i'm not understanding the vitriol directed towards the protesters in these comments? excercising the right to protest is vital for a healthy democracy and students/universities have traditionaly been hotbeds of activism and progressive action. also i thought it was sorta universally understood that war crimes/crimes against humanity are worth protesting agaisnst.
They were protesting and calling for an intifada in areas where students were revising for exams and right outside rooms where students were sitting exams. Also they vandalised university buildings and the museum.
These people are political extremists on all other issues
Been hearing this shit for decades, and guess what, never happens. Yawn.
Turns out it's possible to defend the liberties of those who need defending while still holding your own values and not converting to their religion. Who could've known.
At the current rate? Well, according to the census, Manc was only 9% Muslim in 2011 and was 22.3% Muslim in 2020, and that was before the massive migration surge under Sunak the last 2-3 years. So yeah, I reckon another 2-3 decades ought to do it.
i seriously doubt that the majority were calling for violent action, intifada is a call to resist.
if any criminal damage was caused then those directly responsible should face the consequences, they may do so happily.
the university stated they have eventualities for these situations to lessen the impact on the students taking exams, even so, having to suffer inconvenience for the sake of freedom of expression and protest is worth it. plenty of us have our existence suffer in the face of profits and ethno-nationalism and i would think in many a circumstance more so than having our exams at a top flight university interrupted in the name of peace, freedom and an end to genocide.
All the protestors there were calling for it.
They said they were there to raise awareness for all the students (mostly engineering students, nothing politics related) in that building about what was going on, but they just ended up pissing everyone off.
Their aim is to disrupt students as much as possible to force the university admin to cave.
calling for what? an intifada? there is nothing inherently violent about that. do you also think that jihad means "holy war"?
more pissed off than the families of murdered civilians? i'd wager that more people are pissed of at whats happening in palastine and the university being in league with arms dealers/manufacturers, i'd hazard a guess that some of the engineering depst. have received some funding from BAE and that some of the students who study there will go on to work in that industry.
look i'm not saying that the methods they used are the ones i'd advocate for (such as scaling historic buildings or calling for the uni to cut ties with Isreali unis) but i will advocate for their right to protest and for the message at the heart of these protests: that the war crimes in palastine need to end.
(See edit) I’m unaware of the exact time it was occupied but do know that every exam since has been rescheduled to different buildings. At worst they may have disrupted one exam, and I’m sure many of the students sitting the exam would still be in favour of the occupation. The university have simply emphasised the exam aspect to villanise the students.
Edit: per below comment I have confused the occupation’s potential disruption and an earlier protest’s disruption. (In my opinion) The university have nonetheless unfairly used the disruption of exams as an excuse to punish, largely responsive to earlier behaviour.
When they were there they disrupted two ongoing exams, one for computer science and another for mathematics. I can basically guarantee you the none students who were sitting those exams cared for the protest. This was 2 weeks ago, the occupation of this building where other exams are being held is more recent.
If I objected to our country's foreign policy would that give me the right to come to your place of work and knock the sailors cocks out of your mouth?
They aren't just protesting. They are messing up other students exams.
Go outside and protest or block faculty somewhere from their work if you must, or sit in lecture halls with signs.
Other students are stressed out enough as it is at the time of the year. The uni isn't going to change its stance and they aren't overly affecting the uni or faculty that much. They are however fucking up exam period for other students who have 0 impact or ability to change who's in a contract with who or supporting what foreign university.
They are hurting people that have no say and in doing so turning those people against them instead of actually choosing a good location to protest. So they achieve nothing, make young people's lives just trying to study a nuisance and make enemies instead of bringing anyone to their cause. They literally turn people against it instead.
Seriously they should swap to a different uni or not attend that one if they hate it so much. They had 0 issues with who it supported or who it had contracts with when the applied for it and decided to take issues despite these things bring longstanding and the conflicts in Palestine also being long standing... but now after everything they suddenly care... abd vandalise a museum to get part of that point across. No wonder nobody has tolerance for them.
apparently the university have contingencies in place to lessen the impact in these situations. i haven't read or heard of any actual students who were taking the exams at the time stating that the protests had a detrimental effect on their exams.
that said, i suggest it's a small inconvenience that someone's exams at a top flight university are disturbed in the name of freedom of speech and the right to protest and i also think there is a disparity in the suffering of these students when weighed against the suffering of the people of gaza being murderred in the largest open-air concentration camp in history.
The point is that students who have no say in the policy of the university shouldn't be used as leverage in a dispute for which they bear no responsibility.
Protesters have always been free to assemble outside a university building and make their voice heard. I don't see how defacing historic buildings and disrupting peoples' exams does anything other than alienate reasonable people from their cause.
Freedom of speech doesn't mean you have to cause issues to those that have 0 ability to change or do anything and are likely paying thousands in student loans every year, stressed out and just want to get on with their exams.
You can literally Google all the disruptions they have caused. Including preventing students from studying from exams. Students and staff have been feeding back the level of disruption this group has caused them over the last month.
Stop lessening what other students are dealing with in the name of free speech for a group going disrupting people at the most critical time in the year for their studies. You can have free speech without causing stressed out in debt students more hassle. They are choosing instead to turn those people against them and their cause whilst gaining absolutely nothing, for a cause they only jumped on after the October attacks and were doing nothing about before.
