• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Merged Protests disrupt college campuses / Campus Protests

The Great Zaganza said:
Vandalism of that sort is just that: there are no demands being made, no one to negotiate with
I am talking about protests/ strikes, not property damage for damage sake.
Click to expand...

They are protesting the existence of Jews and any monuments to their existence.

Just to be clear: I'm not saying that targeted vandalism as a method of protest should be legal - protesters get arrested for nothing all the time, they might as well be arrested for something.
Click to expand...

Actually people are able to engage in protests without being arrested even in the horrible fascist imperialist hellhole known as The USA.

But it absolutely does not legitimize a violent response by cops or vigilantes - property can be replaced, lives can't.
Click to expand...

Okay so if I break into your home, evict you, trash all of your belongings (all of which can apparently be replaced) and refuse to leave you will be content with doing nothing because the police would be "forced" to use violence to remove me? Maybe you are rich and can simply continue living in your second (or third) McMansion as if nothing happened, with no emotional attachment to your property?

I think you are seriously overly dismissive over the impact "mere property damage" can have on peoples lives.
 
Last edited:
I find it hilarious that these protests are happening on college campuses. The very source of the protest teaching is being disrupted and vandalized. By the very students of that teaching.
 
The Great Zaganza said:
Who said anything about the commons?
It's about putting pressure on the people who have put people in the position where protests are the only way to affect change


Are you really saying that Amazon slave workers don't have a moral right to sink one of Bezos's yachts? ( He might not notice).

Or that people getting slowly killed by the poison of the factory upstream shouldn't cement the pipes shut?

A majority of Americans think that smashing a police station was a perfectly justified thing to do.

But I guess killing people is the lesser evil than making people pay with their wealth for causing harm to people.
Click to expand...

The Great Zaganza said:
Vandalism of that sort is just that: there are no demands being made, no one to negotiate with
I am talking about protests/ strikes, not property damage for damage sake.

Just to be clear: I'm not saying that targeted vandalism as a method of protest should be legal - protesters get arrested for nothing all the time, they might as well be arrested for something.

But it absolutely does not legitimize a violent response by cops or vigilantes - property can be replaced, lives can't.
Click to expand...


Your buddy Karl would be proud.
 
It's really simple, which is why so many here are working so hard to strawman me.

The Protest comes first: a group has a grievance that it makes known to the people in a position to remedy them. All protests are meant to be disruptive, meaning that they all cause property damage, and be it only in the form of loss of income and increased costs for security and possibly scabs.

If that isn't enough pressure, very targeted vandalism is the logical next step - the goal is to make it more costly for those in a position to fulfill the protesters' demands to refuse than to give in - it's the same for any Strike action.

It's plain lazy to read this as carte blanche to damage property with no connection to the protest, as it would have Zero impact.

Seriously, it's plain to see that most Americans have no clue how to protest.
 
The Great Zaganza said:
It's really simple, which is why so many here are working so hard to strawman me.

The Protest comes first: a group has a grievance that it makes known to the people in a position to remedy them. All protests are meant to be disruptive, meaning that they all cause property damage, and be it only in the form of loss of income and increased costs for security and possibly scabs.

If that isn't enough pressure, very targeted vandalism is the logical next step - the goal is to make it more costly for those in a position to fulfill the protesters' demands to refuse than to give in - it's the same for any Strike action.
Click to expand...

and if that doesn't work? What's your next step of escalation? General vandalism? Rioting? Attack on individuals? (only bruises! honest guv!) Storming Congress?

It's plain lazy to read this as carte blanche to damage property with no connection to the protest, as it would have Zero impact.

Seriously, it's plain to see that most Americans have no clue how to protest.
Click to expand...

Most American's don't feel the need to protest against their own government, it's just the indoctrinated ones.
 
The Great Zaganza said:
It's really simple, which is why so many here are working so hard to strawman me.

The Protest comes first: a group has a grievance that it makes known to the people in a position to remedy them. All protests are meant to be disruptive, meaning that they all cause property damage, and be it only in the form of loss of income and increased costs for security and possibly scabs.

