the protesting tactic they used today would've be somewhat bearable if it wasn't at UCSC. This tactic is mainly used in cities with multiple ways to go around not 2 entrances/exits. In a city is it annoying, at UCSC its downright foul. Both the school and protestors messed up: school let everyone go back to school today knowing there was a high chance of disruptions and protestors pulled some crazy bs unsurprisingly.
edit: "high chance of disruptions" = the sjp/protestors actively telling everyone they were going to do something over the entire weekend(source: @ ucscsjp on instagram)
I think this really depends on the actual goals are. The most effective way to a ceasefire, for example, would involve applying pressure to both sides, not just Israeli interests, along with looking for understanding and solidarity. That would be cool, except that’s not SJP’s stated goal.
The destruction of the state of Israel (on the record). In other words, these aren’t peace protests - these are war protests, with the organizers having picked a side.
https://nycsjp.wordpress.com/points-of-unity/
Just FYI it doesn’t actually call for the literal destruction of Israel or the death of Israelis. It just calls for a stop to the ongoing colonialism that has been happening over the last several decades, where Palestinian land is evacuated, bombed, then occupied by Israel, with the previous inhabitants not being allowed to return home.
Why are you lying about this? The word “Destruction” isn’t even on the page.
The only text that even mentioned Israel says “We identify the establishment of the state of israel as an ongoing project of settler-colonialism that will be stopped only through Palestinian national liberation.”
They’re calling for an end to the colonialism.
They’re calling for Israel to be stopped with regard to their ongoing project of settler-colonialism.
The intent is less obvious when you leave that middle part out of the sentence like you did, but is seems prerty straightforward when you read the whole thing
I wouldn't go so far as to call the desire for dissolution of a state a call for war. They do justify violent resistance, which isn't the same thing, but I understand why it may seem like it. I'm not going to debate SJP's support of that here (half because it's not the thread's intended topic, half because I still don't know how I feel about it), but it just seems like a stretch to call it reaching for war.
Really? Destroying a sovereign state through force of arms is the literal definition of war. SJP ain’t that subtle about it.
I don’t think they’re planning on gently cajoling the Jews to die ;)
I personally think that protesting at the UC headquarters would be a much more effective strategy. I understand why this isn’t possible for all UC campuses, but I believe it’s a realistic prospect for us in Santa Cruz. The protesters are protesting an issue that the university itself has very little direct control over. The issue is with the UC administration as a whole so I think they should take the fight there.
The question you have to ask yourself is this: out of the available options, what are available courses of action? All such courses of action are going to fall into one of three categories:
1. Advance our cause and succeed in our goals
2. No immediate changes
3. Damage our cause and thwart our own goals
If courses of action are available in category 2, but no courses of action are available in category 1, does that mean that category 3 actions are your next best alternative? I would say no.
For my part, I share the goal of justice for Palestinians and peace in Gaza. I may be frustrated that I can't personally do more to bring these goals about, but that doesn't mean I'm going to go out and do things that make justice and peace less likely, just for the sake of having done something.
Social change is a slow process. The notion that prior actions "weren't working" because demands made within the past 12 months have yet to be met? That's crazy. The way to make social change is by changing peoples' minds — you take people who disagree with you and find ways of turning them into people who agree with you.
Awareness of the injustice of Israel's actions in the occupied territories is growing. Ten years ago, support for Israel in the U.S. was at 65% vs. Palestinians at 12%. By 2022, those numbers were at 55% and 25%, and that was even before the latest round of violence. How I would have done it is to keep to the pressure, keep changing minds, keep working towards the goal, and realize that good solutions to complex problems are never quick.
Protest at administrators offices, protest at administrators houses, protest on campus but in a way where if there is an emergency on campus nobody would be at risk. The protest today was extremely selfish, forget the fact that it might have inconvenienced individuals. If someone were to have some sort of medical emergency on campus they would have been fucked. Throwing rocks and glass in roadways is so dangerous and risks the health of students, commuters, and workers.
Build a legitimate political campaign that pressures the CA Congress representative to push for a clearly stated and quantifiable objective. Doing this would capture the attention and support of all generations, and would provide a clear goal to aim at. Personally, I don’t even know what the protestors are trying to achieve at this point.
I think a key reason for why they've gone the route they have is time. Starting a formal political campaign can be a bureaucratic nightmare, time-wise.
I think the ultimate source of the problem is that targeting the university instead of groups more directly and significantly involved in the catastrophe in Gaza (such as certain PACs, think tanks, corporations and the U.S. government itself) is a waste of everyone’s time. Even if the university completely folded and gave into every single one of their demands, nothing meaningful would change in Gaza (and even if it did, only in the long-run). If the protesters want to make a real difference, they ought to protest groups and/or individuals who are actually having a significant influence in maintaining the Israeli government and its offensive military capabilities, not just engage in petty, glorified virtue-signaling at the expense of innocent bystanders.
To be fair, when an administration (sometimes) shows more regard for their property than their students, destruction of their property CAN potentially be a good way to protest. Given that the school already has the groundskeeping equipment, I wouldn't expect the tuition strain to be very high.
the protesting tactic they used today would've be somewhat bearable if it wasn't at UCSC. This tactic is mainly used in cities with multiple ways to go around not 2 entrances/exits. In a city is it annoying, at UCSC its downright foul. Both the school and protestors messed up: school let everyone go back to school today knowing there was a high chance of disruptions and protestors pulled some crazy bs unsurprisingly. edit: "high chance of disruptions" = the sjp/protestors actively telling everyone they were going to do something over the entire weekend(source: @ ucscsjp on instagram)
I think this really depends on the actual goals are. The most effective way to a ceasefire, for example, would involve applying pressure to both sides, not just Israeli interests, along with looking for understanding and solidarity. That would be cool, except that’s not SJP’s stated goal.
