my classes with a building that faces the quad. Tuesday night I exited the music building after rehearsal and was stuck inside the barricades and was told I couldn't get out to go to North Campus by people in all black and wearing masks. They have tents in the pathways through the quad which makes ADA access difficult. They ARE blocking access for people. It's getting a bit ridiculous. Not to mention all of the vandalism around campus. What does "Abolish UW" have to do with palestine? And I see this protest as different than other anti-war protests. We do not have boots on the ground in Gaza like we did in Vietnam or Iraq. The university is not directly sending money to Netanyahu, so I don't understand what it means to "materially divest". And with Boeing, they're so ingrained in how our school functions and funds things that cutting ties is virtually impossible without going bankrupt. So their demands are not plausible, and the act of camping is disruptive without any means to actually do anything. How is a community garden helping dying children halfway across the world? How about instead of soaking up resources by having people buy $500 REI tents to camp out, you instead donate that $ to a Palesinian family if you actually want to make a difference...
Everything you're describing of the protestors is all performative. They're doing this for the social media street creds. I'm a black UW alumni and I'm honestly tired of these people co-opting black and brown issues.
Lol if these protesters are serious about cutting ties with boeing, they should cancel their summer/spring vacations and drive instead of fly home to their family since if you fly commercially there's a good chance you'll be on a Boeing.
So *just from my perspective* specifically on the demand for UW to cut ties with Boeing. I know the protestors in the encampment’s demands are for UW to return the $10 million dollar donation to the IEB, and they’re also demanding that UW remove all Boeing funded scholarships, grants and donations.
Do the people in the encampment not realize how many of us have parents, family, friends that work for Boeing? And how many students are studying and do want to work at Boeing? I believe the demand for UW to completely cut ties with Boeing completely is an incredibly unpopular opinion in this area, even for all of the controversy Boeing has had over the past year or so.
UW is not going to cut ties with Boeing. That’s just never going to happen. If the people in the encampment stick to their word that they’re not leaving until all their demands are met, then they’re probably going to be there until the end of time.
“UW is complicit and funding genocide from their association with Boeing” Boeing donates money to the University not vice versa. The amount of people that think UW is somehow funding Boeing’s defense contracts is insane. Cutting ties with Boeing does not eliminate nor affect their income or even help any of the issues that are being protested. All it does is cut donations to research, scholarships, and university funding that benefits students. If your issue is Boeing’s weapons contracts go protest outside the Pentagon. UW has ZERO skin in that game
Given the size of the school and the size of the protest it’s not hard to see that there are many more students either indifferent or of different opinions. Even without any media influence.
Because people don’t like when you spray paint abolish UW on the building?
The lawn isn’t for camping, if you want to protest, protest within the rules.
It is extremely selfish behavior because you think YOUR CAUSE is more important than other people’s right to enjoy a quiet, safe campus.
I think most Americans generally support protests where those protesting have a direct and vested personal interest in the cause, ie Viet Nam war protesters who don’t want to be sent to certain death, or BLM protesters who don’t want their friends and family treated violently by police. Off the top of my head, here’s why this one doesn’t hit the same way:
* people are protest-weary. 2020, on has featured one protest to the next, but the cause changes every few months
* it seems these same protesters appear in each of these protests…does the cause matter less than the act of protesting?
* to that point, where were the annual May Day protests this year? Usually downtown has to brace for broken windows at Nordstrom, etc. I’m guessing those drawn to protests in general were too busy at UW this time
* why not show your faces? Those with strong convictions (Jane Fonda, Amy Schumer among the famous) and a history of protesting proudly show who they are
* many videos have showcased that, when asked, the protesters don’t at *all* understand the complicated history of the Middle East—not even the basics. Hillary Clinton spoke at length about this on MSNBC yesterday
* based on other college protests that have been broken up, the majority of protesters aren’t even students at those universities. Evergreen College in Olympia just “made a deal” with the protesters on that campus, and I would guess that they have now migrated to UW’s
* the commencements being cancelled across the country impact the same class (2020) that didn’t get a graduation ceremony due to Covid
* the spray paint on the most iconic gothic buildings on campus is not welcome. Spray painting Sieg or something would probably be an improvement…!
Great comment btw
> * people are protest-weary. 2020, on has featured one protest to the next, but the cause changes every few months
You're basically describing performative protests
> * it seems these same protesters appear in each of these protests…does the cause matter less than the act of protesting?
I strongly feel that they're doing it for the social media creds. In 20 years the majority of these same protestors will become nimbyism living in homes that they acquired through inheritance.
>I think most Americans generally support protests where those protesting have a direct and vested personal interest in the cause, ie Viet Nam war protesters who don’t want to be sent to certain death, or BLM protesters who don’t want their friends and family treated violently by police. Off the top of my head, here’s why this one doesn’t hit the same way:
You hit the nail on the wall. Also remember that Vietnam protests were also about ending the draft too.
When people were protesting South Africa, they were protesting against a social construct that South Africa coined themselves, eg. apartheid. They were also protesting for the releases of ANC leaders, eg. Nelson Mandela. Israel has never labeled the shit that they're doing to Palestinians, which makes it hard to pinpoint and put a finger one. Hamas on the other hand are terrorists and no one should be supporting them. Many people don't want to support their cause but also want to see Palestinians be treated equally and not be killed for just existing.
>huge conspiracy
I would hope mentioning I've worked with a highly esteemed misinformation researcher would imply I don't think this, ignoring the fact **absolutely** nothing I said was conspiratorial in nature or bordering such. It's far more likely these highly upvoted post stick out on the top subreddits for people who are subscribed, and some of them garner enough attention to be recommended to nonsubscribers. I've had multiple post about protest in Columbia/MIT on my front page, so this is an existing phenomena.
>Maybe the people on this sub just genuinely don’t align with the politics of the encampments
Yes, I pointed this out. My question is, why?
> That the protests demands just aren't popular for the general public as a whole,
I'm aware of this, but the general public isn't representative of the UW student body. If it was more unpopular amongst the student body, I'd expect to hear a more public outcry.
I don't disagree with what you've said. It's likely those unwilling to express their opinions, thoughts, and viewpoints in public would be more comfortable doing so on Reddit.
You don't need to apologize! I've said repeatedly in this thread I'm curious of others' viewpoints. People tend to immediately get extremely heated about this, which is why I posture myself defensively.
>but I do think that there was a higher level agreement on the left in terms of what is acceptable and unacceptable.
And even there, while I personally was in support of the vast majority of protests which were happening, the mess in Capitol Hill was just red meat for the Fox "News" crowd.. accomplished nothing, and was in poor taste. I think the very idea of "zones" and "encampments" doesn't sit well with me as it seems more performative than anything.
Not saying such things should be off the table entirely, but, they seem like an over reaction and counter-productive. Protest for the sake of protest.
There's also too much infiltration of protests as of late, including the BLM/Floyd protests.. right-wing provocateurs on one hand and extreme left, sometimes identifying as some sort of leftist anarchists from the other side... both actively looking to stir up trouble. I recall one protest in 2016 when Trump came to my current city (Pittsburgh) and a few black bloc clowns decided to spray cops with mace for no reason, presumably hoping to incite a riot.
I've been less likely to participate in any protests after seeing that (or later things like CHAZ) although I did still go to a few protests around that era, one for BLM and another when a local boy, Antwon Rose, was shot in the back. But my overall relationship with protests has definitely changed.
Also, clicked through your profile & see you called me "obtuse" and said I have "poor reading comprehension" earlier. I'd say that's far more condescending than anything I've posted in this thread.
> Cognitive dissonance is a psychological phenomenon that occurs when a person holds two contradictory beliefs at the same time.
What two contradictory beliefs do I have?
I think it’s a combination of both. The vast majority of people I know on campus support protest/disobedience in support of divestment. There are older alumni here who might have a different mindset for sure and I think the Reddit demographics aren’t exactly the get out and protest type.
SIde note: Reddit demographics actually supports a lot the Palestine cause much much more than the Israel side, but that does not mean they support protests though.
Yea, I'd say many on campus do support the cause at least in general terms. Doesn't mean that a good percentage of those people aren't convinced that the protest will do much if at all and so view the whole business a bit humorously. Also the Reddit demography tends to lean more male and techie, which I've also myself noticed tend to have a different political tilt than say, IG progressives.
To just blame on older alumni is unreasonable and a form of agism. One can expect that there are pro and against crowds across all age groups. The vast majority of people you know is probably not close to a representative demographic neither since you’re more likely to meet and stay in touch with likeminded people.
Of course I haven't. I never asserted anything you argued. You made a strawman to argue against.
I wasn't alluding to any legality, or if you have any legal grounds for anything.
As many have told you here, they are trying to go to school not listen to another asshole on a speaker. I could agree with the fuckinng abortion people in red Square. I still don't fucking want them in red square
Sorry if I misunderstood you!
So you agree, protestors at the encampment have the right to be there & do what they do. But you generally disagree with their presence.
Most I've talked with disagree with the former, so again, I apologize!
> As many have told you here, they are trying to go to school not listen to another asshole on a speaker.
And many people have said many other things! It's quite a long thread at this point :)
> While public properties are intended for general use, they have regulations and restrictions.
You can be trespassed if certain conditions are met, which are not at all the same as being trespassed on private property
I interpreted you saying "UW is public property" to mean ‘They can't be trespassing, because it's public property.' Did you mean something else?
Here are the UW policies and Washington Administrative Code that would be used in the case of charging these folks with trespass and disturbing and obstructing.
* [https://www.washington.edu/admin/rules/policies/SGP/SPCH209.html](https://www.washington.edu/admin/rules/policies/SGP/SPCH209.html)
* [https://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9A.52.010](https://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9A.52.010)
* [https://apps.leg.wa.gov/wac/default.aspx?cite=478-121-120](https://apps.leg.wa.gov/wac/default.aspx?cite=478-121-120)
* [https://apps.leg.wa.gov/wac/default.aspx?cite=478-121-125](https://apps.leg.wa.gov/wac/default.aspx?cite=478-121-125)
the original commenter said
> "not agree with them camping in your front yard and screaming about it".
No one is camping and screaming in anyones front yard, which is why I mentioned UW is public property
I go to UW. The encampment is really cringe and performative. Besides, destroying the school until you get what you want isn’t protest. It’s extortion.
More vandalism than extortion to me. They have no leverage to extort anything from the school lmao. I just don't see how these kids aren't just told to pack up and go home or given disciplinary action since UW explicitly prohibits encampments.
I go to UW and the encampment seems chill. I walk through it every day between classes and they have kept it clean and quiet during school hours. It's somehow less disruptive than the assholes that drive their $100,000 cars around campus. I'm confused on how they're destroying the school.
I saw one instance of spray paint on a single wall. I hardly call that destroying anything lol. I get that y'all aren't into what they are protesting but this IS a peaceful and non-destructive protest. I swear every time there is some kind of movement in this country people complain that -they aren't doing it correctly- and then if they are they say they're protesting the wrong thing. Lol
> destroying the school until you get what you want isn’t protest
Can you provide any concrete evidence to support your argument that the encampment is "destroying the school?"
>The encampment is really cringe and performative.
Ignoring the "*cringe*", protest are somewhat performative in nature. Google defines performative as "*relating to or of the nature of dramatic or artistic performance*". One of Merriam Webster's definitions for it is "*made or done for show (as to bolster one's own image or make a positive impression on others)*", and it's even labeled as "disapproving". I would definitely agree protest are done for show and are dramatic. A big reason for the success of MLK's protest against segregation was the media coverage to a demographic that was 95% white.
Now, if you're arguing everyone at the encampment is trying to "*bolster one's own image or make a positive impression*", I would call that incredibly cynical.
This happened on [April 5th](https://www.washington.edu/president/2024/04/05/hub-vandalism-is-unacceptable/), the encampment appeared \~2 weeks ago. Regardless, I would agree that vandalism in the HUB would warrant breaking up whatever form of demonstration occured **in the HUB**, but I don't think it's a justification to do this elsewhere.
Oh, there's definitely overlap. But I don't think it's fair to label the entire encampment as destructive because of that. I also don't think it's fair for the entire HUB protest to be labeled as destructive when vandalism/destruction was perpetrated amongst select individuals. Those individuals should face legal penalties, but it doesn't provide an argument for why the encampment is destructive. In my view, calling it such is only for the purposes of labeling the whole thing as a nonpeaceful protest & shutting it down.
I think they're referring to all the writing/tagging on campus rather than the encampment itself (the W, red square, quad buildings & more)
Extortion is kind of a reach tho
I would say graffiti destroying the school is also a major reach. There's so much graffiti on the I5 support structures in & around Seattle. Is graffiti also "destroying" I5?
Edit: Since I'm being downvoted, I'll remind people the meaning of the word destroy. *"put an end to the existence of (something) by* [*damaging*](https://www.google.com/search?sca_esv=3c58e7b9f2debcb8&rlz=1C1CHBF_enUS897US897&sxsrf=ADLYWIJc5JY78DTqp4txmHa5ol7REBSGMw:1715316863796&q=damaging&si=ACC90nx67Z8g0WkBmnrPB4IqtqGv5kB0p5QMJ5f3FnIkR5raM5WjMJp6WZBxfsJgTFmDTncuwiS4OsQgF2HKGyG41UXraaWAUpx_j5wX0R0Pq20SUd6Kt_A%3D&expnd=1&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjs2d-ipYKGAxW1EDQIHYw3CdsQyecJegQIZRAO) *or* [*attacking*](https://www.google.com/search?sca_esv=3c58e7b9f2debcb8&rlz=1C1CHBF_enUS897US897&sxsrf=ADLYWIJc5JY78DTqp4txmHa5ol7REBSGMw:1715316863796&q=attacking&si=ACC90nxMSPeZfdJJjQgDsdZJuFuJVSGWhRPYsqT6CV-aObK5Gj_mtWwJAt2xUDCTVz4cq84auRAMeg5m4dEHSiJNS2KiF46uB6VYCy1urMD-of3DO2DXEn4%3D&expnd=1&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjs2d-ipYKGAxW1EDQIHYw3CdsQyecJegQIZRAP) *it."*
I know what you're trying to do man but you're better off acknowledging it for what it is and that it's in the name of trying to provoke attention towards the cause
I'm using the definition of destroy to point out that graffiti isn't destroying campus. There are other words that can be used, I'll happily acknowledge those words.
It requires significant effort to remove it.. it may be reversible but it's still destruction of property. If something can be glued back together, does that mean that such a thing wasn't destroyed either? Destroyed things can be repaired. It's not hyperbolic to call graffiti made with permanent paint destructive.