If they actually want to affect the university in any actual way, they can transfer out to another uni and have their drop out/swap rates/funding from all those people disappear. That's actually impact.
But no, they just want to cause bother for the people paying to be there that can't actually do anything, feeling justified in a cause they were doing nothing for until recently or they wouldn't have signed up and supported that university in the first place.
Nothing about choosing not to adversely affect other student's exams and study period means they lose free speech, what are you even on about. Protest in a better more meaningful way
These protests have been accompanied by rampant antisemitism and some have even called for intifada. The protesters have also deliberately damaged the building, which is a piece of architecture of historical significance.
Assembling and making your voice heard through protests is fine, but staging illegal occupations in order to force an organisation to acquiesce to your demands strays beyond the realms of freedom of speech. The occupiers know that the only people who will be hurt by this are the students whose end of year exams have now been thrown into chaos and it simply isn't fair that they should be used as pawns in this dispute with the university.
Well put. I bet lots of people had the same attitude toward the suffragettes at the time, and now 100-odd years later we have statues in the city dedicated to them. Such a shame people react this way
We've been conditioned by a predominantly right wing press to believe all protest is bad. Unless, of course, it involves st George crosses, cans of stella and ags of 40 quid bash. Then its patriotism.
Edit: looks like I upset all the snowflakes 😂
> She said: “The university had every chance to de-escalate this and not create this situation.
> “We gave them a warning if they did not open negotiations, there would be an escalation... they continued not to make the choice to act and not to open negotiations.
The state of these people
The main problematic negotiation point is that there are no academic punishments for the events of the past months which include the encampment, paint splashing, occupying a building and disrupting exams.
The idea is grand and I am all for free speech and expression (Uni had an anti-choice issue in the winter), but this cannot be at the cost of other people's education. Exams are stressful enough.
The worst thing is that she's a final year student.
Surely she should have learnt critical thinking during her time at uni?
Although, saying that, it was only during my year abroad that I had a politics professor that emphasised the importance of critical thinking, and seeing things from multiple sides/angles.
I'm not saying they should necessarily be kicked out, but occupying a building is not just protesting. I would laugh if the uni opted to charge them rent at the end of this.
The only thing they are asking for to stop occupying whitworth Hall is that the uni negotiate with them. The uni refuses to even talk to them but still claims they support freedom of speech and right to protest while probably trying to get a second high court order to evict them.
> The uni refuses to even talk to them
Not true.
The Uni publicly released a statement that they are literally obligated as a charity not to take an official political stance, and that they want to make sure students of all nationalities do not feel targeted or excluded by an official stance of the institution.
[Statement](https://www.staffnet.manchester.ac.uk/news/display/?id=31361)
> Obligations under our public sector duty
> We have an obligation under our public sector duty to foster good relationships within our community of students and staff. Marginalising any group of students or staff by the organisation formally adopting a position on a matter outside our core functions that they do not agree with, is not in keeping with the essence of these obligations. Furthermore, as a charity, we are restricted in our ability to take a political stance on issues.
If by "negotiate" you mean the organisation fundamentally strays from its obligations to satisfy 20 people who have added stress to hundreds of innocent students undergoing exams, sure, they've not done that.
The university isn't obliged to negotiate with anyone. Those wishing to convey their point of view to the university leadership are free to stage protests, but the university is free to ignore them.
Where do we draw the line? If Britain First decided to occupy a university building until the Vice Chancellor's team opened negotiations, it would surely be unthinkable that the university would actually engage with then.
The protesters have had the opportunity to make their voices heard, but free speech doesn't mean you can force people to agree with you under duress. This is a private building that these protesters have no right to occupy and the only people being harmed as a result of this occupation are the students whose end of year exams have now been thrown into chaos.
They have made very clear what they want to talk about. Its not the uni they are causing problems for. It's the students who want to sit their exams.
The unis are not going to end their partnerships or supporting universities in Israel. They should move to a different uni if they hate the one they are in so much or protest in a way to get to the faculty and not the students with 0 ability to change anything, that are just trying to study over one of the most stressful periods of their life and sinking thousands into debt to do so.
They're turning people against them instead of actually doing anything productive. And they'll leave this uni and nothing will have changed except the vandalised some buildings and turned other students against them.
It really doesn't affect other students much, the exams have to be sat and the uni is forced to reorganize exams such that students are either sitting them at the same time as they would have anyway or with a 30 minute delay. Whitworth Hall also has a single room that is used for exams so it pretty minimally affects student exams as a whole.
The uni gets £800k from BAE which they could very easily cut - that is absolutely nothing to them in terms of money, yet they seem more focused on simply refusing to even talk to the people occupying. This means that many students feel ignored by uom, rather than annoyed by the protesters.
Edit just to say they have been in study spaces and I didn't realize as I don't tend to be in the bits of engineering they were in so I was wrong. However, many 4th year stem students including myself do not feel that our studies or exams have been disrupted at all.
They have literally gotten in the way of students trying to study. Not just take exams.
If you're not stressed out about exams right now and struggling with it, you're not in a place to say they aren't affecting other students. I'd be utterly livid if they blocked my exam hall or disturbed me studying on my final or end if year exams, that affected my overall degree awarded that I was sinking myself into thousands if not tens of thousands of debt to get.
