Smith Students Approach Week-Long Sit-In [about Israeli / Palestinian politics]

Colleges & Universities Smith College
21

Yes! However, I have not occupied a building and made a serious of fantasy demands. Additionally, unlike literally every student in that building, I can offer cogent points about:
Distinctions between legitimate social protest and terrorism,
The pointlessness of making “demands” to parties who have no authority to respond to them,
The unfortunate necessity of “defense” as a legitimate industry because the last time anyone declared war on the United States, they did not withdraw because we staged an “occupy” event.

Finally – I implore you – ask ANY ONE of the protesters, whether-or-not they receive financial aid from Smith, whether they would be the one to step-up and bear the financial consequence of an alternative, contrived social justice-driven investment agenda.

Real protest isn’t performance. It inevitably involves some degree of personal accountability and consequence.

There’s not A SINGLE FRONT on which this is a legitimate human rights protest.
It is a sad performance.

6 Likes
22

Again, they likely would make the same claims about you. Regardless of whether I side with the protestors, it is inaccurate to claim that adults with whom we disagree are “controlled by outside forces” or insincere and performative. Protests on campuses are nothing new. If students object, those adults can reach out to administrators or form a counterprotest or debate or ignore them.

4 Likes
23

Anyone may claim anything about me they wish, so long as they have a legitimate basis for it.

No one’s “claiming” these protesters are “controlled;” that’s too simplistic. And I agree that they are 100% sincere!

  1. Claims that they are influenced by outside forces are literally irrefutable. (If such outside forces didn’t exist, neither would their protest.) What are their sources of information? Who benefits? (“Social justice?” “Human rights?” Plenty of easier headway on countless other fronts.)

  2. Legitimate campus protests are important!!! We have a rich history of that here. However, this is not that.

  3. NO, students can’t “just reach out, debate or ignore” this. One of the defining factors of this affront to legitimate protest is that, as AHFD23x2 has noted, protesters/many students actively work to create an environment of threat and intimidation to shut-down dissent. That isn’t protest, it’s conflict. Again, I urge you to read the notes from their meeting with the president. These are not protestors. This is not a protest. Regardless of what minds direct these bodies, this is anarchy/chaos. Debate is not a welcome option.

This is not how free speech, Democracy, or communities work.

This is wrong.

Among many issues, I suggest:

  1. Their demands are without reasonable basis ( = literally preposterous)
5 Likes
24

No doubt the adults on campus will handle it without parental input.

25

Do I understand this correctly? Are you saying the Smith students are behaving as terrorists?

26

I am on the Smith parent groups on FB where many of these same arguments are being made, likely by many of the voices active in this thread. I believe these voices have their own FB group where they are discussing these issues and putting forth theories that the students occupying College Hall are being brainwashed by an Iranian propaganda machine fueled by adult terrorists.

And, in making the claim that the protestors are not open to conversation and just shout over dissenting voices they too are shouting over any dissenting voice in the parent community.

I believe President Sarah is doing good work in helping to move towards resolution. I don’t believe the statement made upthread that not a single one of the over 40 students occupying College Hall has done any research into the geopolitical issues at play. How on earth would you know that to be true?

3 Likes
27

“TERRORIST: a person who uses unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.”
• The “occupation” is unlawful according to both civil law, and Smith’s Code of Conduct.
• Many other students are WHOLLY AND COMPLETELY intimidated by the highly aggressive conduct and rhetoric of these “activists.” Indeed, these “activists” have shouted in the face of the President such that she was forced to disengage with them.

So…You tell me.

And for what?!? I keep asking, no one has a constructive response. I guarantee there will not be a constructive outcome for them because:
1. It is not a “protest” at all. There is no constructive dialogue or interest in facts, only one-sided demands.
2. These “activists” seek anonymity, claiming they fear persecution. Legitimate protesters call this “consequences,” and they accept them.
3. What is demanded is absurd, and there’s been no legitimate basis offered for doing it. (Note I said “legitimate.”)

Whether-or-not the underlying cause is propaganda-driven by others (or even legitimate from a human rights standpoint) isn’t relevant.

If you’re a parent and support this cause, by all means step-up and offer to cover any financial difference between the existing investment strategy and some absurdly contrived version of it.

1 Like
28

You will likely wish to take your claims to the politics forum of CC for greater support and validation.