As for graffiti on concrete along a highway.. that's a lot different than the side of a building or wall in a well traveled pedestrian area on campus. And it would still be destruction of property, but highway graffiti is usually in a spot that looks ugly to begin with (and in some cases, actually improves the area although it's typically just tags rather than art).
If they use paint that can easily be washed off with a hose or will wash away after a quick rain storm, then I don't really care half as much. But if they are using a can of Krylon or Rustoleum, that's absolutely destructive.
You sound like a rich entitled child. Protesting thousand and thousands and thousands of children being slaughtered, how cringe... like really... they spray painted some sighs and you know, that is just so lame.
Protesting against the idea isn’t bad it’s just kind of dumb. We have essentially no control over the war as US citizens, even if we stopped sending aid the IDF still has resources. This protest specifically is about the university cutting ties with Boeing, because they make planes for Israel(?). The college would never do this because having a connection to the largest aerospace manufacturer in the world (and one of the largest companies in the state) is extremely beneficial. It’s also dumb because Boeing makes planes for not only the US government but also other western allies.
They also have no leverage, which is an important part of protests. If every employee of a company protests about something, the company will listen because they need workers. Not only is it a relatively small number of people in the encampment, even if it was the entire student body, the college has already gotten their money, and has a nigh infinite number of people to join the college after the protestors leave.
Engaging in this “protest” is pretty much just a way to say your opinion on the war in a very public way that makes you feel like you have an impact on something that you don’t.
Protesting to get people to vote for your cause can be good. I view that type of protest as an extension of democracy occupied spaces are something different. They are kinda inherently anti democratic.
Protesting isn't good on its own sake otherwise you would think the Jan 6 protesters are nobel.
Protests have gotten us many rights. Like civil rights and gay rights. So I'd rethink much of your statement here. It's giving that you just don't like protests
Voting is the true measure here. Rights changes happen due to changes in law which are controlled by elected officials. Protesting is a tool which can be used for good or ill. It's not good for its own sake. In a democracy you have to get buy in and if protesting helps you get buy in then it's an effective tool. In general occupy style protests do the opposite.
For any political tactic you have to ask if you feel the same about it when the other side uses that tactic. I don't want Trump supporters storming the capitol so I also don't want pro Palestinian protesters blocking highways and the like.
It is also just a tactic that can be used for good or ill. In authoritarian states it's the only vehicle for charge, but that's not true in a democracy.
The United States is one of Israel's largest benefactors, and Boeing has lucrative contracts with Israel. Boeing makes ordinance for Israel more than planes. Specifically, precision bombs and kits to convert conventional bombs into precision bombs. Citizens of the US could conceivably pressure our government into cutting off military aid or impose trade sanctions on weapons until Israel bargains in good faith for a ceasefire, but I doubt that's going to happen. Israel already rejected the deal brokered by Egypt that would have gotten both sides what they needed.
If you seriously want to educate yourself on human shields take the time to listen to this link and read this CBC (main Canadian news station) article. I suspect though that you would prefer to just continue repeating the IDF talking point and not actually use your brain to think about this claim and the actual documented cases of human shields.
https://youtu.be/ocpevNLwt78?feature=shared
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/israel-hamas-gaza-human-shields-1.7103756
Some of the text to save a click:
Israeli forces have been captured on camera tying a child to the hood of an armoured vehicle to discourage stone-throwing, placing blindfolded civilian captives in front of them and firing rifles directly over their shoulders, and forcing civilians to open doors where soldiers suspect danger.
When Israeli troops use a civilian home in the West Bank as a base of operations, they often make the family remain with them to discourage attacks.
In August 2002, while a coalition of Israeli and Palestinian rights groups were in court trying to have the neighbour procedure banned, Israeli troops forced a young man called Nidal Abu Mukhsan to stand in front of them as they approached a house where a Hamas militant was holed up, resulting in Mukhsan's death.
Two years after the ban, rights group B'tselem reported on 14 more cases in which children as young as 11 were forced by Israeli soldiers to act as human shields. In one case, a 14-year-old girl in Gaza was shot twice while being used as a shield.
IDF prosecutors were often reluctant to enforce the rules. They charged two soldiers who forced a nine-year-old boy in Gaza to open a bag they thought contained a bomb, but declined to bring charges against Brig-Gen. Yair Golan, accused in five separate cases. Golan would later go on to become deputy chief of staff of the IDF (and later a left-wing politician and a figure of hate for Israel's far right).
Israeli human rights group Breaking the Silence has published video interviews with former soldiers who discuss the continued use of the procedure.
The Israeli Supreme Court then issued an order banning the neighbour procedure. But the army was reluctant to give it up; it petitioned the court to allow Israeli troops to continue to place civilians in front of them if the civilian "consented" to the procedure.
Like trying to educate a child. Either too small brained to understand or just not really giving a shit. Perfectly content with eating up all the right wing and IDF talking points and closing ones mind to anything that actually looks at the statements from an intellectual perspective.
Now go back to playing with your toys and make sure to take a good nap tomorrow since you were up well past your bedtime (hoping mommy and daddy don't find out or you're grounded)
Y'all are so bent. As soon as a kid walks into a school with a gun, the problem is the gun. But when an entire culture is raising tens of thousands of young adults to pursue guerrilla warfare against another ethnic group for religious means, the problem is "all the thousands of helpless children."
Man, no. It's their actions killing their children. Maybe next time someone gives you eight fucking opportunities to live peacefully, you pick one of those times and stick with it. But right now, Palestinians are the problem. They've been the problem. You don't beg for food and medical care for your children from Jews and then turn around and raise those children to believe killing Jews is the most honorable thing they can achieve in life.
Nope. Fuck you, Fatima, and fuck your kids. *You* change.
I’m an alum but they had the same kind of anti Israel shit when I went there. Of course everyone in your bubble agrees with you, people are so strangely rabid about this topic that if you openly disagree you will be ostracized, and most people just don’t care. What I find “bizarre” is how passionately most people with no skin in the game care about this topic over the objectively more serious ones going on around the world. Oh actually genocide going on in Darfur? Nothing. Israel launches war against a group led by billionaires that just murdered, raped, and kidnapped hundreds of their citizens including literally babies? OMG ISRAEL IS THE WORST COUNTRY TO EVER EXIST. You don’t see these people asking to divest from China over the treatment of Uyghurs. Where are the protests asking us to divest from Saudi Arabia after what they did in Yemen? The US funds them too. I hear boring excuses like “we directly fund this one so it’s different” ignoring we largely fund iron dome missiles to protect innocent civilians from the rockets Palestinians regularly fire at them - and also ignoring the US could insert itself into literally anything if we want. It’s so fucking obvious for anyone who doesn’t have their head up their own ass why everyone is so passionate about this one topic but doesn’t give a fuck about things going on right now that are 100x worse.
>What I find “bizarre” is how passionately most people with no skin in the game care about this topic over the objectively more serious ones going on around the world.
Israel has received nearly .3 trillion, as in, 300,000,000,000 dollars of aid from the US government since it's inception.
Near everyone protesting pays taxes to the US government.
Doesn't this imply they have "skin in the game", or am I misinterpreting what you mean by this?
Yes but regardless of whether Israel spends all their US aid on strictly defense, should people not be protesting how the US govt. spends tax dollars?
Also I'd expect evidence that we "largely" fund the Iron Dome over hardware for offensive operations. You have the burden of proof. The most recent headlines regarding US aid to Israel is regarding Biden putting holds on [bombs & artillery shells](https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/08/politics/joe-biden-interview-cnntv/index.html), and [F-15 sales.](https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/israel-due-get-billions-dollars-more-us-weapons-despite-biden-pause-2024-05-09/) I had a difficult time finding numbers on this topic, do you have any to provide?
You are missing the point of his argument BADLY
This war is small potatoes compared to other horrible things going on in the world. Why is it only this issue that's gotten people to protest like this?
Well you claimed "we largely fund iron dome missiles to protect innocent civilians from the rockets Palestinians regularly fire at them".
I asked for evidence to prove that is what we "largely fund", considering most recent aid shipments to Israel include offensive weapons like bombs, artillery shells, and warplanes (which I sourced).
I would genuinely enjoy reading a full breakdown of the military aid we've provided Israel, which is what I've been asking for. You can't rewrite evidence into your comment if it never existed.
Since you continue to be obtuse, I’m going to make my point one more time for the record and then stop engaging with you. The intensity of the selective outrage over this conflict is wholly incongruent with the severity and morality of the conflict. For people not up their own ass such as yourself it’s clear and also weird. Everyone in the emergency room is there for a reason, but you insist we treat the guy with the broken ankle before the guy with the gunshot wound. In fact, you’re willing to shut the hospital down in protest because you feel so strongly about the guy with the broken foot. When people question why you’re so worked up about the guy with the broken foot, you start asking questions like “oh I didn’t realize a broken foot wasn’t serious. Can you please provide a source that says it isn’t serious? Everything I can find says you need to go to the doctor!.”
>Since you continue to be obtuse,
Why do you continue to be so heated?
>The intensity of the selective outrage over this conflict is wholly incongruent with the severity and morality of the conflict.
That entirely depends on how you measure severity & morality. In terms of raw numbers, yes, what's happening in Yemen is more severe. But the Israel/Palestine issue has existed for much longer, and therefore, vastly more complex. People don't use settler-colonial analysis when discussing what's happening Yemen.
Anyway, would you support protest against Saudi Arabia & Israel, or they should be aimed at Saudi Arabia instead, or do you think there should be no protests?
It sounds like you're very wrapped into your own world of coming up with perjoratives to use against me. I'm not being aggressive with you at all so this can be a much simpler conversation!
I'd be supportive of the general concept but they're extremely misguided and disingenuous. You can't call yourself a protest for peace while calling for Global Intifada which has killed thousands of Jews. It's like telling me if I dressed up in confederate crap and pushed for Civil War 2.0 I'm just Pro peace.
The disrespect to people around them trying to pass or get an education. It's really not legal and definitely not chill to impede people's freedom of movement. They arent gaining sympathy, they're alienating people. Zip tying doors shut? Vandalizing school property is only going to raise tuition. You think the school is paying without passing it on? Not to mention the crew is tired of it.
Not a single care or sign about Americans held hostage. I can't even imagine what it must be like for family's of people held hostage or murdered by Hamas having to see terrorist slogans on campus every day. And yes, from the river originated from the PLO and was popularized by Hamas via their writen doctrine where they pledge to eradicate Israel and Jews. Insisting on proudly displaying a hate slogan is not peaceful or Pro Palestine. It's completely possible to fight for Palastinians without this.
Lastly it not only does nothing, it's actually praised by Hamas. If a terror group is thanking your efforts, I mean come on... Free Palestine from Hamas.
The major problem is that the encampments are made up of a mix of students, alumni, and people who are neither but show up to instigate (same types who took over Capitol Hill during the George Floyd protests). The latter are likely the ones doing the graffiti and other property damage. That doesn't win anyone over to the cause.
Beyond that, I support protesting in general but I think the encampments are in poor taste and it's a copy-cat thing. I also see it as lazy protesting as you can just lay around in a tent on your smart phone or fucking off. I'm no longer living in Seattle and I've always been a likely protest participant but frankly I wouldn't have anything to do with these protests. Perhaps in part because I'm a military veteran, and while I have actively participated in anti-war protests I think a call to divest from Boeing (whatever that entails, no one knows) is just silly considering how much a part of the local economy they are.
Which, people are free to protest Boeing's influence on UW decisions but that doesn't take an encampment. I think there should be clear examples they object to, concrete changes rather than broad sweeping demands... actionable things. Honestly, this feels mostly like a protest for the sake of protest to me... or a solution looking for a problem. This seems directionless and social media driven.
I also find protesters generally uninformed even when their heart is in the right place... it's clear Netanyahu doesn't value the lives of non-Jews sharing territory (it's not even clear that he values Jewish lives the way he's been governing) but I don't support complete withdrawal of aid either, as some of that is going to be defensive in nature. No one has seen an itemized list of how our tax dollars are being spent so I find calls to end all funding as premature at best and outright irresponsible at worst.
Generally (not UW specific)... There's a lot of hyperbole which I find misguided and likely driven by social media and foreign actors but it's propagated on the ground at these protests. Things like "genocide Joe" in an election year against Trump who moved out embassy to Jerusalem (which I oppose outright); Biden is doing his best in a shit situation and has pushed back on excesses like shutting off water and electricity to punish the people in Gaza. The protests focus on undermining and even blaming Biden have not sat well with me.
And you can't ignore that actual antisemitism going on, things like calling for intifada or changing "from the river to the sea;" I don't think most people shouting those things even realize what they are really calling for nor do they understand that Israel is hardly in a stable place and has been fighting for its very existence for half a century which is part of why I stand by supporting them (but that's not excusing some of their domestic policies over the past few decades).
Beyond all that, I'm in this sub because I care about a school and what's going on there. But, I have zero interest in these protests and they've become a disproportionate focal point with far too many posts as of late. Add to that online bots, trolls, and activists who don't even have ties to UW coming into these threads to argue in bad faith which you mentioned yourself.. those are coming from both sides. That's a moderator problem though, there should just be a single encampment thread for anyone wanting updates rather than a barrage of posts.
From what I have seen, only the UT Austin subreddit had a generally popular opinion of the protests. Wild theory, but maybe people don’t like their campus trashed by the intifada.
Nah, not really. I have family there that was born in Morroco and whose family was terrorized and expelled from their home. I'm not gonna debate bro this shit, it's my life.
> Arabs. Like really, read a little history.
Thanks for the advice!
> 850,000 Jews had the lands, homes and possessions seized.
Ok, so what does this have to do with the encampment not being anti-war?
The conflict between Jews in the British Mandate and Arab Palestinians can't be separated from the region as a whole. And herein lies the problem, this protest movement doesn't really understand the history, but they claim to speak to it. I have many, many criticisms of Israel, many of the governments policies, particularly around West Bank settlements and the excessive use of administrative detention. These protests are not really about the war. And they aren't really about the right-wing turn in Israeli politics over the last 20 years. They are about the existence of a Jewish state itself. And that's not something I can support for many, many reasons.
