World News

I wonder how long it will take for enough to realise their government is not compatible with protests. Peer pressure does not encourage authoritarians.

If security shows up to stop protestors from leaving, they aren't there to secure the peace, they are there to oppress.

Sure, but let's step back and analyze it a little more.

Protest itself does not achieve political change. Its usefulness is in direct action or in recruiting those present into further action, education, and organizations. Liberal protests are state-sanctioned parades. Real protests tend to have an actual action to take, demands to be met, people to impact, costs to incur on others.

The terminology of "peaceful protest" is already poisoned and should be questioned. The media and politicians - and those propagandized downstream, all conflate private property destruction and violence. If a protest breaks windows, suddenly it is no longer "peaceful" and can be rejected by the propagandized as invalid and not to be supported. The US is full of such good little piggies, happy to align with the ruling class picking their pocket and doing actual violence because they exist exclusively in a world of capitalist propaganda.

Under these auspices, all direct action that the capitalist system wants to crush is, will, and has been labelled terrorism. It's already done this for private property destruction by environmentalists, peace activists during all major wars (except WWII, where American Nazis were coddled and of course did not damage private property), labor organizers, anti-segregation organizers, socialists, communists, Mexicans, Chinese, Native Americans, etc. They happily do it again against anti-genocide protesters, particularly because they can play on the islamophobic use of the terrorism label at the same time. Like all fascistic logic, they must frame themselves as the true victims, so they also happily call every critic of Israel an antisemite.

All of this bombards the US population 24/7. Americans exist in a haze of accusations and terms they barely understand, trying to slot it into what could only charitably called an ideology - the naked reactionaries in red and the obfuscated reactionaries in blue.

All of this is to say that the greatest barrier in the US is education, and education begins with agitation, e.g. these protests in any form. Get as many people as possible to show up to the next thing, to organize the next thing, and spread knowledge.

Taking over a building is on the far end of "peaceful".

Are you serious? So, any group can just take over a University now, and demand things, even if they are deemed "sane and civilized" by people like you? Okay...

People will forget about it all 2 months after it ends. They have the memory of a potato. Americans still praise NYT after the WMD lies.

fwiw, Hong Kong protestors were protesting about their own home, rather than these universities protesting in international solidarity against their university's investments and policies. I'd kinda expect the Hong Kong ones to be defended more viciously.

The Hong Kong dudes threw tear gas back. If American protesters do that they get shot and killed. Even sitting down peacefully with a flag gets American protesters painted as violent terrorists.

zionists who want a chance to sue for discrimination. imagine their shock if their entire class shows up wearing Israeli flags etc. the disappointment.

They probably were intending/expecting arrests. There are probably protesters who didn't go into the library because they specifically don't want a criminal record (especially if they're on a visa or some such).

And you can see in the comments here how angry the arrests are getting some people.

That's the goal of a lot of nonviolent protest. Get your allies loud about it and split some moderates away from the authorities that they hadn't really thought of as "the bad guys" before.

So they took over a building they don’t own, refused to leave, and had a list of demands?

Yeah, sounds like something the police should be called for.

Would you say the same thing about organized sit-ins in segregated buildings during the civil rights movement? Same set of facts, took over a building they didn't own, refused to leave, had a list of demands. If not, then clearly you believe that if the status quo is untenable and the demands reasonable then the action is justified.

This is peaceful civil disobedience in opposition to an ongoing genocide being broken up by the police state.