2 Likes
29

This is an interesting statement. Does a protest by necessity require constructive dialogue? I live in ground zero of various protest movements, and I don’t think most have ever sought dialog per se. They seek to raise awareness of their cause, sometimes they seek to convince others to join them, they seek publicity for their cause, sometimes they are trying to create pressure for policy change…But there is often little dialogue. I imagine that would be the exception not the rule - at least around here. So I am confused why this isn’t a protest? I get that you may not agree with their stance or their tactics, you may find their demands unrealistic, but how is this not a protest just because they are not seeking dialogue with those who oppose them?

Not in this day and age, thanks to doxxing and the internet. Look even at Anonymous who likely did much to popularize masking identity. And then look at the early days of this conflict and protest movement when in fact the opposing side was putting student faces on billboards and I believe there is still a website that seeks to publish student information. I don’t think it is about being ashamed of their position or their protest, but I think they have a legitimate concern for their safety in the current climate.

Maybe so, but that does not mean they can not demand it. People demand all kinds of things that will never happen - world peace, an end to poverty, what have you. They have a right promote this issue, often with some understanding that it is ultimately unlikely, but in their promotion they raise the awareness of the issue that they most seek.

So their demand aside, I think this really raises the issues of what a protest is, what are strategy for protests, what are the real goals of a protest, and what makes a protest “successful” or a failure.

I also have concerns over the assumption that adult women are necessarily being manipulated by outside forces and are not capable of making an informed choice in what they believe and how they express that belief. They are clearly tapping into a larger movement - many groups are involved in such protests. But that does not mean they are somehow prey to these groups. They are allied with them perhaps and see themselves as part of something larger. That also often happens (we can see similar in movements like Occupy and Black Lives Matter).

5 Likes
30

I am on the Smith parent groups on FB where many of these same arguments are being made, likely by many of the voices active in this thread.

…Nope. (Maybe, but not by me.)

I believe these voices have their own FB group where they are discussing these issues and putting forth theories that the students occupying College Hall are being brainwashed by an Iranian propaganda machine fueled by adult terrorists.

…Huh! Seems many people have this opinion. That does not make it right, of course. However, if there is actually a phenomenally well-resourced propaganda machine serving the interests of sworn enemies of the United States, and these “activists” both parrot that language and seek actions that weaken both Smith and the rest of the country… Why are you not the least bit suspect?!?

And, in making the claim that the protestors are not open to conversation and just shout over dissenting voices they too are shouting over any dissenting voice in the parent community.

…That’s important! Disagreement is important! …But… Why can’t ANYONE who supports this action offer solid, cogent, well-reasoned points as to why and how it’s legitimate?!?

I believe President Sarah is doing good work in helping to move towards resolution. I don’t believe the statement made upthread that not a single one of the over 40 students occupying College Hall has done any research into the geopolitical issues at play. How on earth would you know that to be true?

…I don’t recall anyone saying “not a single has done any research;” that’s silly. I’m sure some have done something . I AM saying (again) I know some of these young women. I have fed them and talked with them. They’re lovely! Re. the statistically insignificant sample group that I personally draw from, as wonderful as they are, they are WHOLLY ill-equipped to evaluate and understand the issues they’re protesting, and no understanding of the implicit consequences (to Smith, and the larger world) outside their own concerns about their own direct/personal/immediate consequences.

“I’m doing this to support my friends” can be great and worthy if there are good reasons for doing so.

But if there are consequences to anyone other than yourself, you ought to have other reasons for doing something.

31

Please keep this thread focused on what is actually happening at Smith. Political commentary about sit ins in general need to be moved to the political forum. Thank you.

32

The efficacy and consequences of various divestment strategies is debated by experts. One may disagree with such strategies, but they are a legitimate factor in college campus discussions.

It is certainly possible that any one individual on any side of a debate is ill-informed. That does not mean most are, or alter the validity of the position.

To bring it back to Smith, if @be_thoughtful’s daughter is unhappy with the actions of her friend group, she can take action. A parent has no role in that adult decision

1 Like
33

If these students were behaving as actual terrorists, I believe they would be arrested.

4 Likes
34

Fair point; “protest” does not require dialogue or facts. You can “protest” mistreatment of the Unicorns.