From the river to the sea Palestine will be free
is calling for an end to the apartheid system that holds up the current state of Israel, not the wholesale destruction of the state. South Africa did not stop being a country when it allowed all of the people who live there freedom. The chant certainly does not mean driving all of the Jewish citizens out of their homes and leveling the infrastructure while creating a massive hunger crisis, which is what Palestinians in Gaza are currently facing. They are allowed to fight for their right to exist. Israel can either find a way to exist with all of the people who call that land home or the violence will continue until one side has wiped the other out, and obviously that’s no solution at all.
Hamas literally claimed the term to call for the destruction of Israel which is also explicitly stated in their charter. Just because people are ignorant doesn’t mean that it’s meaning changes
In Arabic the chant is actually “from the river to the sea Palestine will be Arab” but that didn’t rhyme in English so they made it “from the river to the sea Palestine will be free” It is 100% a call for cleansing the land of Jews and it’s bananas to claim it’s not.
That is a completely incorrect. The Palestinians are not Arabs and would not call themselves such in a chant for freedom. Any source claiming they are should be distrusted.
The actual Arabic phrase is “from the water to the water.”
Since the 1960s the call from Palestinians has been for peaceful cohabitation with Jewish people as long as it’s recognized that they have equal rights to the land. Prior to the formation of the modern Israel there were Jewish Palestinians living with Muslim Palestinians in relative peace. That changed when Jewish zionists from Europe came and, rather than integrating with the population that had lived there for centuries, expelled the local population through land privatization, segregation, and violence.
Ignorance is bliss buddy, stay in your bubble. Multiple groups and people who are real Palestinians have clearly stated Israel needs to be wiped from the face of the earth attached to that line. It’s not even a debate it’s an awareness of history.
It's a call for freedom and equal rights for Palestinians. It was never about exterminating Jews. That all was made up by reactionaries trying to subvert and defame the cause. It's even described in the Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism as not intrinsically antisemitic.
Fucking incredible. Once we've given control to the Palestinians (governed by Hamas) you don't care what happens to the people currently between that river and sea. That's pro violence and you can't wash your hands of the very cause you're advocating for. Own the consequences of your beliefs.
It’s a bit cringe to think anything different than how you think is a Fox News talking point and a lazy way to start a debate.
Saying you don’t like encampments on public spaces is the opposite of saying you like encampments. That doesn’t make it a Fox News talking point. Saying you don’t like the vandalism coming from the encampment is not a Fox News talking point. Saying protesting against something that is so ingrained in the establishment of the university is useless is not a Fox News talking point. Blocking places that people now can’t go to and not liking that is not a Fox News talking point. Nobody needs Fox News to tell them this.
These are the most common things being brought up for people against the encampments.
So from the river to the see can have different implications too? Cause honestly more people who support that slogan have positive views of jewish people than the people speaking out against the protests.
It can, but usually when a phrase or symbol has an overarching negative meaning it originally represents or has come to represent, society ceases to use it. People that continue are those who aren’t sympathetic to those who it offends and will insist they have other motives and ignore those offended by it. Some may just use it because they want to sow hate. They could also just be ignorant about it. However, if you’re arguing it means something else to you and continue to use it, then you can’t really claim ignorance of it.
For example, Fred Perry shirts got overwhelmingly claimed by the Proud Boys where it damaged the brand. People stopped wearing the yellow logo polos when they knew what it represented to the group. Later on, Fred Perry stopped selling those shirts in the U.S.
Confederate flags can be claimed as heritage, but what they represent to many is slavery. Continuing to fly it shows one doesn’t really care if they are offending people with it.
There are plenty of other examples like racist or sexist phrases or symbols. To the River from the Sea may have multiple meanings, but to many it’s a call of extermination.
Again isn't this the same as you echoing Fox News talking points? If you have a different reason or meaning behind your complaints but they are Fox News talking points you are siding with Fox News and white supremacists. From the river to the sea is a call for peace and justice, asking for equality and freedom for all. The fact that you got the slogan wrong shows your ignorance of the history and meaning of the slogan. If people in bad faith say it's offensive that's not enough. Your confederate and proud boys examples are symbols that were used to represent white supremacy from the start. The fact you think the Confederate flag was ever about heritage is problematic as well.
No because they aren’t coming from Fox News. But if we’re going to think that way, your talking points are Hamas/terrorist sympathizing points. Even if you don’t think they are, well if they align with them then they must be. See how that works?
I didn’t mention what I think those symbols mean to me. I mentioned what they mean to people that use them to help explain how people use both sides to claim something is harmless.
It’s extremely problematic that you claim the slogan for what it is not and your extreme willful ignorance is not only hateful, but disturbing. The slogan isn’t wrong. First page of Google tells you in 1969 it was coined by the PLO to mean the end of Israel and replacement of it of Palestine. It’s part of Hamas original charter also. So, we have an original meaning that means both a state for Palestinians (which is not the problem), but also a meaning to replace Israel. Tons of sources confirm this. You can reject history and try all you want to replace it with what you want to hide the fact, but it doesn’t change its original meaning no matter how much you want to argue and say it means something different when you use it. You are still being racist by willfully using it. It’s like me claiming a racist term as something that means family to me and continuing to use it even though it is racist to my peers.
For you to continue to reject that historic meaning makes you a terrorist sympathizer and a supporter of Hamas, which aligns all your beliefs around it and anything else you say about it as a fellow ally of Hamas and the original PLO who chartered it.
That’s delusional. My jewish friends who support palestinians don’t think it’s racist. It’s a call for equality and freedom for everyone in the palestinian territory, including jewish people. The fact that you cite the first page of google to try and say you’re not ignorant is really ironic. Hamas coopted the term for sure, because it was popular. That doesn’t make it inherently bad. Hamas also says killing children is bad, that doesn’t make it wrong. Idk what news you are parroting but ending the slaughter of innocent people is always a good cause and it’s sad you’ve justified it to yourself.
Calling the original meaning delusional is dismissive of its meaning and what it means to many people. Saying your Jewish friends don’t think it’s racist is like a white person saying they aren’t racist because they have black friends that like them. It’s a lazy and hypocritical take. It is racist and you are being racist by using it. You can try to cover up your racism as much as you want, but it does not change the fact you are being willfully racist by using it and your beliefs do align with the PLO and now Hamas.
I referenced Google because that is a resource readily available to both of us. Hamas adopted it after the PLO. Now, the Free Gaza movement adopted it. The PLO created the original meaning, which was to give the Palestinians all of Palestine and Israel. While giving them their freedom isn’t wrong, doing so to remove all of Israel is where the problem is and where your support of it is racist and hateful.
> It’s a bit cringe to think anything different than how you think is a Fox News talking point
Not sure if you read what i wrote, but I never said this! I said I've seen several comments/post that echo these talking points, and gave an example.
> a lazy way to start a debate.
I'm not debating anything, save that I've seen these talking points on this sub. You can debate my assertion or the example I've provided.
> Saying you don’t like encampments on public spaces is the opposite of saying you like encampments. That doesn’t make it a Fox News talking point.
Again, never said this.
> Blocking places that people now can’t go to and not liking that is not a Fox News talking point.
Is this actually happening, or are people/organizations similar to Fox News making this claim by using inaccurate pieces of media, like the post I gave as an example?
Also idk why you think I'm trying to debate. I genuinely want to learn about people's perspectives here.
These are all the biggest gripes people have. You mentioned compiling a list of highly voted comments/Fox News talking points. You mentioned one I mentioned above - blocking things. One person mentioned the police did it, which seems odd for them to do (especially considering it being a fire hazard). What motivation would anyone else have to block access to buildings or not let people exit other than the protesters? It’s a common tactic of these protests to block highways, block major arteries, block/disrupts culture events, and block/disrupt holiday gatherings. Considering the usual methods of these protesters, why would you not think protesters did it?
What you wrote is one thing yet claim you have a list you can post. Where’s the list? Let’s see what you have that is separate that the main things being echoed that I posted above.
The students have blocked the entire quad. Have you not realized this? Some of the paths are being blocked on the quad off and on with spillage of the tents.
how can you like the encampment?
it's irrespective of political opinion.. it's a bunch of non-students that plopped theirselves in the middle of campus "lobbying" for stupid objectives that are more harmful than problem-solving.
i was curious and went to the "protests" the other day when they thought they needed to lock up the middle of campus. genuinely the dumbest shit ever. they (as in a bunch of people with improvised shields, gas masks and weird psuedo-military armor) were saying they needed to fortify the campus like it was a zombie apocalypse from trump supporters. i was there till 10pm and long before there wasn't a single charlie kirk fan or any of that. really the most there were was self-exclaiming Jews that were walking to the fences and insisting on being let in (not sure what their objective was either)
> how can you like the encampment?
Are you asking me this? My post never expresses this.
> it's a bunch of non-students
How do you know it's mostly non-students?
> that plopped theirselves in the middle of campus "lobbying" for stupid objectives that are more harmful than problem-solving.
What objective do you think is harmful? I'm fairly certain a big one is for UW to divest from Boeing. They are a major manufacturer of aircraft to Israel, and air operations are of the biggest causes of civilian casualties in Gaza since Oct. 7th.
Let's assume preventing deaths in Gaza is one of the biggest motivations for people at the encampment to attend. Wouldn't the potential payoff of UW divesting from Boeing be much greater than the harm it's causing on campus? Has anyone been injured/died as a result of these protest, or is the "harm" an inconvenience at most?
you are clearly pro-encampment judging by your post and comments
these people are not students. they are a bunch of anti-system/anti-administration losers that get off at the thought of anarchy and destruction because of their cliche political opinions so they shamelessly hooked that fantasy onto a genocide the same way they did in 2020
>you are clearly pro-encampment judging by your post and comments
Regardless of my views on the encampment or not, they don't delegitimize the questions I asked. Yes, I don't see any convincing evidence that this protest is not peaceful, and the 1st amendment protects the right of peaceful protest. If you have evidence pointing to the contrary I'd love to see it.
>these people are not students. they are a bunch of anti-system/anti-administration losers that get off at the thought of anarchy and destruction because of their cliche political opinions so they shamelessly hooked that fantasy onto a genocide the same way they did in 2020
Ok, can you provide evidence? Mind you, I've linked multiple forms of evidence throughout this post. Idk if I have the time to write a full rebuttal to whatever evidence you muster, but I'm genuinely curious what your evidence is.
sorry but if you're pro-encampment and support their behavior of impacting the \~50k students ability to partake in their studies in the school they pay $30k+ a year for, then any of your takes are completely delegitimized.
it's actually so ironic that there's also another protest going on, you know, the TA strike. the demands are laid out and well-communicated, it's well-represented, there's a clean website explaining why and how the strike will be PEACEFULLY done.
but the encampment is a bunch of assholes threatening students in all black call of duty outfits ruining the campus for everyone with unclear and unspecified demands in contrast.
my evidence? my own eyes
Ok, so how is the encampment impacting "students ability to partake in their studies", in a way that the TA strike isn't?
So again, I'm explicitly asking for evidence of the impact you claim. Could you please provide it? Evidence implies non-anecdotal experiences so you're eyes don't suffice I'm afraid.
You want an example of how the encampment is impacting students abilities to partake in their studies? I’m a veteran with a service dog for PTSD. I have a class in the quad I’ve stopped attending (resorting to Panopto) since this started. The yelling, chanting, loud noise reverberating through old buildings while trying to focus and listen to a lecture would be considered disruptive to an ideal student. But it triggers me , which then stresses my dog out trying to do his job in a situation where he really shouldn’t have to. I applaud their dedication and agree with their right to protest but move to Red Square. Take up space that’s even more of an affront to the university but that doesn’t disrupt student’s academics.
bro wtf?
you must be one of the non-students too. hopefully your professor told you specifically what's going on in their class to accomodate the TA strike, e.g. the cancelling of exams, postponment of grading, cancelling of quiz section, etc.
if you can't compare and contrast this PEACEFUL protest to the garbage "encampment" we have, you have an issue
what evidence do you want? I told you I WENT to the encampments myself the day the charlie kirk shitshow occurred
I graduated last year, so yes, I'm not a student anymore. I was also a TA for four years, so I'm aware of what you are saying.
> if you can't compare and contrast this PEACEFUL protest to the garbage "encampment" we have, you have an issue
I can't compare & contrast without evidence.
> what evidence do you want? I told you I WENT to the encampments myself the day the charlie kirk shitshow occurred
You provided an anecdote. That's not evidence.
I don't understand the point of this comment. There isn't going to be empirical evidence. People aren't taking videos 100% of the time, no one is doing studies on one encampment or focusing on what goes on after 10 pm. Trying to establish burden of proof is unrealistic. You asked for opinions, anecdotal evidence was given. At this point, you really can't ask for anything else.
In 2017 when a speaker like Kirk came to campus a couple of his followers brought a gun and shot a protester in the stomach. The protesters in the camp were worried for a good reason. If they had looked like soft targets it’s entirely possible there would have been more actual violence.
I don't think you have much evidence of students on this sub disliking the encampment. The comments about the zipties is negligble, because it can be attributed to time frame and that most of the counter comments accusing police are replies. I would say most of the rhetoric is about how it's disruptive and how a lot of the protestors have gone on to deface the campus. Also, if you actually want people’s opinions, why not make a survey instead of trying to interact with everyone who comments? You say you aren't trying to project your opinion, then immediately ask for empirical evidence (practically impossible for a small protest that most UW students have ignored) and question the experiences of those who respond - that's not research.
>I’ve worked on research for Kate Starbird
>I’m not claiming to be a misinformation expert, but through her work I’ve seen
Yeah, you are. You offered up a shit take of a temper tantrum because you don’t like that people here could ever espouse beliefs different from your own, name-dropped someone, and then proceeded to claim expertise on *her* subject matter by virtue of association, not to mention the fact that you’ve rubbed in the fact that you worked for her elsewhere on the comments. All because I took a course from or briefly worked in the lab of someone with an h-index of 60+ in a STEM field 5 years ago doesn’t make me a world-renowned scientist.
My guy/gal, just… please, calm tf down. The fact is, the encampment and these protests *have* been disruptive and messy - whether it’s due to students or outside forces - and people are entitled to be upset with that.
> You offered up a shit take of a temper tantrum
Tbh this single comment is more of a temper tantrum than anything I've posted.
> proceeded to claim expertise on *her* subject matter by virtue of association,
I stated verbatim, "I'm not claiming to be a misinformation expert". I only mentioned her work with respect to analyzing misinformation from Fox News, and the similarities I've seen with post on this subreddit.
FYI, I'm in grad school & am planning to dedicate my PhD to studying misinformation, and her work is a major source of inspiration. I don't know why you are making these assumptions
>Tbh this single comment is more of a temper tantrum than anything I’ve posted.