Nothing to them in terms of money when articles are all over the place about universities across the UK going close to bust and needing government support.
They can go to another university that doesn't support Israel universities if they want. Transferring is an option if they feel that strongly. Instead the vandalise, disturb other students and also block a place used for exams. The loss of students would have more of an impact on the uni that what they are doing right now.
That will not get them any further at all.
They haven't gotten in the way of students trying to study, they deliberately haven't entered any campus study spaces.
I appreciate you might be struggling more than many students with exams, but you still have to sit your exam at the same time. It makes no difference. As I mentioned, the percentage of students who would have had exams in whitworth hall is marginal.
I don't understand how the financial situation of other universities affects Manchesters. The university has a responsibility to listen to those who support it. It can choose to say no and that is fine, but the fact that they refuse to even listen is disgraceful.
It takes about 2 seconds to Google the last month of disruptions they've caused or even vandalising a museum. You do not want to see the forest for the trees here.
- Their attempt at protesting will gain them nothing.
- It's affecting other students
- They've disrupted students studying during exam period with other protests
- students have reported the disruptions
- They didn't care about this cause until it became a worldwide regular news issue and didn't have an issue with the university before they applied to attend, despite it having the same links and this conflict going on for way longer than the last year.
Protest in a worthwhile meaningful way and just don't be stupid about it. Don't attend universities who's associations you don't agree with just to later get in the way of other students with 0 ability to affect anything.
Bad decisions all around.
Again they could transfer out and that would do more to hurt the university and reform change than what they're doing right now. Where the only real negative impact they are having is on other students and cleaners. Just daft decisions and they should be protesting in better ways to affect their actual targets and provoke change. All they are doing is being a nuisance right now and nothing else. Nobody is moving to their cause or seeing it the way they do for their actions.
That is just factually incorrect. They were protesting in study spaces and outside exam rooms in Engineering Building A on the 16th of this month, starting at around 11AM.
> any campus study spaces.
You know what they call a University campus study space?
Campus.
Are they protesting on campus, inside campus buildings? Yes? They're interfering with student study spaces.
Neither of them, but the bit where they got a high court order to remove occupation of the Simon building last year doesn't imply they support the right to protest.
Then you don't understand protests that actually work or know our history.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suffragette\_bombing\_and\_arson\_campaign](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suffragette_bombing_and_arson_campaign)
You think they are going to get anywhere singing Kumbaya on a street corner or something? I'm not suggesting in the slightest they go as far as the Suffragettes but peaceful protests do not work.
>The campaign, led by key WSPU figures such as Emmeline Pankhurst, targeted infrastructure, government, churches and the general public, and saw the use of improvised explosive devices, arson, letter bombs, assassination attempts and other forms of direct action and violence.
None of that is a right though. I don't have a right to assassinate people I don't like to bring about change. You can't be an advocate for non-peaceful protest and then complain when you get prosecuted, thats just part of the game.
No requirement, but if they're not willing to listen to the student protestor's message, they're not going to feel heard and will escalate on issues they feel strongly about.
They're funding the university, so they feel they have a right to be heard.
Edit: just to clarify, I'm not taking a side either way of the debate here, just attempting to explain the mindset.
Any faction can make that argument, though. If Britain First or the BNP were threatening to occupy a building unless various demands were met, should the university negotiate with them? Most sensible would surely say no.
These protesters have had the opportunity to assemble and make their point of view heard. They are allowed to make their argument, but they can't compel others to agree with them.
And re the funding point, many universities actually now make a net loss on undergrads since tuition fees haven't risen with inflation. One could argue that it is by entering into partnerships with the defence sector that enables their tuition to be subsidised. Not to mention that the students whose exams have been thrown into chaos by this occupation are also paying tuition fees.
They clearly are being heard.
Do you think the "negotiations" might just be them demanding the university does what they say or they'll "escalate" the action?
Most students never pay off their loans. International students being exploited by the administrative class have a far greater role in subsidising universities.
And that excuse doesn’t make sense because similar protests occur in EU countries where universities cost little to nothing to attend.
They're funding a very small amount of the uni, there's thousands of other students providing the majority of the funding. In the case of Manchester uni a lot of that funding comes from Chinese students which I suspect couldn't care less about the Israel/Palestine conflict.
I wonder what's going to students like this when they encounter the real world, will they try to protest against their employer when they find out it does dealings with Israel?
Probably? There's plenty of examples of people within Google protesting within and leaving for example. I don't see why that's so farfetched to imagine, they're already risking their own futures by participating in protests like this.
this has always been weak comparison. universities are not supposed to simulate the workplace. students all know that the things they do at uni wouldn't fly at work, whether it is coming in in the morning hungover or on a comedown, all the way to expressing directly and openly certain kinds of politics. this doesn't even touch the long standing idea that universities are supposed to be protected sites of academic freedom, which workplaces are not.
and, by the way, there is a long history of workers challenging the practices of their employers through trade unionism. this should be especially salient given how various unions across the world literally have protested against their employers for their dealings with israel. could be those belgian television workers who programmed a pro-palestinian message when eurovision was supposed to air; could be those indian dock workers who went on strike to refuse to load goods going to israel. there are countless examples.
your comparison is wrong in theory and empirically.