Another good point about anonymity. I don’t have a constructive proposal to how this point should be resolved in our world, other than noting that NO ONE (including me) should ever be respected as authoritative unless they somehow confirm their legitimacy. HOWEVER, I am not grinding the Smith community, and if I thought I had reason to, I would darn well identify myself.

Another fair point about “demanding,” people can demand anything, they have that right. But if we genuinely seek change shouldn’t we demand things that have an objectively reasonable basis? (Cutting short, no, the demand that Smith divest 106% from anything having to do with U.S. defense is not objectively reasonable, and asserting that “defense is bad and wrong!” is not even ethically clear.)

I also have concerns over the assumption that adult women are necessarily being manipulated by outside forces and are not capable of making an informed choice in what they believe and how they express that belief.

…Hear me out: these adult women – and many, many “smart” adults – are 100% being manipulated by outside forces, and because of this their choices are not fully-informed. I deeply appreciate your use of the phrase “choose to believe.” If “outside forces” were not driving them, there would be no “protest.”

Every cause, even clear-cut ones (e.g. Apartheid) are “manipulated by outside forces.” The crux isn’t whether-or-not people are being manipulated, it’s the quality of information they’re receiving, upon which they decide what to believe.

They are clearly tapping into a larger movement - many groups are involved in such protests.

…Be careful. Examples of “larger movements” include the Klan, White Nationalism, Christian Nationalism, and every populist regime. Populism doesn’t equal anything other than “lots of people believe.” When lots of people believe the wrong things strongly, lots of other people die.

But that does not mean they are somehow prey to these groups.

…It doesn’t mean they are “prey” if their beliefs spring from fully-informed decisions!

They are allied with them perhaps and see themselves as part of something larger.

…Oh, they most definitely see themselves as part of something larger, and that is a very popular historical driver. However, there are lots of populist movements that end up…you know…killing people. Shouldn’t it be far more important to be ethical, accurate, thoroughly well-informed and clear-thinking than part of something larger?

That also often happens (we can see similar in movements like Occupy and Black Lives Matter).

…Again, “large movement” and sets of beliefs are not magically right-or-wrong. Some are right, some are wrong. This is why thinking is more important than believing. Or, as you say, choosing what to believe.

I suggest what these young women are choosing to believe is wholly ill-informed, and what they’re choosing to do is grossly selfish, and will ultimately be unproductive. (Except, as you note, to “raise awareness.”)

35

You are entitled to your opinion, just as they are entitled to theirs. The contempt you show for them in this thread makes discussion of the actual issues unlikely to be productive, and if mirrored on campus, explains a lot about why such scenes devolve quickly into ugliness.

Nothing productive comes from accusing those with whom you disagree to be terrorists or bigots, prey or ill-informed.

2 Likes
36

No. The Board has decided not to do that (at present, anyway).
“If illegal then arrested” falls into the “one would think” category, not the “what will definitely happen” category.

37

The Board doesn’t have the power to arrest anyone. Law enforcement does, and will do so if actual laws are broken.

38

No. It’s pretty simple; the Board has the power of decision as to whether-or-not to call law enforcement. Smith is a private enterprise over which the Board has dominion. If the Board decides to call law enforcement because of criminal trespass (or whatever the specific infraction), it will, and the students will be arrested. Clarifying, students have not (yet) been arrested NOT because the Board cannot initiate this (it can), but because the Board has chosen not to call law enforcement and have this done.

IMHO, what the board is doing is both smart and right; let the “activists” do as they have chosen, the community suffers, the “activists” will EVENTUALLY LEAVE. After which… There Will Be Consequences. As grossly unfair as this is to the rest of the community (including our children), unfortunately, alternatives seem worse.

39

The property owner determines if a visitor is unwelcome, not you. Apparently the property owner ( Smith ) does not find the visitors unwelcome, therefore, no trespass has occurred. You may find them unwelcome, but that isn’t relevant to the determination. Unless the property owner objects, there is no trespass.

Complaints can be made to the property owner if you wish, but as if this time, nothing illegal seems to have taken place.

40

I believe this issue is too consequential to discuss it on purely rhetorical grounds. However, I will say that the Smith administration cannot unilaterally decide whether or not terrorists will be arrested. In any case, I offered just a fraction of a larger viewpoint earlier.

4 Likes