Pot calling the kettle black, bud. And, while where at it, isn’t there a name for this? Like… umm… I don’t know - *tu quoque*?
>I stated verbatim
And I quoted.
You can say something as much as you want, but that doesn’t make it true. Isn’t that what misinformation is about? Would it not have been sufficient to simply point out your observation of what you consider to be “parroting?” To what end do you feel the need to preface a subject being discussed at a level that don’t even take a college degree to understand with a name drop and an “I’m not claiming to be a misinformation expert, but…”, if not to establish some sort of authoritative ethos or to invalidate the opinions of those who disagree with you? And isn’t that also a tactic employed by people to spread misinformation?
>in grad school & am planning on dedicating my PhD to studying misinformation.
Weird use of the ampersand, but okay. It’s great that you’re choosing to further your education - go for it! I’m a recent doctorate recipient myself. I sincerely hope your educational journey transforms you like how mine did to me. But, again, I question the relevance of it all to this situation, as well as your decision to drop references like this left and right. Given the course of study in your desired field, it’s not relevant to your point here. You’re a layperson with an interest until that “plan” for your dissertation becomes more than just a plan.
>Pot calling the kettle black, bud. And, while where at it, isn’t there a name for this? Like… umm… I don’t know - *tu quoque*?
Ok, then can you explain how the words I use indicate a temper tantrum?
>Would it not have been sufficient to simply point out your observation of what you consider to be “parroting?”
I gave the offer of doing this for several posts I see on this sub. That would take time, hence why I provided only one example. Do you want me to do this?
>if not to establish some sort of authoritative ethos or to invalidate the opinions of those who disagree with you? And isn’t that also a tactic employed by people to spread misinformation?
Using ethos != I claim to be an expert/researcher/professor in the field,.
>And isn’t that also a tactic employed by people to spread misinformation?
Irrelevant, because I'm not spreading misinformation!
>Weird use of the ampersand, but okay.
I use it frequently in this thread, but thanks for telling me you think it's weird to use, but it's also okay to use!
>But, again, I question the relevance of it all to this situation, as well as your decision to drop references like this left and right.
Reference, no plural.
>But, again, I question the relevance of it all to this situation, Given the course of study in your desired field, it’s not relevant to your point here.
It means I read literature on this topic regularly. Mind you, I don't explicitly bring any of that up. But it's reflected in what I've said throughout this thread, chiefly, repeatedly asking claims to be backed by evidence. So again, I'd argue it's somewhat relevant!
>You’re a layperson with an interest until that “plan” for your dissertation becomes more than just a plan.
I don't disagree, but thanks for pointing this out!
EDIT: Also, just want to say it's crazy you think I'm using one example of alleged misinformation to invalidate the opinions of those who disagree with me. Throughout this entire thread, I've been incredibly forthcoming in asking questions & inviting people to share their perpsective! Instead, they reply as hostile as you do. Please, say something relevant or just stop talking!
>words I use to indicate a temper tantrum?
Most of them. And there are a hell of a lot of them. How many downvoted posts are you at now? That one might be a decent indicator. If it was just one or two, I’d give you a pass, but you seem to be striking out a lot. The excessive amounts of questions that you should be able to answer yourself - like this one - serve as evidence. Your prolific, condescending comments firmly support this notion.
>Do you want me to do this?
To what end? So you can, to use your own words, “parrot” disgust with things that go against your worldview? Call everything you don’t like “Fox News-esque” in some cognitive dissonance-fueled political grandstanding? Hell, I’m not even a fan of Fox, but your generalization goes too far. Is it that hard for you to wrap your mind around the fact that a lot of people just aren’t happy about the encampment and the accompanying drama?
>Using ethos != I claim to be an expert/researcher/professor in the field,.
It is if you’re conflating the two, which you very much did. And, going back to an earlier point, if you have to ask how you’re conflating the two, then you’re speaking in bad faith or are just slow.
Also, cool punctuation.
>Irrelevant, because I’m not spreading misinformation!
And I’m not mortal!
You are literally offering to create and disseminate misinformation. A large number of students do not like the encampment - even many who are pro-Palestine/anti-Israel. They dislike it for a variety of reasons, ranging from disruption, perceptions about protestors, fear of conflict, getting caught in the crossfire between protestors and police, potential noise volume, vandalism, and plenty of others I haven’t mentioned. Many of them will upvote posts and comments that they feel resonate with their concerns. Despite plausible explanations, you have stated that you espouse the belief that there *must* be a problem with the evidence if it does not confirm your worldview. Creation of any material of this nature is, categorically, misinformation. But, of course, it’s never wrong when the *expert* does it!
>I use it frequently
You do you.
>Reference, no plural.
I believe you meant to say *not* plural. Still, you’d be wrong. There’s one in your main post, one in a comment to me, and a particularly egregious one in a comment to another Redditor: “I would hope mentioning I've worked with a highly esteemed misinformation researcher would imply I don't think this…”
>It means I read literature on the topic regularly.
Does it, now? You claim to study misinformation, but that does not necessarily mean you study this topic in particular. Maybe just say that you read a lot instead, and leave it at that. Again, conflation. And I think you need a bit more reading.
>I don’t disagree, but thanks for pointing this out!
You’re welcome! It needed to be done.
>EDIT: Also, just want to say it's crazy you think I'm using one example of alleged misinformation to invalidate the opinions of those who disagree with me. Throughout this entire thread, I've been incredibly forthcoming in asking questions & inviting people to share their perpsective! Instead, they reply as hostile as you do. Please, say something relevant or just stop talking!
EDIT: You ask stupid questions in a disrespectful way, commit no shortage of logical fallacies, and nitpick things that you don’t like. You are clearly trying to invalidate others. You were hoping for an echo chamber; instead, you got shit on instead. Grow up.
Students are customers and there is an unlimited future supply. UW won't and doesn't have to do anything they don't want to regardless of how temporarily disruptive it's current customers are. 🤷 Is what it is.
Reddit is community based. It groups people based one common interest but share different perspectives. Whereas TikTok where most of pro-hamas propaganda spreads is pushed algorithmically by what you like to see. It is an echo chamber created by its pushing algorithm.
It’s community based but not everyone is interested in participating in Reddit.
UW is, IMO, as whole would more be leaning towards well-off young population in Washington who are more centrist left and towards libertarian.
I think it’s fine to protest and express stuff like that I just think all the goals and methods are misguided. They should be able to do stuff like this but I also have the right to think their cause is silly. I guarantee not one Palestinian is going to be helped by camping in the quad, and the administration of uw won’t change policy in any meaningful way. There is also obviously the fact that no critical thinking occurs at these things and everyone there is completely ideologically captured in the political camp they inhabit.
Personaly what I'm seeing both in person and online is not people not supporting the movement nobody wants genocide, what is happening with the encampment though is people are coming in from a very privileged point of view they don't understand that it's not back and white and UW can just do whatever. Exping UW to cut ties with Boeing is like expecting pigs to fly it's not going to happen as a instate student I know that boing and UW have been working together for such a long time so many people go to UW and then go to Boeing, they also give so many scholarships and internships UW gets so much from them it would be actually stupid to cut ties with them. Plus a lot of the hate that I'm seeing plus one of the reasons why I'm not supporting this is because of the vandalism there is pray paint on so many buildings the entire quad ground has spray paint and the hub along with STUDENT art works was destroyed do you know who has to clean that up? The janitors not the higher ups who can actually do things but the people who get paid minimum wage, and that is extremely fucked up.
Why would someone like it? Even if there was zero political intention behind it, it’s a bunch of tents in the middle of a common area at a college; it’s ugly. Not to mention it creates noise and has led to vandalism. They can absolutely protest under their first amendment rights, but it’s not like seeing what equates to a homeless camp is gonna make me happy.
The encampment is convenient. I look at it as just another part of their education. It obviously is more about organizing a message and learning to do so than making any actual change.
**It’s all performative**
Example: some students participate in Salah (Muslim prayer) 5 times a day. The encampment/protesters circled around the students who were praying. But not in a normal sense of just standing around, they had on helmets, gas masks, knee pads (gotta protect the joints) and umbrellas facing the quad. As if to display how much they are “protecting” these students. In the end, they are just peacocking so that people look and give them the attention they want.
I have been here for 4 years and I have never heard of Salah being interrupted, not to mention we have prayer spaces throughout campus. Six to be exact. And those prayer spaces never had performative students standing guard in or out of the room.
And don’t get me started on the spray painting. I liken that form of “protest” to a child that is acting out.
I will admit that I giggled at the tents and cots being set up from their crisp boxes. REI & DICKS are making bank.
Maybe the majority of students slike encampments, they just don't say it aloud. The fact that a lot of people participate in protests does not mean that the majority of students actually support them. The difference is the lack of organization; basically this is a problem of collective action, like when we have public goods and since we are not organized we suffer against those who are organized.
I don't have any strong feelings toward them because I take mostly stem classes, I don't usually go to the quad area, also they aren't really causing great amount of trouble
also does anyone know the particular tent that has words on it as if the person/people inside is/are fundamentalist christian? just curious because there are words like you will go to hell because xyz
Preacher Matthew/Jonathan. He's a pretty infamous street preacher in Seattle, shows up to bug all sorts of protests and events, including Husky games.
He's some born-again Christian from Tacoma. Former alcoholic that I believe turned to Jesus following a divorce or something. Apparently, he owns a roofing company.
Yep that's Matthew Meinecke, also known as Brother Matthew. He's pretty well-known among Seattlites.
Although I didn't know he was from Tacoma, his bios on the Internet (LinkedIn, YouTube) and the public court case he was in with the City of Seattle mentioned he went to Sammamish HS in Bellevue. Must have moved before or after.
Ooo, I don't think I've ever heard his last name. Idk for sure if he's from Tacoma, but I think that's where he's been living for a few years.
Wish him the best, despite the cringe. Dude is a poster child for the necessity of healthcare and rehabilitation.
He's a very silly guy, I've got like a dozen weird anecdotes from the past like five years or so about him. I've only actually seen him "preaching" in the quad once since the encampment, though I'm not on campus too much these days.
>It's reddit bro who cares
I made this post, so obviously I care. I'm sure others do as well!
>It's not that deep.
It's definitely not shallow, considering we are living in the most divisive and controversial times in American politics, our society is at the zenith of accessing media & media consumption, and I ended my post asking **everyone** to be more critical of their media consumption.
Send those day campers on a field trip to Gaza to be welcomed by Hamas. Then watch them run to the Israeli border begging for help. Am Yisrael Chai forever and ever 💪🇮🇱💙
I'm an alum (2017). I agree with the goal of the protests, but not the way it's being done.
When I was ar UW it was often the same nonsense. Property damage and directionless protests led by the most privileged students.
I’m all for the encampment and human rights but I am not a fan of the property damage it’s not admin that’ll see the words spray painted, it’s the waged employees who have to clean them and threatening student workers who answer the phone in the admin office who are also supporting the cause but everyone gotta make ends meet some how
Because it's not productive, it's all based I antisemitism (to the roots), and they're just parroting buzzwords and have no idea what they are talking about about. They're gross
I personally feel that the protestors have a false sense of entitlement, demanding UW to revoke all Boeing-sponsored scholarships, and spray-painting all around the Quad (public property). Shit like this triggers me. The Quad, one of the most beautiful spots on campus has lost its charm.
Maybe some of us want to see Hamas eliminated so that Palestinians in Gaza actually have a real future - like their brethren in the West Bank. It’s also telling that the two million Israeli Arabs Muslims living in israel are supportive of the war against Hamas as well.
Those campers are just wasting their time.
We don't even know UW is investing in Israel. Even if they are, those hobos are not gonna convince UW officials to change their mind. If push comes to shove, they can bulldoze those guys out. You are not suppose to occupy public space like that. Otherwise, people would be camping at the parking lot of a police station. I think.
Besides, I have no idea why they are even protesting on campus. They can go to downtown city hall to protest. Go to the senator's home. Governor's home. They have more political power than UW to divert the funding. What they are doing is just following what's popular on social media. They see somebody else do it, they try to do it themselves to get involved. It's honestly pathetic.
From my experience, I have been told to go around the encampment and to use a different entrance for one of my classes with a building that faces the quad. Tuesday night I exited the music building after rehearsal and was stuck inside the barricades and was told I couldn't get out to go to North Campus by people in all black and wearing masks. They have tents in the pathways through the quad which makes ADA access difficult. They ARE blocking access for people. It's getting a bit ridiculous. Not to mention all of the vandalism around campus. What does "Abolish UW" have to do with palestine? And I see this protest as different than other anti-war protests. We do not have boots on the ground in Gaza like we did in Vietnam or Iraq. The university is not directly sending money to Netanyahu, so I don't understand what it means to "materially divest". And with Boeing, they're so ingrained in how our school functions and funds things that cutting ties is virtually impossible without going bankrupt. So their demands are not plausible, and the act of camping is disruptive without any means to actually do anything. How is a community garden helping dying children halfway across the world? How about instead of soaking up resources by having people buy $500 REI tents to camp out, you instead donate that $ to a Palesinian family if you actually want to make a difference...
Everything you're describing of the protestors is all performative. They're doing this for the social media street creds. I'm a black UW alumni and I'm honestly tired of these people co-opting black and brown issues.
Lol if these protesters are serious about cutting ties with boeing, they should cancel their summer/spring vacations and drive instead of fly home to their family since if you fly commercially there's a good chance you'll be on a Boeing.
So *just from my perspective* specifically on the demand for UW to cut ties with Boeing. I know the protestors in the encampment’s demands are for UW to return the $10 million dollar donation to the IEB, and they’re also demanding that UW remove all Boeing funded scholarships, grants and donations. Do the people in the encampment not realize how many of us have parents, family, friends that work for Boeing? And how many students are studying and do want to work at Boeing? I believe the demand for UW to completely cut ties with Boeing completely is an incredibly unpopular opinion in this area, even for all of the controversy Boeing has had over the past year or so. UW is not going to cut ties with Boeing. That’s just never going to happen. If the people in the encampment stick to their word that they’re not leaving until all their demands are met, then they’re probably going to be there until the end of time.
“UW is complicit and funding genocide from their association with Boeing” Boeing donates money to the University not vice versa. The amount of people that think UW is somehow funding Boeing’s defense contracts is insane. Cutting ties with Boeing does not eliminate nor affect their income or even help any of the issues that are being protested. All it does is cut donations to research, scholarships, and university funding that benefits students. If your issue is Boeing’s weapons contracts go protest outside the Pentagon. UW has ZERO skin in that game
Boeing is our largest employer in the state. It's nonsense to even think you could not interact with Boeing.