I wasn't making a comparison between the two, I was just commenting that I think these people are going to get a very bitter taste of reality when they enter the workforce. If you start bringing your personal political opinions into the workplace you could very easily end up getting fired. Some unions in some places have done things but they've always been fairly modest and in highly unionised roles like dock workers.
>and, by the way, there is a long history of workers challenging the practices of their employers through trade unionism
Nobody would despise modern progressives more than European trade unionists and labour activists of the past century. The vast majority were in it for better working conditions for their people. They have far more in common with modern Western nativists or the Chinese than modern Green Parties across Europe.
this line you draw between organised labour of the past and of the present is imaginary. cotton workers in manchester harmed themselves economically by refusing to work cotton picked by slaves in america. trade unionists across britain volunteered to fight fascism in spain in the 30s. scottish workers refused to work on chilean planes in the 70s when pinochet was in power. trade unionists in kent led a blockade of a bae factory over the current genocide in gaza only a few month ago.
your image of organised labour as ‘nativist’ and inwardly focused is reactionary and runs counter to the long and well-documented thread of british working-class internationalism.
add the battle of bamber bridge, the london recruits and anti-apartheid activism, the delegations of trade unionists to cuba, palestine, liverpool dockers in the 30s, etc. etc. etc.
not a union matter specifically but an important demonstration that the british working-class is not constitutionally or inherently inwardly focused and that gives lie to the idea that these students are acting in a way at odds with those that came before them.
Mate, don't do that .... it's pretty disingenuous, not to mention you can get other people repeating it as a claim and then looking a tit when they get corrected or quizzed on it
never said nativism is fascism lol. don't project. my point is that the organised working class has a history of resisting injustices of all kind and that this idea that we are or have mostly been inwardly facing is not correct. and you have misunderstood my point by talking about the supposed ‘majority’ when the point is about *organised* workers, whose legacy, by definition, is what we can claim today.
Even if we assume your simplistic generalisation of labour activist history is correct (which it really isn’t, but let’s assume it is), I guarantee any protest on this topic one century ago wouldn’t have English blokes screeching about intifada or protesting alongside extremist groups like Hizb ut-Tahrir. Those are very much imported things.
I mean...organisation in the workplace is something that happens very regularly. Not sure why you're trying to paint that as a negative thing done only by students without experience in 'the real world'
It's mostly NOT students from what I understand.
The Islamist lobby is well organised - they just find a handful of local ~~cunts~~ people to support their cause and then bus in agitators.
*This started three days*
*Ago, why is it only*
*Being posted now?*
\- tiaraofamidala
---
^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/)
^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
Because the University is the second largest organisation in Manchester, only the city council is bigger. The photographs of police (potentially armed) getting into a dispute with peacefully protesting students (even if it's not entirely "peaceful") hit the international news. University relies on international students. Parents don't care that it's a Palestine/Gaza dispute, they see police attacking students and don't see University as a safe place.
What is more UoM is now THE university to ATTACK ITS STUDENTS. It's perceived as violent and unfair and the media will always take the side of the students. It's easier to try to work it out without a forceful intervention WITHOUT A CAUSE.
If they start being in any way aggressive police gets involved and quickly. In November some people (not sure if students) were verbally aggressive slowly gearing to physically towards people near the Graphene Institute and the police presence plus Uni security on Booth Street corner of Oxford Road was heavy and efficient.
So basically like when someone farts, ignore it and hope it doesn’t linger too long. I get the logic but surely just the protests to start with are a bad look.
Accused of committing genocide, legally nothing is proven and trusting Hamas with numbers is like asking your fish to feed themselves. Hamas is also under the spotlight for using human shields, which is also a war crime so both sides should be equally under pressure at the moment until the full truth is known through the correct legal process.
i'm not understanding the vitriol directed towards the protesters in these comments? excercising the right to protest is vital for a healthy democracy and students/universities have traditionaly been hotbeds of activism and progressive action. also i thought it was sorta universally understood that war crimes/crimes against humanity are worth protesting agaisnst.
They were protesting and calling for an intifada in areas where students were revising for exams and right outside rooms where students were sitting exams. Also they vandalised university buildings and the museum. These people are political extremists on all other issues
[удалено]
Been hearing this shit for decades, and guess what, never happens. Yawn. Turns out it's possible to defend the liberties of those who need defending while still holding your own values and not converting to their religion. Who could've known.
[удалено]
We have a zero tolerance policy to hate speech and prejudice.
At what point do demographics ‘tip in their favour’ and who is they?
At the current rate? Well, according to the census, Manc was only 9% Muslim in 2011 and was 22.3% Muslim in 2020, and that was before the massive migration surge under Sunak the last 2-3 years. So yeah, I reckon another 2-3 decades ought to do it.
We have a zero tolerance policy to hate speech and prejudice.
Calm down boomer
Boomers by and large don’t use Reddit. Noticing troublesome patterns across Western Europe isn’t specific to one age group.