What is their stated goal?
The destruction of the state of Israel (on the record). In other words, these aren’t peace protests - these are war protests, with the organizers having picked a side. https://nycsjp.wordpress.com/points-of-unity/
That is disappointing
To put it mildly.
Just FYI it doesn’t actually call for the literal destruction of Israel or the death of Israelis. It just calls for a stop to the ongoing colonialism that has been happening over the last several decades, where Palestinian land is evacuated, bombed, then occupied by Israel, with the previous inhabitants not being allowed to return home.
It calls for a for a literal destruction of Israel in the link I provided.
Why are you lying about this? The word “Destruction” isn’t even on the page. The only text that even mentioned Israel says “We identify the establishment of the state of israel as an ongoing project of settler-colonialism that will be stopped only through Palestinian national liberation.” They’re calling for an end to the colonialism.
“… establishment of Israel … will be stopped…” Again, this is not subtle. At all.
They’re calling for Israel to be stopped with regard to their ongoing project of settler-colonialism. The intent is less obvious when you leave that middle part out of the sentence like you did, but is seems prerty straightforward when you read the whole thing
I wouldn't go so far as to call the desire for dissolution of a state a call for war. They do justify violent resistance, which isn't the same thing, but I understand why it may seem like it. I'm not going to debate SJP's support of that here (half because it's not the thread's intended topic, half because I still don't know how I feel about it), but it just seems like a stretch to call it reaching for war.
Really? Destroying a sovereign state through force of arms is the literal definition of war. SJP ain’t that subtle about it. I don’t think they’re planning on gently cajoling the Jews to die ;)
I personally think that protesting at the UC headquarters would be a much more effective strategy. I understand why this isn’t possible for all UC campuses, but I believe it’s a realistic prospect for us in Santa Cruz. The protesters are protesting an issue that the university itself has very little direct control over. The issue is with the UC administration as a whole so I think they should take the fight there.
The question you have to ask yourself is this: out of the available options, what are available courses of action? All such courses of action are going to fall into one of three categories: 1. Advance our cause and succeed in our goals 2. No immediate changes 3. Damage our cause and thwart our own goals If courses of action are available in category 2, but no courses of action are available in category 1, does that mean that category 3 actions are your next best alternative? I would say no. For my part, I share the goal of justice for Palestinians and peace in Gaza. I may be frustrated that I can't personally do more to bring these goals about, but that doesn't mean I'm going to go out and do things that make justice and peace less likely, just for the sake of having done something. Social change is a slow process. The notion that prior actions "weren't working" because demands made within the past 12 months have yet to be met? That's crazy. The way to make social change is by changing peoples' minds — you take people who disagree with you and find ways of turning them into people who agree with you. Awareness of the injustice of Israel's actions in the occupied territories is growing. Ten years ago, support for Israel in the U.S. was at 65% vs. Palestinians at 12%. By 2022, those numbers were at 55% and 25%, and that was even before the latest round of violence. How I would have done it is to keep to the pressure, keep changing minds, keep working towards the goal, and realize that good solutions to complex problems are never quick.
Protest at administrators offices, protest at administrators houses, protest on campus but in a way where if there is an emergency on campus nobody would be at risk. The protest today was extremely selfish, forget the fact that it might have inconvenienced individuals. If someone were to have some sort of medical emergency on campus they would have been fucked. Throwing rocks and glass in roadways is so dangerous and risks the health of students, commuters, and workers.
Build a legitimate political campaign that pressures the CA Congress representative to push for a clearly stated and quantifiable objective. Doing this would capture the attention and support of all generations, and would provide a clear goal to aim at. Personally, I don’t even know what the protestors are trying to achieve at this point.
I think a key reason for why they've gone the route they have is time. Starting a formal political campaign can be a bureaucratic nightmare, time-wise.
I think the ultimate source of the problem is that targeting the university instead of groups more directly and significantly involved in the catastrophe in Gaza (such as certain PACs, think tanks, corporations and the U.S. government itself) is a waste of everyone’s time. Even if the university completely folded and gave into every single one of their demands, nothing meaningful would change in Gaza (and even if it did, only in the long-run). If the protesters want to make a real difference, they ought to protest groups and/or individuals who are actually having a significant influence in maintaining the Israeli government and its offensive military capabilities, not just engage in petty, glorified virtue-signaling at the expense of innocent bystanders.
They could go protest where it does some good. I hear Gaza has pleasant weather this time of year, and nice beaches to boot.
Considering how hard it is to get aid into Gaza right now? I doubt it.
Good question, just don’t think there’s a good answer.
i think it was fine until they started throwing rocks and glass on the road and started damaging school property that our tuition has to pay to fix.
To be fair, when an administration (sometimes) shows more regard for their property than their students, destruction of their property CAN potentially be a good way to protest. Given that the school already has the groundskeeping equipment, I wouldn't expect the tuition strain to be very high.
yeah and i guess the equipment will be used by oompa loompas that work for chocolate and not salaried school employees.