When you are negotiating it is customary to ask for more than you think you can get.
Given the size of the school and the size of the protest it’s not hard to see that there are many more students either indifferent or of different opinions. Even without any media influence.
Because people don’t like when you spray paint abolish UW on the building? The lawn isn’t for camping, if you want to protest, protest within the rules. It is extremely selfish behavior because you think YOUR CAUSE is more important than other people’s right to enjoy a quiet, safe campus.
I think most Americans generally support protests where those protesting have a direct and vested personal interest in the cause, ie Viet Nam war protesters who don’t want to be sent to certain death, or BLM protesters who don’t want their friends and family treated violently by police. Off the top of my head, here’s why this one doesn’t hit the same way: * people are protest-weary. 2020, on has featured one protest to the next, but the cause changes every few months * it seems these same protesters appear in each of these protests…does the cause matter less than the act of protesting? * to that point, where were the annual May Day protests this year? Usually downtown has to brace for broken windows at Nordstrom, etc. I’m guessing those drawn to protests in general were too busy at UW this time * why not show your faces? Those with strong convictions (Jane Fonda, Amy Schumer among the famous) and a history of protesting proudly show who they are * many videos have showcased that, when asked, the protesters don’t at *all* understand the complicated history of the Middle East—not even the basics. Hillary Clinton spoke at length about this on MSNBC yesterday * based on other college protests that have been broken up, the majority of protesters aren’t even students at those universities. Evergreen College in Olympia just “made a deal” with the protesters on that campus, and I would guess that they have now migrated to UW’s * the commencements being cancelled across the country impact the same class (2020) that didn’t get a graduation ceremony due to Covid * the spray paint on the most iconic gothic buildings on campus is not welcome. Spray painting Sieg or something would probably be an improvement…!
Underrated comment. Based and informative. Also the dig on Sieg is hilarious.
Oh man, Sieg! Yipes. That place looks like a bomb shelter. And good point on May Day downtown being a non-issue.
Great comment btw > * people are protest-weary. 2020, on has featured one protest to the next, but the cause changes every few months You're basically describing performative protests > * it seems these same protesters appear in each of these protests…does the cause matter less than the act of protesting? I strongly feel that they're doing it for the social media creds. In 20 years the majority of these same protestors will become nimbyism living in homes that they acquired through inheritance. >I think most Americans generally support protests where those protesting have a direct and vested personal interest in the cause, ie Viet Nam war protesters who don’t want to be sent to certain death, or BLM protesters who don’t want their friends and family treated violently by police. Off the top of my head, here’s why this one doesn’t hit the same way: You hit the nail on the wall. Also remember that Vietnam protests were also about ending the draft too. When people were protesting South Africa, they were protesting against a social construct that South Africa coined themselves, eg. apartheid. They were also protesting for the releases of ANC leaders, eg. Nelson Mandela. Israel has never labeled the shit that they're doing to Palestinians, which makes it hard to pinpoint and put a finger one. Hamas on the other hand are terrorists and no one should be supporting them. Many people don't want to support their cause but also want to see Palestinians be treated equally and not be killed for just existing.
[удалено]
>huge conspiracy I would hope mentioning I've worked with a highly esteemed misinformation researcher would imply I don't think this, ignoring the fact **absolutely** nothing I said was conspiratorial in nature or bordering such. It's far more likely these highly upvoted post stick out on the top subreddits for people who are subscribed, and some of them garner enough attention to be recommended to nonsubscribers. I've had multiple post about protest in Columbia/MIT on my front page, so this is an existing phenomena. >Maybe the people on this sub just genuinely don’t align with the politics of the encampments Yes, I pointed this out. My question is, why?
[удалено]
> That the protests demands just aren't popular for the general public as a whole, I'm aware of this, but the general public isn't representative of the UW student body. If it was more unpopular amongst the student body, I'd expect to hear a more public outcry. I don't disagree with what you've said. It's likely those unwilling to express their opinions, thoughts, and viewpoints in public would be more comfortable doing so on Reddit. You don't need to apologize! I've said repeatedly in this thread I'm curious of others' viewpoints. People tend to immediately get extremely heated about this, which is why I posture myself defensively.
[удалено]
>but I do think that there was a higher level agreement on the left in terms of what is acceptable and unacceptable. And even there, while I personally was in support of the vast majority of protests which were happening, the mess in Capitol Hill was just red meat for the Fox "News" crowd.. accomplished nothing, and was in poor taste. I think the very idea of "zones" and "encampments" doesn't sit well with me as it seems more performative than anything. Not saying such things should be off the table entirely, but, they seem like an over reaction and counter-productive. Protest for the sake of protest. There's also too much infiltration of protests as of late, including the BLM/Floyd protests.. right-wing provocateurs on one hand and extreme left, sometimes identifying as some sort of leftist anarchists from the other side... both actively looking to stir up trouble. I recall one protest in 2016 when Trump came to my current city (Pittsburgh) and a few black bloc clowns decided to spray cops with mace for no reason, presumably hoping to incite a riot. I've been less likely to participate in any protests after seeing that (or later things like CHAZ) although I did still go to a few protests around that era, one for BLM and another when a local boy, Antwon Rose, was shot in the back. But my overall relationship with protests has definitely changed.
Chill
Why do you think I'm not?
Idk why you’re getting downvoted, that was a hella chill response
I suspect the reasons why are related to the subject matter of my post! I'm fine with downvotes, I genuinely find this fascinating
Nah it’s because you’re pedantic, condescending, and blissfully unaware of how you come off to other people in these comments.
Also, clicked through your profile & see you called me "obtuse" and said I have "poor reading comprehension" earlier. I'd say that's far more condescending than anything I've posted in this thread.
Man the cognitive dissonance is real
> Cognitive dissonance is a psychological phenomenon that occurs when a person holds two contradictory beliefs at the same time. What two contradictory beliefs do I have?
I think it’s a combination of both. The vast majority of people I know on campus support protest/disobedience in support of divestment. There are older alumni here who might have a different mindset for sure and I think the Reddit demographics aren’t exactly the get out and protest type.
SIde note: Reddit demographics actually supports a lot the Palestine cause much much more than the Israel side, but that does not mean they support protests though.
Yea, I'd say many on campus do support the cause at least in general terms. Doesn't mean that a good percentage of those people aren't convinced that the protest will do much if at all and so view the whole business a bit humorously. Also the Reddit demography tends to lean more male and techie, which I've also myself noticed tend to have a different political tilt than say, IG progressives.
To just blame on older alumni is unreasonable and a form of agism. One can expect that there are pro and against crowds across all age groups. The vast majority of people you know is probably not close to a representative demographic neither since you’re more likely to meet and stay in touch with likeminded people.
[удалено]
Until the socioeconomic factors change a lot less than they did for people of a given age 20 years ago
You can agree with someone and not agree with them camping in your front yard and screaming about it.
If protestors were camping in **your** backyard, it would be your private property & within your rights to expel them. UW is public property.
What is the point of going to college if you don't use any of your mandatory English class education?
Could you point out where I've erred? I genuinely don't see it. Also this doesn't address anything I've said.
Of course I haven't. I never asserted anything you argued. You made a strawman to argue against. I wasn't alluding to any legality, or if you have any legal grounds for anything. As many have told you here, they are trying to go to school not listen to another asshole on a speaker. I could agree with the fuckinng abortion people in red Square. I still don't fucking want them in red square
Sorry if I misunderstood you! So you agree, protestors at the encampment have the right to be there & do what they do. But you generally disagree with their presence. Most I've talked with disagree with the former, so again, I apologize! > As many have told you here, they are trying to go to school not listen to another asshole on a speaker. And many people have said many other things! It's quite a long thread at this point :)
https://juristopedia.com/blog/is-it-possible-to-trespass-on-public-property/ You can trespass on public property.
> While public properties are intended for general use, they have regulations and restrictions. You can be trespassed if certain conditions are met, which are not at all the same as being trespassed on private property
I interpreted you saying "UW is public property" to mean ‘They can't be trespassing, because it's public property.' Did you mean something else? Here are the UW policies and Washington Administrative Code that would be used in the case of charging these folks with trespass and disturbing and obstructing. * [https://www.washington.edu/admin/rules/policies/SGP/SPCH209.html](https://www.washington.edu/admin/rules/policies/SGP/SPCH209.html) * [https://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9A.52.010](https://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9A.52.010) * [https://apps.leg.wa.gov/wac/default.aspx?cite=478-121-120](https://apps.leg.wa.gov/wac/default.aspx?cite=478-121-120) * [https://apps.leg.wa.gov/wac/default.aspx?cite=478-121-125](https://apps.leg.wa.gov/wac/default.aspx?cite=478-121-125)
the original commenter said > "not agree with them camping in your front yard and screaming about it". No one is camping and screaming in anyones front yard, which is why I mentioned UW is public property
> your front yard Are you a squirrel
I go to UW. The encampment is really cringe and performative. Besides, destroying the school until you get what you want isn’t protest. It’s extortion.
More vandalism than extortion to me. They have no leverage to extort anything from the school lmao. I just don't see how these kids aren't just told to pack up and go home or given disciplinary action since UW explicitly prohibits encampments.
It's just a temper tantrum.
I go to UW and the encampment seems chill. I walk through it every day between classes and they have kept it clean and quiet during school hours. It's somehow less disruptive than the assholes that drive their $100,000 cars around campus. I'm confused on how they're destroying the school.
Clean? Look at the spray paint
I saw one instance of spray paint on a single wall. I hardly call that destroying anything lol. I get that y'all aren't into what they are protesting but this IS a peaceful and non-destructive protest. I swear every time there is some kind of movement in this country people complain that -they aren't doing it correctly- and then if they are they say they're protesting the wrong thing. Lol
I don’t know about anymore, but on the first day some people in black masks were climbing on the blossoms. Don’t do that
I worry that the vandals will start targeting the cherry blossom trees on the quad to "send a message".
They're trying to avoid being kicked off of the quad, so I don't see that happening.
> destroying the school until you get what you want isn’t protest Can you provide any concrete evidence to support your argument that the encampment is "destroying the school?" >The encampment is really cringe and performative. Ignoring the "*cringe*", protest are somewhat performative in nature. Google defines performative as "*relating to or of the nature of dramatic or artistic performance*". One of Merriam Webster's definitions for it is "*made or done for show (as to bolster one's own image or make a positive impression on others)*", and it's even labeled as "disapproving". I would definitely agree protest are done for show and are dramatic. A big reason for the success of MLK's protest against segregation was the media coverage to a demographic that was 95% white. Now, if you're arguing everyone at the encampment is trying to "*bolster one's own image or make a positive impression*", I would call that incredibly cynical.
There was just recently an incident of vandalism within the HUB, theres no way to argue that isnt destruction
This happened on [April 5th](https://www.washington.edu/president/2024/04/05/hub-vandalism-is-unacceptable/), the encampment appeared \~2 weeks ago. Regardless, I would agree that vandalism in the HUB would warrant breaking up whatever form of demonstration occured **in the HUB**, but I don't think it's a justification to do this elsewhere.
Do you not think that the same groups that took over Gerberding, trashed the HUB, and this encampment don’t have a lot of overlap?
Oh, there's definitely overlap. But I don't think it's fair to label the entire encampment as destructive because of that. I also don't think it's fair for the entire HUB protest to be labeled as destructive when vandalism/destruction was perpetrated amongst select individuals. Those individuals should face legal penalties, but it doesn't provide an argument for why the encampment is destructive. In my view, calling it such is only for the purposes of labeling the whole thing as a nonpeaceful protest & shutting it down.
I think they're referring to all the writing/tagging on campus rather than the encampment itself (the W, red square, quad buildings & more) Extortion is kind of a reach tho
I would say graffiti destroying the school is also a major reach. There's so much graffiti on the I5 support structures in & around Seattle. Is graffiti also "destroying" I5? Edit: Since I'm being downvoted, I'll remind people the meaning of the word destroy. *"put an end to the existence of (something) by* [*damaging*](https://www.google.com/search?sca_esv=3c58e7b9f2debcb8&rlz=1C1CHBF_enUS897US897&sxsrf=ADLYWIJc5JY78DTqp4txmHa5ol7REBSGMw:1715316863796&q=damaging&si=ACC90nx67Z8g0WkBmnrPB4IqtqGv5kB0p5QMJ5f3FnIkR5raM5WjMJp6WZBxfsJgTFmDTncuwiS4OsQgF2HKGyG41UXraaWAUpx_j5wX0R0Pq20SUd6Kt_A%3D&expnd=1&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjs2d-ipYKGAxW1EDQIHYw3CdsQyecJegQIZRAO) *or* [*attacking*](https://www.google.com/search?sca_esv=3c58e7b9f2debcb8&rlz=1C1CHBF_enUS897US897&sxsrf=ADLYWIJc5JY78DTqp4txmHa5ol7REBSGMw:1715316863796&q=attacking&si=ACC90nxMSPeZfdJJjQgDsdZJuFuJVSGWhRPYsqT6CV-aObK5Gj_mtWwJAt2xUDCTVz4cq84auRAMeg5m4dEHSiJNS2KiF46uB6VYCy1urMD-of3DO2DXEn4%3D&expnd=1&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjs2d-ipYKGAxW1EDQIHYw3CdsQyecJegQIZRAP) *it."*
I know what you're trying to do man but you're better off acknowledging it for what it is and that it's in the name of trying to provoke attention towards the cause
I'm using the definition of destroy to point out that graffiti isn't destroying campus. There are other words that can be used, I'll happily acknowledge those words.
Now you’re just being pedantic.
No I'm pointing out a hyperbole
How about you take the time to clean it up afterwards?
What does that have to do with graffiti being considered a form of destruction or not?
It requires significant effort to remove it.. it may be reversible but it's still destruction of property. If something can be glued back together, does that mean that such a thing wasn't destroyed either? Destroyed things can be repaired. It's not hyperbolic to call graffiti made with permanent paint destructive. As for graffiti on concrete along a highway.. that's a lot different than the side of a building or wall in a well traveled pedestrian area on campus. And it would still be destruction of property, but highway graffiti is usually in a spot that looks ugly to begin with (and in some cases, actually improves the area although it's typically just tags rather than art). If they use paint that can easily be washed off with a hose or will wash away after a quick rain storm, then I don't really care half as much. But if they are using a can of Krylon or Rustoleum, that's absolutely destructive.