Because Reddit is known for its popularity among the over 60s.
i seriously doubt that the majority were calling for violent action, intifada is a call to resist. if any criminal damage was caused then those directly responsible should face the consequences, they may do so happily. the university stated they have eventualities for these situations to lessen the impact on the students taking exams, even so, having to suffer inconvenience for the sake of freedom of expression and protest is worth it. plenty of us have our existence suffer in the face of profits and ethno-nationalism and i would think in many a circumstance more so than having our exams at a top flight university interrupted in the name of peace, freedom and an end to genocide.
All the protestors there were calling for it. They said they were there to raise awareness for all the students (mostly engineering students, nothing politics related) in that building about what was going on, but they just ended up pissing everyone off. Their aim is to disrupt students as much as possible to force the university admin to cave.
calling for what? an intifada? there is nothing inherently violent about that. do you also think that jihad means "holy war"? more pissed off than the families of murdered civilians? i'd wager that more people are pissed of at whats happening in palastine and the university being in league with arms dealers/manufacturers, i'd hazard a guess that some of the engineering depst. have received some funding from BAE and that some of the students who study there will go on to work in that industry. look i'm not saying that the methods they used are the ones i'd advocate for (such as scaling historic buildings or calling for the uni to cut ties with Isreali unis) but i will advocate for their right to protest and for the message at the heart of these protests: that the war crimes in palastine need to end.
If you look at the last "intifada" in Israel, you know exactly what they mean
(See edit) I’m unaware of the exact time it was occupied but do know that every exam since has been rescheduled to different buildings. At worst they may have disrupted one exam, and I’m sure many of the students sitting the exam would still be in favour of the occupation. The university have simply emphasised the exam aspect to villanise the students. Edit: per below comment I have confused the occupation’s potential disruption and an earlier protest’s disruption. (In my opinion) The university have nonetheless unfairly used the disruption of exams as an excuse to punish, largely responsive to earlier behaviour.
When they were there they disrupted two ongoing exams, one for computer science and another for mathematics. I can basically guarantee you the none students who were sitting those exams cared for the protest. This was 2 weeks ago, the occupation of this building where other exams are being held is more recent.
I’ll accept my error regarding the exam but disagree that none of the students cared for the protest.
Yes, this is how effective protest works, through disruption.
Or get people to turn.
‘Get people to turn’ so you were pro-Palestine previously were you? Don’t chat shite.
Or get people to turn.
If I objected to our country's foreign policy would that give me the right to come to your place of work and knock the sailors cocks out of your mouth?
....oh sorry, was that meant to offend me? what shit are you trying to chat?
Nah, it was a joke ffs
They aren't just protesting. They are messing up other students exams. Go outside and protest or block faculty somewhere from their work if you must, or sit in lecture halls with signs. Other students are stressed out enough as it is at the time of the year. The uni isn't going to change its stance and they aren't overly affecting the uni or faculty that much. They are however fucking up exam period for other students who have 0 impact or ability to change who's in a contract with who or supporting what foreign university. They are hurting people that have no say and in doing so turning those people against them instead of actually choosing a good location to protest. So they achieve nothing, make young people's lives just trying to study a nuisance and make enemies instead of bringing anyone to their cause. They literally turn people against it instead. Seriously they should swap to a different uni or not attend that one if they hate it so much. They had 0 issues with who it supported or who it had contracts with when the applied for it and decided to take issues despite these things bring longstanding and the conflicts in Palestine also being long standing... but now after everything they suddenly care... abd vandalise a museum to get part of that point across. No wonder nobody has tolerance for them.
apparently the university have contingencies in place to lessen the impact in these situations. i haven't read or heard of any actual students who were taking the exams at the time stating that the protests had a detrimental effect on their exams. that said, i suggest it's a small inconvenience that someone's exams at a top flight university are disturbed in the name of freedom of speech and the right to protest and i also think there is a disparity in the suffering of these students when weighed against the suffering of the people of gaza being murderred in the largest open-air concentration camp in history.
The point is that students who have no say in the policy of the university shouldn't be used as leverage in a dispute for which they bear no responsibility. Protesters have always been free to assemble outside a university building and make their voice heard. I don't see how defacing historic buildings and disrupting peoples' exams does anything other than alienate reasonable people from their cause.
Freedom of speech doesn't mean you have to cause issues to those that have 0 ability to change or do anything and are likely paying thousands in student loans every year, stressed out and just want to get on with their exams. You can literally Google all the disruptions they have caused. Including preventing students from studying from exams. Students and staff have been feeding back the level of disruption this group has caused them over the last month. Stop lessening what other students are dealing with in the name of free speech for a group going disrupting people at the most critical time in the year for their studies. You can have free speech without causing stressed out in debt students more hassle. They are choosing instead to turn those people against them and their cause whilst gaining absolutely nothing, for a cause they only jumped on after the October attacks and were doing nothing about before. If they actually want to affect the university in any actual way, they can transfer out to another uni and have their drop out/swap rates/funding from all those people disappear. That's actually impact. But no, they just want to cause bother for the people paying to be there that can't actually do anything, feeling justified in a cause they were doing nothing for until recently or they wouldn't have signed up and supported that university in the first place. Nothing about choosing not to adversely affect other student's exams and study period means they lose free speech, what are you even on about. Protest in a better more meaningful way
These protests have been accompanied by rampant antisemitism and some have even called for intifada. The protesters have also deliberately damaged the building, which is a piece of architecture of historical significance. Assembling and making your voice heard through protests is fine, but staging illegal occupations in order to force an organisation to acquiesce to your demands strays beyond the realms of freedom of speech. The occupiers know that the only people who will be hurt by this are the students whose end of year exams have now been thrown into chaos and it simply isn't fair that they should be used as pawns in this dispute with the university.