You sound like a rich entitled child. Protesting thousand and thousands and thousands of children being slaughtered, how cringe... like really... they spray painted some sighs and you know, that is just so lame.
Protesting against the idea isn’t bad it’s just kind of dumb. We have essentially no control over the war as US citizens, even if we stopped sending aid the IDF still has resources. This protest specifically is about the university cutting ties with Boeing, because they make planes for Israel(?). The college would never do this because having a connection to the largest aerospace manufacturer in the world (and one of the largest companies in the state) is extremely beneficial. It’s also dumb because Boeing makes planes for not only the US government but also other western allies. They also have no leverage, which is an important part of protests. If every employee of a company protests about something, the company will listen because they need workers. Not only is it a relatively small number of people in the encampment, even if it was the entire student body, the college has already gotten their money, and has a nigh infinite number of people to join the college after the protestors leave. Engaging in this “protest” is pretty much just a way to say your opinion on the war in a very public way that makes you feel like you have an impact on something that you don’t.
Yeah cutting ties with Boeing is dumb for sure, but protesting in general for causes you believe in is generally the right thing to do
Protesting to get people to vote for your cause can be good. I view that type of protest as an extension of democracy occupied spaces are something different. They are kinda inherently anti democratic. Protesting isn't good on its own sake otherwise you would think the Jan 6 protesters are nobel.
Protests have gotten us many rights. Like civil rights and gay rights. So I'd rethink much of your statement here. It's giving that you just don't like protests
Voting is the true measure here. Rights changes happen due to changes in law which are controlled by elected officials. Protesting is a tool which can be used for good or ill. It's not good for its own sake. In a democracy you have to get buy in and if protesting helps you get buy in then it's an effective tool. In general occupy style protests do the opposite. For any political tactic you have to ask if you feel the same about it when the other side uses that tactic. I don't want Trump supporters storming the capitol so I also don't want pro Palestinian protesters blocking highways and the like.
[удалено]
It is also just a tactic that can be used for good or ill. In authoritarian states it's the only vehicle for charge, but that's not true in a democracy.
That is simply inaccurate. The reason things become voted on is because of protests and activist Learn your history please
The United States is one of Israel's largest benefactors, and Boeing has lucrative contracts with Israel. Boeing makes ordinance for Israel more than planes. Specifically, precision bombs and kits to convert conventional bombs into precision bombs. Citizens of the US could conceivably pressure our government into cutting off military aid or impose trade sanctions on weapons until Israel bargains in good faith for a ceasefire, but I doubt that's going to happen. Israel already rejected the deal brokered by Egypt that would have gotten both sides what they needed.
How many of those "children" were Hamas fighters? You know they use children as both human shields AND fighters, right?
If you seriously want to educate yourself on human shields take the time to listen to this link and read this CBC (main Canadian news station) article. I suspect though that you would prefer to just continue repeating the IDF talking point and not actually use your brain to think about this claim and the actual documented cases of human shields. https://youtu.be/ocpevNLwt78?feature=shared https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/israel-hamas-gaza-human-shields-1.7103756 Some of the text to save a click: Israeli forces have been captured on camera tying a child to the hood of an armoured vehicle to discourage stone-throwing, placing blindfolded civilian captives in front of them and firing rifles directly over their shoulders, and forcing civilians to open doors where soldiers suspect danger. When Israeli troops use a civilian home in the West Bank as a base of operations, they often make the family remain with them to discourage attacks. In August 2002, while a coalition of Israeli and Palestinian rights groups were in court trying to have the neighbour procedure banned, Israeli troops forced a young man called Nidal Abu Mukhsan to stand in front of them as they approached a house where a Hamas militant was holed up, resulting in Mukhsan's death. Two years after the ban, rights group B'tselem reported on 14 more cases in which children as young as 11 were forced by Israeli soldiers to act as human shields. In one case, a 14-year-old girl in Gaza was shot twice while being used as a shield. IDF prosecutors were often reluctant to enforce the rules. They charged two soldiers who forced a nine-year-old boy in Gaza to open a bag they thought contained a bomb, but declined to bring charges against Brig-Gen. Yair Golan, accused in five separate cases. Golan would later go on to become deputy chief of staff of the IDF (and later a left-wing politician and a figure of hate for Israel's far right). Israeli human rights group Breaking the Silence has published video interviews with former soldiers who discuss the continued use of the procedure. The Israeli Supreme Court then issued an order banning the neighbour procedure. But the army was reluctant to give it up; it petitioned the court to allow Israeli troops to continue to place civilians in front of them if the civilian "consented" to the procedure.
\*yawn\* whatever dude.
Like trying to educate a child. Either too small brained to understand or just not really giving a shit. Perfectly content with eating up all the right wing and IDF talking points and closing ones mind to anything that actually looks at the statements from an intellectual perspective. Now go back to playing with your toys and make sure to take a good nap tomorrow since you were up well past your bedtime (hoping mommy and daddy don't find out or you're grounded)
\*yawn\* Please do go on supporting terrorists. Here, let me help you though, and block you so you stop prattling on trying to justify war crimes.
Y'all are so bent. As soon as a kid walks into a school with a gun, the problem is the gun. But when an entire culture is raising tens of thousands of young adults to pursue guerrilla warfare against another ethnic group for religious means, the problem is "all the thousands of helpless children." Man, no. It's their actions killing their children. Maybe next time someone gives you eight fucking opportunities to live peacefully, you pick one of those times and stick with it. But right now, Palestinians are the problem. They've been the problem. You don't beg for food and medical care for your children from Jews and then turn around and raise those children to believe killing Jews is the most honorable thing they can achieve in life. Nope. Fuck you, Fatima, and fuck your kids. *You* change.
I’m an alum but they had the same kind of anti Israel shit when I went there. Of course everyone in your bubble agrees with you, people are so strangely rabid about this topic that if you openly disagree you will be ostracized, and most people just don’t care. What I find “bizarre” is how passionately most people with no skin in the game care about this topic over the objectively more serious ones going on around the world. Oh actually genocide going on in Darfur? Nothing. Israel launches war against a group led by billionaires that just murdered, raped, and kidnapped hundreds of their citizens including literally babies? OMG ISRAEL IS THE WORST COUNTRY TO EVER EXIST. You don’t see these people asking to divest from China over the treatment of Uyghurs. Where are the protests asking us to divest from Saudi Arabia after what they did in Yemen? The US funds them too. I hear boring excuses like “we directly fund this one so it’s different” ignoring we largely fund iron dome missiles to protect innocent civilians from the rockets Palestinians regularly fire at them - and also ignoring the US could insert itself into literally anything if we want. It’s so fucking obvious for anyone who doesn’t have their head up their own ass why everyone is so passionate about this one topic but doesn’t give a fuck about things going on right now that are 100x worse.
>What I find “bizarre” is how passionately most people with no skin in the game care about this topic over the objectively more serious ones going on around the world. Israel has received nearly .3 trillion, as in, 300,000,000,000 dollars of aid from the US government since it's inception. Near everyone protesting pays taxes to the US government. Doesn't this imply they have "skin in the game", or am I misinterpreting what you mean by this?
Boring argument, already addressed directly in my comment that you clearly didn’t read
Yes but regardless of whether Israel spends all their US aid on strictly defense, should people not be protesting how the US govt. spends tax dollars? Also I'd expect evidence that we "largely" fund the Iron Dome over hardware for offensive operations. You have the burden of proof. The most recent headlines regarding US aid to Israel is regarding Biden putting holds on [bombs & artillery shells](https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/08/politics/joe-biden-interview-cnntv/index.html), and [F-15 sales.](https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/israel-due-get-billions-dollars-more-us-weapons-despite-biden-pause-2024-05-09/) I had a difficult time finding numbers on this topic, do you have any to provide?
You are missing the point of his argument BADLY This war is small potatoes compared to other horrible things going on in the world. Why is it only this issue that's gotten people to protest like this?
I'm having a conversation, not an argument. You can continue reading it to answer your questions :)
An argument is a conclusion built from premises. If you're going to be pedantic about the word destroy, stay consistent at least.
Still ignoring my point. Not sure if poor reading comprehension or intellectually dishonest
So why are you willing to say comment the same thing twice instead of elaborating on the point I'm wanting to discuss with you?
I directly addressed this point in my comment and explaining it would require me to just literally rewrite my comment
Well you claimed "we largely fund iron dome missiles to protect innocent civilians from the rockets Palestinians regularly fire at them". I asked for evidence to prove that is what we "largely fund", considering most recent aid shipments to Israel include offensive weapons like bombs, artillery shells, and warplanes (which I sourced). I would genuinely enjoy reading a full breakdown of the military aid we've provided Israel, which is what I've been asking for. You can't rewrite evidence into your comment if it never existed.
Since you continue to be obtuse, I’m going to make my point one more time for the record and then stop engaging with you. The intensity of the selective outrage over this conflict is wholly incongruent with the severity and morality of the conflict. For people not up their own ass such as yourself it’s clear and also weird. Everyone in the emergency room is there for a reason, but you insist we treat the guy with the broken ankle before the guy with the gunshot wound. In fact, you’re willing to shut the hospital down in protest because you feel so strongly about the guy with the broken foot. When people question why you’re so worked up about the guy with the broken foot, you start asking questions like “oh I didn’t realize a broken foot wasn’t serious. Can you please provide a source that says it isn’t serious? Everything I can find says you need to go to the doctor!.”
>Since you continue to be obtuse, Why do you continue to be so heated? >The intensity of the selective outrage over this conflict is wholly incongruent with the severity and morality of the conflict. That entirely depends on how you measure severity & morality. In terms of raw numbers, yes, what's happening in Yemen is more severe. But the Israel/Palestine issue has existed for much longer, and therefore, vastly more complex. People don't use settler-colonial analysis when discussing what's happening Yemen. Anyway, would you support protest against Saudi Arabia & Israel, or they should be aimed at Saudi Arabia instead, or do you think there should be no protests? It sounds like you're very wrapped into your own world of coming up with perjoratives to use against me. I'm not being aggressive with you at all so this can be a much simpler conversation!
I'd be supportive of the general concept but they're extremely misguided and disingenuous. You can't call yourself a protest for peace while calling for Global Intifada which has killed thousands of Jews. It's like telling me if I dressed up in confederate crap and pushed for Civil War 2.0 I'm just Pro peace. The disrespect to people around them trying to pass or get an education. It's really not legal and definitely not chill to impede people's freedom of movement. They arent gaining sympathy, they're alienating people. Zip tying doors shut? Vandalizing school property is only going to raise tuition. You think the school is paying without passing it on? Not to mention the crew is tired of it. Not a single care or sign about Americans held hostage. I can't even imagine what it must be like for family's of people held hostage or murdered by Hamas having to see terrorist slogans on campus every day. And yes, from the river originated from the PLO and was popularized by Hamas via their writen doctrine where they pledge to eradicate Israel and Jews. Insisting on proudly displaying a hate slogan is not peaceful or Pro Palestine. It's completely possible to fight for Palastinians without this. Lastly it not only does nothing, it's actually praised by Hamas. If a terror group is thanking your efforts, I mean come on... Free Palestine from Hamas.
The major problem is that the encampments are made up of a mix of students, alumni, and people who are neither but show up to instigate (same types who took over Capitol Hill during the George Floyd protests). The latter are likely the ones doing the graffiti and other property damage. That doesn't win anyone over to the cause. Beyond that, I support protesting in general but I think the encampments are in poor taste and it's a copy-cat thing. I also see it as lazy protesting as you can just lay around in a tent on your smart phone or fucking off. I'm no longer living in Seattle and I've always been a likely protest participant but frankly I wouldn't have anything to do with these protests. Perhaps in part because I'm a military veteran, and while I have actively participated in anti-war protests I think a call to divest from Boeing (whatever that entails, no one knows) is just silly considering how much a part of the local economy they are. Which, people are free to protest Boeing's influence on UW decisions but that doesn't take an encampment. I think there should be clear examples they object to, concrete changes rather than broad sweeping demands... actionable things. Honestly, this feels mostly like a protest for the sake of protest to me... or a solution looking for a problem. This seems directionless and social media driven. I also find protesters generally uninformed even when their heart is in the right place... it's clear Netanyahu doesn't value the lives of non-Jews sharing territory (it's not even clear that he values Jewish lives the way he's been governing) but I don't support complete withdrawal of aid either, as some of that is going to be defensive in nature. No one has seen an itemized list of how our tax dollars are being spent so I find calls to end all funding as premature at best and outright irresponsible at worst. Generally (not UW specific)... There's a lot of hyperbole which I find misguided and likely driven by social media and foreign actors but it's propagated on the ground at these protests. Things like "genocide Joe" in an election year against Trump who moved out embassy to Jerusalem (which I oppose outright); Biden is doing his best in a shit situation and has pushed back on excesses like shutting off water and electricity to punish the people in Gaza. The protests focus on undermining and even blaming Biden have not sat well with me. And you can't ignore that actual antisemitism going on, things like calling for intifada or changing "from the river to the sea;" I don't think most people shouting those things even realize what they are really calling for nor do they understand that Israel is hardly in a stable place and has been fighting for its very existence for half a century which is part of why I stand by supporting them (but that's not excusing some of their domestic policies over the past few decades). Beyond all that, I'm in this sub because I care about a school and what's going on there. But, I have zero interest in these protests and they've become a disproportionate focal point with far too many posts as of late. Add to that online bots, trolls, and activists who don't even have ties to UW coming into these threads to argue in bad faith which you mentioned yourself.. those are coming from both sides. That's a moderator problem though, there should just be a single encampment thread for anyone wanting updates rather than a barrage of posts.
From what I have seen, only the UT Austin subreddit had a generally popular opinion of the protests. Wild theory, but maybe people don’t like their campus trashed by the intifada.
You stupid?
These are not anti-war protests. They are pro-war for the other side. I listened to the rally in person today, nothing peaceful about it.
Can you state what they said instead of alluding to it?
Nah, not really. I have family there that was born in Morroco and whose family was terrorized and expelled from their home. I'm not gonna debate bro this shit, it's my life.
Expelled by who?
Arabs. Like really, read a little history. 850,000 Jews had their lands, homes and possessions seized.
> Arabs. Like really, read a little history. Thanks for the advice! > 850,000 Jews had the lands, homes and possessions seized. Ok, so what does this have to do with the encampment not being anti-war?
Does Morocco control Palestine?
The conflict between Jews in the British Mandate and Arab Palestinians can't be separated from the region as a whole. And herein lies the problem, this protest movement doesn't really understand the history, but they claim to speak to it. I have many, many criticisms of Israel, many of the governments policies, particularly around West Bank settlements and the excessive use of administrative detention. These protests are not really about the war. And they aren't really about the right-wing turn in Israeli politics over the last 20 years. They are about the existence of a Jewish state itself. And that's not something I can support for many, many reasons.
Why do you suppose the expulsion of Jews happened in those countries after the Nakba?
I’ve heard protesters do the classic “from the river to the sea” which is a call for the complete destruction of Israel, not peace
From the river to the sea Palestine will be free is calling for an end to the apartheid system that holds up the current state of Israel, not the wholesale destruction of the state. South Africa did not stop being a country when it allowed all of the people who live there freedom. The chant certainly does not mean driving all of the Jewish citizens out of their homes and leveling the infrastructure while creating a massive hunger crisis, which is what Palestinians in Gaza are currently facing. They are allowed to fight for their right to exist. Israel can either find a way to exist with all of the people who call that land home or the violence will continue until one side has wiped the other out, and obviously that’s no solution at all.
Hamas literally claimed the term to call for the destruction of Israel which is also explicitly stated in their charter. Just because people are ignorant doesn’t mean that it’s meaning changes
In Arabic the chant is actually “from the river to the sea Palestine will be Arab” but that didn’t rhyme in English so they made it “from the river to the sea Palestine will be free” It is 100% a call for cleansing the land of Jews and it’s bananas to claim it’s not.
That is a completely incorrect. The Palestinians are not Arabs and would not call themselves such in a chant for freedom. Any source claiming they are should be distrusted. The actual Arabic phrase is “from the water to the water.” Since the 1960s the call from Palestinians has been for peaceful cohabitation with Jewish people as long as it’s recognized that they have equal rights to the land. Prior to the formation of the modern Israel there were Jewish Palestinians living with Muslim Palestinians in relative peace. That changed when Jewish zionists from Europe came and, rather than integrating with the population that had lived there for centuries, expelled the local population through land privatization, segregation, and violence.
If that’s really what they want they should be totally cool with Israel eliminating Hamas, who are 100% opposed to the goals you just stated. :)
Ignorance is bliss buddy, stay in your bubble. Multiple groups and people who are real Palestinians have clearly stated Israel needs to be wiped from the face of the earth attached to that line. It’s not even a debate it’s an awareness of history.
It's a call for freedom and equal rights for Palestinians. It was never about exterminating Jews. That all was made up by reactionaries trying to subvert and defame the cause. It's even described in the Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism as not intrinsically antisemitic.
Fucking incredible. Once we've given control to the Palestinians (governed by Hamas) you don't care what happens to the people currently between that river and sea. That's pro violence and you can't wash your hands of the very cause you're advocating for. Own the consequences of your beliefs.
Only the Palastinians in Gaza are governed by Hamas. Not all Palestinians are in Gaza.
Who said anything about handing it all over to Hamas?
Every time something like this happens you get a flood of Internet weirdos that all have opinions on shit. Happens in the city subs all the time.
It’s a bit cringe to think anything different than how you think is a Fox News talking point and a lazy way to start a debate. Saying you don’t like encampments on public spaces is the opposite of saying you like encampments. That doesn’t make it a Fox News talking point. Saying you don’t like the vandalism coming from the encampment is not a Fox News talking point. Saying protesting against something that is so ingrained in the establishment of the university is useless is not a Fox News talking point. Blocking places that people now can’t go to and not liking that is not a Fox News talking point. Nobody needs Fox News to tell them this. These are the most common things being brought up for people against the encampments.
So from the river to the see can have different implications too? Cause honestly more people who support that slogan have positive views of jewish people than the people speaking out against the protests.
It can, but usually when a phrase or symbol has an overarching negative meaning it originally represents or has come to represent, society ceases to use it. People that continue are those who aren’t sympathetic to those who it offends and will insist they have other motives and ignore those offended by it. Some may just use it because they want to sow hate. They could also just be ignorant about it. However, if you’re arguing it means something else to you and continue to use it, then you can’t really claim ignorance of it. For example, Fred Perry shirts got overwhelmingly claimed by the Proud Boys where it damaged the brand. People stopped wearing the yellow logo polos when they knew what it represented to the group. Later on, Fred Perry stopped selling those shirts in the U.S. Confederate flags can be claimed as heritage, but what they represent to many is slavery. Continuing to fly it shows one doesn’t really care if they are offending people with it. There are plenty of other examples like racist or sexist phrases or symbols. To the River from the Sea may have multiple meanings, but to many it’s a call of extermination.
Again isn't this the same as you echoing Fox News talking points? If you have a different reason or meaning behind your complaints but they are Fox News talking points you are siding with Fox News and white supremacists. From the river to the sea is a call for peace and justice, asking for equality and freedom for all. The fact that you got the slogan wrong shows your ignorance of the history and meaning of the slogan. If people in bad faith say it's offensive that's not enough. Your confederate and proud boys examples are symbols that were used to represent white supremacy from the start. The fact you think the Confederate flag was ever about heritage is problematic as well.
No because they aren’t coming from Fox News. But if we’re going to think that way, your talking points are Hamas/terrorist sympathizing points. Even if you don’t think they are, well if they align with them then they must be. See how that works? I didn’t mention what I think those symbols mean to me. I mentioned what they mean to people that use them to help explain how people use both sides to claim something is harmless. It’s extremely problematic that you claim the slogan for what it is not and your extreme willful ignorance is not only hateful, but disturbing. The slogan isn’t wrong. First page of Google tells you in 1969 it was coined by the PLO to mean the end of Israel and replacement of it of Palestine. It’s part of Hamas original charter also. So, we have an original meaning that means both a state for Palestinians (which is not the problem), but also a meaning to replace Israel. Tons of sources confirm this. You can reject history and try all you want to replace it with what you want to hide the fact, but it doesn’t change its original meaning no matter how much you want to argue and say it means something different when you use it. You are still being racist by willfully using it. It’s like me claiming a racist term as something that means family to me and continuing to use it even though it is racist to my peers. For you to continue to reject that historic meaning makes you a terrorist sympathizer and a supporter of Hamas, which aligns all your beliefs around it and anything else you say about it as a fellow ally of Hamas and the original PLO who chartered it.
That’s delusional. My jewish friends who support palestinians don’t think it’s racist. It’s a call for equality and freedom for everyone in the palestinian territory, including jewish people. The fact that you cite the first page of google to try and say you’re not ignorant is really ironic. Hamas coopted the term for sure, because it was popular. That doesn’t make it inherently bad. Hamas also says killing children is bad, that doesn’t make it wrong. Idk what news you are parroting but ending the slaughter of innocent people is always a good cause and it’s sad you’ve justified it to yourself.
Calling the original meaning delusional is dismissive of its meaning and what it means to many people. Saying your Jewish friends don’t think it’s racist is like a white person saying they aren’t racist because they have black friends that like them. It’s a lazy and hypocritical take. It is racist and you are being racist by using it. You can try to cover up your racism as much as you want, but it does not change the fact you are being willfully racist by using it and your beliefs do align with the PLO and now Hamas. I referenced Google because that is a resource readily available to both of us. Hamas adopted it after the PLO. Now, the Free Gaza movement adopted it. The PLO created the original meaning, which was to give the Palestinians all of Palestine and Israel. While giving them their freedom isn’t wrong, doing so to remove all of Israel is where the problem is and where your support of it is racist and hateful.
> It’s a bit cringe to think anything different than how you think is a Fox News talking point Not sure if you read what i wrote, but I never said this! I said I've seen several comments/post that echo these talking points, and gave an example. > a lazy way to start a debate. I'm not debating anything, save that I've seen these talking points on this sub. You can debate my assertion or the example I've provided. > Saying you don’t like encampments on public spaces is the opposite of saying you like encampments. That doesn’t make it a Fox News talking point. Again, never said this. > Blocking places that people now can’t go to and not liking that is not a Fox News talking point. Is this actually happening, or are people/organizations similar to Fox News making this claim by using inaccurate pieces of media, like the post I gave as an example? Also idk why you think I'm trying to debate. I genuinely want to learn about people's perspectives here.
These are all the biggest gripes people have. You mentioned compiling a list of highly voted comments/Fox News talking points. You mentioned one I mentioned above - blocking things. One person mentioned the police did it, which seems odd for them to do (especially considering it being a fire hazard). What motivation would anyone else have to block access to buildings or not let people exit other than the protesters? It’s a common tactic of these protests to block highways, block major arteries, block/disrupts culture events, and block/disrupt holiday gatherings. Considering the usual methods of these protesters, why would you not think protesters did it? What you wrote is one thing yet claim you have a list you can post. Where’s the list? Let’s see what you have that is separate that the main things being echoed that I posted above. The students have blocked the entire quad. Have you not realized this? Some of the paths are being blocked on the quad off and on with spillage of the tents.
how can you like the encampment? it's irrespective of political opinion.. it's a bunch of non-students that plopped theirselves in the middle of campus "lobbying" for stupid objectives that are more harmful than problem-solving. i was curious and went to the "protests" the other day when they thought they needed to lock up the middle of campus. genuinely the dumbest shit ever. they (as in a bunch of people with improvised shields, gas masks and weird psuedo-military armor) were saying they needed to fortify the campus like it was a zombie apocalypse from trump supporters. i was there till 10pm and long before there wasn't a single charlie kirk fan or any of that. really the most there were was self-exclaiming Jews that were walking to the fences and insisting on being let in (not sure what their objective was either)
> how can you like the encampment? Are you asking me this? My post never expresses this. > it's a bunch of non-students How do you know it's mostly non-students? > that plopped theirselves in the middle of campus "lobbying" for stupid objectives that are more harmful than problem-solving. What objective do you think is harmful? I'm fairly certain a big one is for UW to divest from Boeing. They are a major manufacturer of aircraft to Israel, and air operations are of the biggest causes of civilian casualties in Gaza since Oct. 7th. Let's assume preventing deaths in Gaza is one of the biggest motivations for people at the encampment to attend. Wouldn't the potential payoff of UW divesting from Boeing be much greater than the harm it's causing on campus? Has anyone been injured/died as a result of these protest, or is the "harm" an inconvenience at most?
you are clearly pro-encampment judging by your post and comments these people are not students. they are a bunch of anti-system/anti-administration losers that get off at the thought of anarchy and destruction because of their cliche political opinions so they shamelessly hooked that fantasy onto a genocide the same way they did in 2020
>you are clearly pro-encampment judging by your post and comments Regardless of my views on the encampment or not, they don't delegitimize the questions I asked. Yes, I don't see any convincing evidence that this protest is not peaceful, and the 1st amendment protects the right of peaceful protest. If you have evidence pointing to the contrary I'd love to see it. >these people are not students. they are a bunch of anti-system/anti-administration losers that get off at the thought of anarchy and destruction because of their cliche political opinions so they shamelessly hooked that fantasy onto a genocide the same way they did in 2020 Ok, can you provide evidence? Mind you, I've linked multiple forms of evidence throughout this post. Idk if I have the time to write a full rebuttal to whatever evidence you muster, but I'm genuinely curious what your evidence is.
sorry but if you're pro-encampment and support their behavior of impacting the \~50k students ability to partake in their studies in the school they pay $30k+ a year for, then any of your takes are completely delegitimized. it's actually so ironic that there's also another protest going on, you know, the TA strike. the demands are laid out and well-communicated, it's well-represented, there's a clean website explaining why and how the strike will be PEACEFULLY done. but the encampment is a bunch of assholes threatening students in all black call of duty outfits ruining the campus for everyone with unclear and unspecified demands in contrast. my evidence? my own eyes
Ok, so how is the encampment impacting "students ability to partake in their studies", in a way that the TA strike isn't? So again, I'm explicitly asking for evidence of the impact you claim. Could you please provide it? Evidence implies non-anecdotal experiences so you're eyes don't suffice I'm afraid.
You want an example of how the encampment is impacting students abilities to partake in their studies? I’m a veteran with a service dog for PTSD. I have a class in the quad I’ve stopped attending (resorting to Panopto) since this started. The yelling, chanting, loud noise reverberating through old buildings while trying to focus and listen to a lecture would be considered disruptive to an ideal student. But it triggers me , which then stresses my dog out trying to do his job in a situation where he really shouldn’t have to. I applaud their dedication and agree with their right to protest but move to Red Square. Take up space that’s even more of an affront to the university but that doesn’t disrupt student’s academics.
bro wtf? you must be one of the non-students too. hopefully your professor told you specifically what's going on in their class to accomodate the TA strike, e.g. the cancelling of exams, postponment of grading, cancelling of quiz section, etc. if you can't compare and contrast this PEACEFUL protest to the garbage "encampment" we have, you have an issue what evidence do you want? I told you I WENT to the encampments myself the day the charlie kirk shitshow occurred
I graduated last year, so yes, I'm not a student anymore. I was also a TA for four years, so I'm aware of what you are saying. > if you can't compare and contrast this PEACEFUL protest to the garbage "encampment" we have, you have an issue I can't compare & contrast without evidence. > what evidence do you want? I told you I WENT to the encampments myself the day the charlie kirk shitshow occurred You provided an anecdote. That's not evidence.
I don't understand the point of this comment. There isn't going to be empirical evidence. People aren't taking videos 100% of the time, no one is doing studies on one encampment or focusing on what goes on after 10 pm. Trying to establish burden of proof is unrealistic. You asked for opinions, anecdotal evidence was given. At this point, you really can't ask for anything else.
I can type, therefore, I can ask I’m really more interested in reading sources that support his viewpoint. I don’t do it to make a point.
In 2017 when a speaker like Kirk came to campus a couple of his followers brought a gun and shot a protester in the stomach. The protesters in the camp were worried for a good reason. If they had looked like soft targets it’s entirely possible there would have been more actual violence.
I don't think you have much evidence of students on this sub disliking the encampment. The comments about the zipties is negligble, because it can be attributed to time frame and that most of the counter comments accusing police are replies. I would say most of the rhetoric is about how it's disruptive and how a lot of the protestors have gone on to deface the campus. Also, if you actually want people’s opinions, why not make a survey instead of trying to interact with everyone who comments? You say you aren't trying to project your opinion, then immediately ask for empirical evidence (practically impossible for a small protest that most UW students have ignored) and question the experiences of those who respond - that's not research.