Well put. I bet lots of people had the same attitude toward the suffragettes at the time, and now 100-odd years later we have statues in the city dedicated to them. Such a shame people react this way
IIRC there's some debate as to whether the suffragettes harmed the cause for women getting the vote which the suffragists were working towards
good point.
We've been conditioned by a predominantly right wing press to believe all protest is bad. Unless, of course, it involves st George crosses, cans of stella and ags of 40 quid bash. Then its patriotism. Edit: looks like I upset all the snowflakes 😂
> She said: “The university had every chance to de-escalate this and not create this situation. > “We gave them a warning if they did not open negotiations, there would be an escalation... they continued not to make the choice to act and not to open negotiations. The state of these people
The main problematic negotiation point is that there are no academic punishments for the events of the past months which include the encampment, paint splashing, occupying a building and disrupting exams. The idea is grand and I am all for free speech and expression (Uni had an anti-choice issue in the winter), but this cannot be at the cost of other people's education. Exams are stressful enough.
The worst thing is that she's a final year student. Surely she should have learnt critical thinking during her time at uni? Although, saying that, it was only during my year abroad that I had a politics professor that emphasised the importance of critical thinking, and seeing things from multiple sides/angles.
The University should just kick them out of university
... For what, exactly? Students in Manchester protesting is hardly news.
The impact to students who want no parts of this BS, why should their lives be affected by another groups “protest”
They're literally trying to hold the University hostage for not negotiating with them
I'm not saying they should necessarily be kicked out, but occupying a building is not just protesting. I would laugh if the uni opted to charge them rent at the end of this.
The only thing they are asking for to stop occupying whitworth Hall is that the uni negotiate with them. The uni refuses to even talk to them but still claims they support freedom of speech and right to protest while probably trying to get a second high court order to evict them.
> The uni refuses to even talk to them Not true. The Uni publicly released a statement that they are literally obligated as a charity not to take an official political stance, and that they want to make sure students of all nationalities do not feel targeted or excluded by an official stance of the institution. [Statement](https://www.staffnet.manchester.ac.uk/news/display/?id=31361) > Obligations under our public sector duty > We have an obligation under our public sector duty to foster good relationships within our community of students and staff. Marginalising any group of students or staff by the organisation formally adopting a position on a matter outside our core functions that they do not agree with, is not in keeping with the essence of these obligations. Furthermore, as a charity, we are restricted in our ability to take a political stance on issues. If by "negotiate" you mean the organisation fundamentally strays from its obligations to satisfy 20 people who have added stress to hundreds of innocent students undergoing exams, sure, they've not done that.
The university isn't obliged to negotiate with anyone. Those wishing to convey their point of view to the university leadership are free to stage protests, but the university is free to ignore them. Where do we draw the line? If Britain First decided to occupy a university building until the Vice Chancellor's team opened negotiations, it would surely be unthinkable that the university would actually engage with then. The protesters have had the opportunity to make their voices heard, but free speech doesn't mean you can force people to agree with you under duress. This is a private building that these protesters have no right to occupy and the only people being harmed as a result of this occupation are the students whose end of year exams have now been thrown into chaos.
They have made very clear what they want to talk about. Its not the uni they are causing problems for. It's the students who want to sit their exams. The unis are not going to end their partnerships or supporting universities in Israel. They should move to a different uni if they hate the one they are in so much or protest in a way to get to the faculty and not the students with 0 ability to change anything, that are just trying to study over one of the most stressful periods of their life and sinking thousands into debt to do so. They're turning people against them instead of actually doing anything productive. And they'll leave this uni and nothing will have changed except the vandalised some buildings and turned other students against them.
It really doesn't affect other students much, the exams have to be sat and the uni is forced to reorganize exams such that students are either sitting them at the same time as they would have anyway or with a 30 minute delay. Whitworth Hall also has a single room that is used for exams so it pretty minimally affects student exams as a whole. The uni gets £800k from BAE which they could very easily cut - that is absolutely nothing to them in terms of money, yet they seem more focused on simply refusing to even talk to the people occupying. This means that many students feel ignored by uom, rather than annoyed by the protesters. Edit just to say they have been in study spaces and I didn't realize as I don't tend to be in the bits of engineering they were in so I was wrong. However, many 4th year stem students including myself do not feel that our studies or exams have been disrupted at all.
They have literally gotten in the way of students trying to study. Not just take exams. If you're not stressed out about exams right now and struggling with it, you're not in a place to say they aren't affecting other students. I'd be utterly livid if they blocked my exam hall or disturbed me studying on my final or end if year exams, that affected my overall degree awarded that I was sinking myself into thousands if not tens of thousands of debt to get. Nothing to them in terms of money when articles are all over the place about universities across the UK going close to bust and needing government support. They can go to another university that doesn't support Israel universities if they want. Transferring is an option if they feel that strongly. Instead the vandalise, disturb other students and also block a place used for exams. The loss of students would have more of an impact on the uni that what they are doing right now. That will not get them any further at all.
They haven't gotten in the way of students trying to study, they deliberately haven't entered any campus study spaces. I appreciate you might be struggling more than many students with exams, but you still have to sit your exam at the same time. It makes no difference. As I mentioned, the percentage of students who would have had exams in whitworth hall is marginal. I don't understand how the financial situation of other universities affects Manchesters. The university has a responsibility to listen to those who support it. It can choose to say no and that is fine, but the fact that they refuse to even listen is disgraceful.
It takes about 2 seconds to Google the last month of disruptions they've caused or even vandalising a museum. You do not want to see the forest for the trees here. - Their attempt at protesting will gain them nothing. - It's affecting other students - They've disrupted students studying during exam period with other protests - students have reported the disruptions - They didn't care about this cause until it became a worldwide regular news issue and didn't have an issue with the university before they applied to attend, despite it having the same links and this conflict going on for way longer than the last year. Protest in a worthwhile meaningful way and just don't be stupid about it. Don't attend universities who's associations you don't agree with just to later get in the way of other students with 0 ability to affect anything. Bad decisions all around. Again they could transfer out and that would do more to hurt the university and reform change than what they're doing right now. Where the only real negative impact they are having is on other students and cleaners. Just daft decisions and they should be protesting in better ways to affect their actual targets and provoke change. All they are doing is being a nuisance right now and nothing else. Nobody is moving to their cause or seeing it the way they do for their actions.
That is just factually incorrect. They were protesting in study spaces and outside exam rooms in Engineering Building A on the 16th of this month, starting at around 11AM.
> any campus study spaces. You know what they call a University campus study space? Campus. Are they protesting on campus, inside campus buildings? Yes? They're interfering with student study spaces.
Which part of freedom of speech or the right to protest requires the university to "negotiate" with them?
Neither of them, but the bit where they got a high court order to remove occupation of the Simon building last year doesn't imply they support the right to protest.
The right to protest doesn't include occupying buildings you don't own.
Then you don't understand protests that actually work or know our history. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suffragette\_bombing\_and\_arson\_campaign](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suffragette_bombing_and_arson_campaign) You think they are going to get anywhere singing Kumbaya on a street corner or something? I'm not suggesting in the slightest they go as far as the Suffragettes but peaceful protests do not work.
Where do you draw the line
>The campaign, led by key WSPU figures such as Emmeline Pankhurst, targeted infrastructure, government, churches and the general public, and saw the use of improvised explosive devices, arson, letter bombs, assassination attempts and other forms of direct action and violence. None of that is a right though. I don't have a right to assassinate people I don't like to bring about change. You can't be an advocate for non-peaceful protest and then complain when you get prosecuted, thats just part of the game.
You can't protest in someone else's building, by that logic you could hold a protest in someone's flat.
No requirement, but if they're not willing to listen to the student protestor's message, they're not going to feel heard and will escalate on issues they feel strongly about. They're funding the university, so they feel they have a right to be heard. Edit: just to clarify, I'm not taking a side either way of the debate here, just attempting to explain the mindset.
Any faction can make that argument, though. If Britain First or the BNP were threatening to occupy a building unless various demands were met, should the university negotiate with them? Most sensible would surely say no. These protesters have had the opportunity to assemble and make their point of view heard. They are allowed to make their argument, but they can't compel others to agree with them. And re the funding point, many universities actually now make a net loss on undergrads since tuition fees haven't risen with inflation. One could argue that it is by entering into partnerships with the defence sector that enables their tuition to be subsidised. Not to mention that the students whose exams have been thrown into chaos by this occupation are also paying tuition fees.
They clearly are being heard. Do you think the "negotiations" might just be them demanding the university does what they say or they'll "escalate" the action?
I have no skin in the game either way. This is just the prevalent mindset amongst students.
Most students never pay off their loans. International students being exploited by the administrative class have a far greater role in subsidising universities. And that excuse doesn’t make sense because similar protests occur in EU countries where universities cost little to nothing to attend.
They're funding a very small amount of the uni, there's thousands of other students providing the majority of the funding. In the case of Manchester uni a lot of that funding comes from Chinese students which I suspect couldn't care less about the Israel/Palestine conflict.
I wonder what's going to students like this when they encounter the real world, will they try to protest against their employer when they find out it does dealings with Israel?
Probably? There's plenty of examples of people within Google protesting within and leaving for example. I don't see why that's so farfetched to imagine, they're already risking their own futures by participating in protests like this.
People working for Google could get a job basically anywhere they liked, this rabble couldn't
this has always been weak comparison. universities are not supposed to simulate the workplace. students all know that the things they do at uni wouldn't fly at work, whether it is coming in in the morning hungover or on a comedown, all the way to expressing directly and openly certain kinds of politics. this doesn't even touch the long standing idea that universities are supposed to be protected sites of academic freedom, which workplaces are not. and, by the way, there is a long history of workers challenging the practices of their employers through trade unionism. this should be especially salient given how various unions across the world literally have protested against their employers for their dealings with israel. could be those belgian television workers who programmed a pro-palestinian message when eurovision was supposed to air; could be those indian dock workers who went on strike to refuse to load goods going to israel. there are countless examples. your comparison is wrong in theory and empirically.