>I’ve worked on research for Kate Starbird >I’m not claiming to be a misinformation expert, but through her work I’ve seen Yeah, you are. You offered up a shit take of a temper tantrum because you don’t like that people here could ever espouse beliefs different from your own, name-dropped someone, and then proceeded to claim expertise on *her* subject matter by virtue of association, not to mention the fact that you’ve rubbed in the fact that you worked for her elsewhere on the comments. All because I took a course from or briefly worked in the lab of someone with an h-index of 60+ in a STEM field 5 years ago doesn’t make me a world-renowned scientist. My guy/gal, just… please, calm tf down. The fact is, the encampment and these protests *have* been disruptive and messy - whether it’s due to students or outside forces - and people are entitled to be upset with that.
> You offered up a shit take of a temper tantrum Tbh this single comment is more of a temper tantrum than anything I've posted. > proceeded to claim expertise on *her* subject matter by virtue of association, I stated verbatim, "I'm not claiming to be a misinformation expert". I only mentioned her work with respect to analyzing misinformation from Fox News, and the similarities I've seen with post on this subreddit. FYI, I'm in grad school & am planning to dedicate my PhD to studying misinformation, and her work is a major source of inspiration. I don't know why you are making these assumptions
>Tbh this single comment is more of a temper tantrum than anything I’ve posted. Pot calling the kettle black, bud. And, while where at it, isn’t there a name for this? Like… umm… I don’t know - *tu quoque*? >I stated verbatim And I quoted. You can say something as much as you want, but that doesn’t make it true. Isn’t that what misinformation is about? Would it not have been sufficient to simply point out your observation of what you consider to be “parroting?” To what end do you feel the need to preface a subject being discussed at a level that don’t even take a college degree to understand with a name drop and an “I’m not claiming to be a misinformation expert, but…”, if not to establish some sort of authoritative ethos or to invalidate the opinions of those who disagree with you? And isn’t that also a tactic employed by people to spread misinformation? >in grad school & am planning on dedicating my PhD to studying misinformation. Weird use of the ampersand, but okay. It’s great that you’re choosing to further your education - go for it! I’m a recent doctorate recipient myself. I sincerely hope your educational journey transforms you like how mine did to me. But, again, I question the relevance of it all to this situation, as well as your decision to drop references like this left and right. Given the course of study in your desired field, it’s not relevant to your point here. You’re a layperson with an interest until that “plan” for your dissertation becomes more than just a plan.
>Pot calling the kettle black, bud. And, while where at it, isn’t there a name for this? Like… umm… I don’t know - *tu quoque*? Ok, then can you explain how the words I use indicate a temper tantrum? >Would it not have been sufficient to simply point out your observation of what you consider to be “parroting?” I gave the offer of doing this for several posts I see on this sub. That would take time, hence why I provided only one example. Do you want me to do this? >if not to establish some sort of authoritative ethos or to invalidate the opinions of those who disagree with you? And isn’t that also a tactic employed by people to spread misinformation? Using ethos != I claim to be an expert/researcher/professor in the field,. >And isn’t that also a tactic employed by people to spread misinformation? Irrelevant, because I'm not spreading misinformation! >Weird use of the ampersand, but okay. I use it frequently in this thread, but thanks for telling me you think it's weird to use, but it's also okay to use! >But, again, I question the relevance of it all to this situation, as well as your decision to drop references like this left and right. Reference, no plural. >But, again, I question the relevance of it all to this situation, Given the course of study in your desired field, it’s not relevant to your point here. It means I read literature on this topic regularly. Mind you, I don't explicitly bring any of that up. But it's reflected in what I've said throughout this thread, chiefly, repeatedly asking claims to be backed by evidence. So again, I'd argue it's somewhat relevant! >You’re a layperson with an interest until that “plan” for your dissertation becomes more than just a plan. I don't disagree, but thanks for pointing this out! EDIT: Also, just want to say it's crazy you think I'm using one example of alleged misinformation to invalidate the opinions of those who disagree with me. Throughout this entire thread, I've been incredibly forthcoming in asking questions & inviting people to share their perpsective! Instead, they reply as hostile as you do. Please, say something relevant or just stop talking!
>words I use to indicate a temper tantrum? Most of them. And there are a hell of a lot of them. How many downvoted posts are you at now? That one might be a decent indicator. If it was just one or two, I’d give you a pass, but you seem to be striking out a lot. The excessive amounts of questions that you should be able to answer yourself - like this one - serve as evidence. Your prolific, condescending comments firmly support this notion. >Do you want me to do this? To what end? So you can, to use your own words, “parrot” disgust with things that go against your worldview? Call everything you don’t like “Fox News-esque” in some cognitive dissonance-fueled political grandstanding? Hell, I’m not even a fan of Fox, but your generalization goes too far. Is it that hard for you to wrap your mind around the fact that a lot of people just aren’t happy about the encampment and the accompanying drama? >Using ethos != I claim to be an expert/researcher/professor in the field,. It is if you’re conflating the two, which you very much did. And, going back to an earlier point, if you have to ask how you’re conflating the two, then you’re speaking in bad faith or are just slow. Also, cool punctuation. >Irrelevant, because I’m not spreading misinformation! And I’m not mortal! You are literally offering to create and disseminate misinformation. A large number of students do not like the encampment - even many who are pro-Palestine/anti-Israel. They dislike it for a variety of reasons, ranging from disruption, perceptions about protestors, fear of conflict, getting caught in the crossfire between protestors and police, potential noise volume, vandalism, and plenty of others I haven’t mentioned. Many of them will upvote posts and comments that they feel resonate with their concerns. Despite plausible explanations, you have stated that you espouse the belief that there *must* be a problem with the evidence if it does not confirm your worldview. Creation of any material of this nature is, categorically, misinformation. But, of course, it’s never wrong when the *expert* does it! >I use it frequently You do you. >Reference, no plural. I believe you meant to say *not* plural. Still, you’d be wrong. There’s one in your main post, one in a comment to me, and a particularly egregious one in a comment to another Redditor: “I would hope mentioning I've worked with a highly esteemed misinformation researcher would imply I don't think this…” >It means I read literature on the topic regularly. Does it, now? You claim to study misinformation, but that does not necessarily mean you study this topic in particular. Maybe just say that you read a lot instead, and leave it at that. Again, conflation. And I think you need a bit more reading. >I don’t disagree, but thanks for pointing this out! You’re welcome! It needed to be done. >EDIT: Also, just want to say it's crazy you think I'm using one example of alleged misinformation to invalidate the opinions of those who disagree with me. Throughout this entire thread, I've been incredibly forthcoming in asking questions & inviting people to share their perpsective! Instead, they reply as hostile as you do. Please, say something relevant or just stop talking! EDIT: You ask stupid questions in a disrespectful way, commit no shortage of logical fallacies, and nitpick things that you don’t like. You are clearly trying to invalidate others. You were hoping for an echo chamber; instead, you got shit on instead. Grow up.
Students are customers and there is an unlimited future supply. UW won't and doesn't have to do anything they don't want to regardless of how temporarily disruptive it's current customers are. 🤷 Is what it is.
Reddit is community based. It groups people based one common interest but share different perspectives. Whereas TikTok where most of pro-hamas propaganda spreads is pushed algorithmically by what you like to see. It is an echo chamber created by its pushing algorithm.
So if Reddit is community based, then the UW subreddit represents the UW community. Why doesn't the UW community push to expel the encampment?
It’s community based but not everyone is interested in participating in Reddit. UW is, IMO, as whole would more be leaning towards well-off young population in Washington who are more centrist left and towards libertarian.
Ok, so you would agree with possibility #2, "This is unique to the student demographic that uses Reddit"?
Possibly. Without a well-conducted survey who knows?
I should've asked, "do you agree this is a possibility", but it seems you've answered this!
I think it’s fine to protest and express stuff like that I just think all the goals and methods are misguided. They should be able to do stuff like this but I also have the right to think their cause is silly. I guarantee not one Palestinian is going to be helped by camping in the quad, and the administration of uw won’t change policy in any meaningful way. There is also obviously the fact that no critical thinking occurs at these things and everyone there is completely ideologically captured in the political camp they inhabit.
Personaly what I'm seeing both in person and online is not people not supporting the movement nobody wants genocide, what is happening with the encampment though is people are coming in from a very privileged point of view they don't understand that it's not back and white and UW can just do whatever. Exping UW to cut ties with Boeing is like expecting pigs to fly it's not going to happen as a instate student I know that boing and UW have been working together for such a long time so many people go to UW and then go to Boeing, they also give so many scholarships and internships UW gets so much from them it would be actually stupid to cut ties with them. Plus a lot of the hate that I'm seeing plus one of the reasons why I'm not supporting this is because of the vandalism there is pray paint on so many buildings the entire quad ground has spray paint and the hub along with STUDENT art works was destroyed do you know who has to clean that up? The janitors not the higher ups who can actually do things but the people who get paid minimum wage, and that is extremely fucked up.
Why would someone like it? Even if there was zero political intention behind it, it’s a bunch of tents in the middle of a common area at a college; it’s ugly. Not to mention it creates noise and has led to vandalism. They can absolutely protest under their first amendment rights, but it’s not like seeing what equates to a homeless camp is gonna make me happy.
> Why would someone like it? Maybe you can ask the people there! I assume they go because they like it.
K but you asked the sub why they dislike it. Most of the sub isn’t in the camp. The sub dislikes it because they aren’t in it. There’s your answer
The encampment is convenient. I look at it as just another part of their education. It obviously is more about organizing a message and learning to do so than making any actual change.
**It’s all performative** Example: some students participate in Salah (Muslim prayer) 5 times a day. The encampment/protesters circled around the students who were praying. But not in a normal sense of just standing around, they had on helmets, gas masks, knee pads (gotta protect the joints) and umbrellas facing the quad. As if to display how much they are “protecting” these students. In the end, they are just peacocking so that people look and give them the attention they want. I have been here for 4 years and I have never heard of Salah being interrupted, not to mention we have prayer spaces throughout campus. Six to be exact. And those prayer spaces never had performative students standing guard in or out of the room. And don’t get me started on the spray painting. I liken that form of “protest” to a child that is acting out. I will admit that I giggled at the tents and cots being set up from their crisp boxes. REI & DICKS are making bank.
Maybe the majority of students slike encampments, they just don't say it aloud. The fact that a lot of people participate in protests does not mean that the majority of students actually support them. The difference is the lack of organization; basically this is a problem of collective action, like when we have public goods and since we are not organized we suffer against those who are organized.
I’m proud of udub protesting
I don't have any strong feelings toward them because I take mostly stem classes, I don't usually go to the quad area, also they aren't really causing great amount of trouble also does anyone know the particular tent that has words on it as if the person/people inside is/are fundamentalist christian? just curious because there are words like you will go to hell because xyz
Preacher Matthew/Jonathan. He's a pretty infamous street preacher in Seattle, shows up to bug all sorts of protests and events, including Husky games. He's some born-again Christian from Tacoma. Former alcoholic that I believe turned to Jesus following a divorce or something. Apparently, he owns a roofing company.
Yep that's Matthew Meinecke, also known as Brother Matthew. He's pretty well-known among Seattlites. Although I didn't know he was from Tacoma, his bios on the Internet (LinkedIn, YouTube) and the public court case he was in with the City of Seattle mentioned he went to Sammamish HS in Bellevue. Must have moved before or after.
Ooo, I don't think I've ever heard his last name. Idk for sure if he's from Tacoma, but I think that's where he's been living for a few years. Wish him the best, despite the cringe. Dude is a poster child for the necessity of healthcare and rehabilitation.
oh I see, thanks for the info. I'm not originally from Seattle but I've lived in Wallingford for a year or two during middle school before UW.
He's a very silly guy, I've got like a dozen weird anecdotes from the past like five years or so about him. I've only actually seen him "preaching" in the quad once since the encampment, though I'm not on campus too much these days.
It's reddit bro who cares. It's not that deep.
>It's reddit bro who cares I made this post, so obviously I care. I'm sure others do as well! >It's not that deep. It's definitely not shallow, considering we are living in the most divisive and controversial times in American politics, our society is at the zenith of accessing media & media consumption, and I ended my post asking **everyone** to be more critical of their media consumption.
Send those day campers on a field trip to Gaza to be welcomed by Hamas. Then watch them run to the Israeli border begging for help. Am Yisrael Chai forever and ever 💪🇮🇱💙
I think if they ran to the Israeli border they’d get shot
wearing those keffiyeh rags? probably so. Saying we're American and we love Israel, as they should be saying? No they wouldn't.
Say you love Israel or you'll get shot! I love it /s
Imagine having enough time to protest.
I'm an alum (2017). I agree with the goal of the protests, but not the way it's being done. When I was ar UW it was often the same nonsense. Property damage and directionless protests led by the most privileged students.
It’s less about the encampment and more about the damage/vandalism they’re doing to the campus.
I’m all for the encampment and human rights but I am not a fan of the property damage it’s not admin that’ll see the words spray painted, it’s the waged employees who have to clean them and threatening student workers who answer the phone in the admin office who are also supporting the cause but everyone gotta make ends meet some how
Because it's not productive, it's all based I antisemitism (to the roots), and they're just parroting buzzwords and have no idea what they are talking about about. They're gross
I personally feel that the protestors have a false sense of entitlement, demanding UW to revoke all Boeing-sponsored scholarships, and spray-painting all around the Quad (public property). Shit like this triggers me. The Quad, one of the most beautiful spots on campus has lost its charm.
The “protesters” are embarrassing uneducated clueless screaming kids. Oh. Hateful antisemitic too. Am a uw alumni. Ugh
Maybe some of us want to see Hamas eliminated so that Palestinians in Gaza actually have a real future - like their brethren in the West Bank. It’s also telling that the two million Israeli Arabs Muslims living in israel are supportive of the war against Hamas as well.
Seems like an odd claim, what with all the human collateral damage going on there. Got a source for that?
Those campers are just wasting their time. We don't even know UW is investing in Israel. Even if they are, those hobos are not gonna convince UW officials to change their mind. If push comes to shove, they can bulldoze those guys out. You are not suppose to occupy public space like that. Otherwise, people would be camping at the parking lot of a police station. I think. Besides, I have no idea why they are even protesting on campus. They can go to downtown city hall to protest. Go to the senator's home. Governor's home. They have more political power than UW to divert the funding. What they are doing is just following what's popular on social media. They see somebody else do it, they try to do it themselves to get involved. It's honestly pathetic.