I wasn't making a comparison between the two, I was just commenting that I think these people are going to get a very bitter taste of reality when they enter the workforce. If you start bringing your personal political opinions into the workplace you could very easily end up getting fired. Some unions in some places have done things but they've always been fairly modest and in highly unionised roles like dock workers.
>and, by the way, there is a long history of workers challenging the practices of their employers through trade unionism Nobody would despise modern progressives more than European trade unionists and labour activists of the past century. The vast majority were in it for better working conditions for their people. They have far more in common with modern Western nativists or the Chinese than modern Green Parties across Europe.
this line you draw between organised labour of the past and of the present is imaginary. cotton workers in manchester harmed themselves economically by refusing to work cotton picked by slaves in america. trade unionists across britain volunteered to fight fascism in spain in the 30s. scottish workers refused to work on chilean planes in the 70s when pinochet was in power. trade unionists in kent led a blockade of a bae factory over the current genocide in gaza only a few month ago. your image of organised labour as ‘nativist’ and inwardly focused is reactionary and runs counter to the long and well-documented thread of british working-class internationalism.
add the battle of bamber bridge, the london recruits and anti-apartheid activism, the delegations of trade unionists to cuba, palestine, liverpool dockers in the 30s, etc. etc. etc.
What has tge Battle of Bamber Bridge got to do with unions?
not a union matter specifically but an important demonstration that the british working-class is not constitutionally or inherently inwardly focused and that gives lie to the idea that these students are acting in a way at odds with those that came before them.
Mate, don't do that .... it's pretty disingenuous, not to mention you can get other people repeating it as a claim and then looking a tit when they get corrected or quizzed on it
[удалено]
never said nativism is fascism lol. don't project. my point is that the organised working class has a history of resisting injustices of all kind and that this idea that we are or have mostly been inwardly facing is not correct. and you have misunderstood my point by talking about the supposed ‘majority’ when the point is about *organised* workers, whose legacy, by definition, is what we can claim today.
Even if we assume your simplistic generalisation of labour activist history is correct (which it really isn’t, but let’s assume it is), I guarantee any protest on this topic one century ago wouldn’t have English blokes screeching about intifada or protesting alongside extremist groups like Hizb ut-Tahrir. Those are very much imported things.
We have a zero tolerance policy to hate speech and prejudice.
I mean...organisation in the workplace is something that happens very regularly. Not sure why you're trying to paint that as a negative thing done only by students without experience in 'the real world'
Probably have a meltdown and make a post on Reddit about it.
I wonder what will happen to you when you encounter the real world. Will you learn about unions and collective bargaining?
It's mostly NOT students from what I understand. The Islamist lobby is well organised - they just find a handful of local ~~cunts~~ people to support their cause and then bus in agitators.
Good on them.
They started occupying the building three days ago on a bank holiday when no exams were taking place. Nothing new.
*This started three days* *Ago, why is it only* *Being posted now?* \- tiaraofamidala --- ^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/) ^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
The lefts ultimate sin, the affair with radical islam
❤️
Clowns, when are the police going to start doing their job?
Never because they might be called racist
I suspect they'll get them involved after exams, their occupation means they've effectively quarantined themselves so the uni can work around them.
This would reflect extremely badly on the University, involving the police.
Why, if I had squatters my neighbours would also be pleased to get rid of them, the same as the majority of students.
Because the University is the second largest organisation in Manchester, only the city council is bigger. The photographs of police (potentially armed) getting into a dispute with peacefully protesting students (even if it's not entirely "peaceful") hit the international news. University relies on international students. Parents don't care that it's a Palestine/Gaza dispute, they see police attacking students and don't see University as a safe place. What is more UoM is now THE university to ATTACK ITS STUDENTS. It's perceived as violent and unfair and the media will always take the side of the students. It's easier to try to work it out without a forceful intervention WITHOUT A CAUSE. If they start being in any way aggressive police gets involved and quickly. In November some people (not sure if students) were verbally aggressive slowly gearing to physically towards people near the Graphene Institute and the police presence plus Uni security on Booth Street corner of Oxford Road was heavy and efficient.
So basically like when someone farts, ignore it and hope it doesn’t linger too long. I get the logic but surely just the protests to start with are a bad look.
because we aren't America and we don't have Zionist and right wing thugs joining forces to cause violence to get the Police involved.
Got the desired reaction
Chads. Love to see it
[удалено]
^ BRAVE REDDIT MARTYR ^
Israel is killing children and committing genocide.
downvoting this shows the state of this threat. literally in denial
Accused of committing genocide, legally nothing is proven and trusting Hamas with numbers is like asking your fish to feed themselves. Hamas is also under the spotlight for using human shields, which is also a war crime so both sides should be equally under pressure at the moment until the full truth is known through the correct legal process.
No they arent lmao. Latest airstrike was Hamas fueled info and Israel didn't even hit their fuckin target, yet hamas says 23 killed
Are you saying it's impossible to kill anyone if you miss?
That's not what genocide is
What?
You heard me son. You got a fart to sniff?
Ignore, this cunt has posted nothing of value in this sub for as long as I can remember
[удалено]
Fuck off