If that isn't enough pressure, very targeted vandalism is the logical next step - the goal is to make it more costly for those in a position to fulfill the protesters' demands to refuse than to give in - it's the same for any Strike action.

It's plain lazy to read this as carte blanche to damage property with no connection to the protest, as it would have Zero impact.

Seriously, it's plain to see that most Americans have no clue how to protest.
Click to expand...

So you support going beyond peaceful protest and civil disobedience. Into terrorism.

I cannot support that. Especially when peaceful means of change are very far from being exhausted.

You are choosing the lazy and impatient way. The way of thugs.
 
Hercules56 said:
So you support going beyond peaceful protest and civil disobedience. Into terrorism.

I cannot support that. Especially when peaceful means of change are very far from being exhausted.

You are choosing the lazy and impatient way. The way of thugs.
Click to expand...

terrorism?

where did you get that?

If workers in a meat packing plant go on strike, it means that tons of food will go to waste, causing massive property damage.

Is that terrorism?

If students occupy libraries etc. it can cost a university millions - clearly terrorism.

seriously people - why are lives so expendable to you all, but the money of exploiters isn't ?

You are all conditioned to never actually do anything that might harm the Status Quo - protesting is allowed as long as it doesn't do anything.
No wonder the rich get richer when the poor have been taught to rather starve than to steal a loave of bread.
 
Last edited:
No doubt the damage caused by the protesters will be paid for with a simple increase in tuition or student fees.

There is a way to escape those fee though. The Houthi led Sanaa University has got your back. They even had a protest in your honor. so if you thought trashing the library was fun just wait until you experience that massive endorphin rush that comes from launching a missile at a passing ship.
 
The Great Zaganza said:
terrorism?

where did you get that?

If workers in a meat packing plant go on strike, it means that tons of food will go to waste, causing massive property damage.

Is that terrorism?

If students occupy libraries etc. it can cost a university millions - clearly terrorism.

seriously people - why are lives so expendable to you all, but the money of exploiters isn't ?

You are all conditioned to never actually do anything that might harm the Status Quo - protesting is allowed as long as it doesn't do anything.
No wonder the rich get richer when the poor have been taught to rather starve than to steal a loave of bread.
Click to expand...

Why are you so quick that you immediately give up on non-violent resistance and civil disobedience? If a sit-in does not achieve your goals after 5 days it's time to engage in property destruction??? How pathetic. And the American people will turn on you.
 
Last edited:
The Great Zaganza said:
All protests are meant to be disruptive, meaning that they all cause property damage, and be it only in the form of loss of income and increased costs for security and possibly scabs.
Click to expand...

That's simply not true. I don't know where your definition of "protest" comes from but its perfectly possible to protest without being disruptive at all let alone causing "property damage".

If that isn't enough pressure, very targeted vandalism is the logical next step - the goal is to make it more costly for those in a position to fulfill the protesters' demands to refuse than to give in - it's the same for any Strike action.
Click to expand...

The way you seem to describe "protesting" sounds less and less like legitimate protesting and more like extremist political violence.

It's plain lazy to read this as carte blanche to damage property with no connection to the protest, as it would have Zero impact.
Click to expand...

Except for the fact that private property, including homes, of the people who are targets for your "protest" clearly have a connection to whatever you are protesting. I can assure you that hounding people at their homes as a part of a "protest" can be effective even if its highly questionable ethically.

Seriously, it's plain to see that most Americans have no clue how to protest.
Click to expand...

Ah huh. Sure whatever you say.
 
Last edited:
The Great Zaganza said:
It's really simple, which is why so many here are working so hard to strawman me.

The Protest comes first: a group has a grievance that it makes known to the people in a position to remedy them. All protests are meant to be disruptive, meaning that they all cause property damage, and be it only in the form of loss of income and increased costs for security and possibly scabs...
Click to expand...

Ideologically we are on the same side, but your statement is an absolute lie.

Most protests are NOT intended to cause any property damage, engage in any vandalism. They are simply intended to express a political point of view or opposition to a certain policy, through purely peaceful and non-violent means. They are about SPEECH and nothing more.
 
Hercules56 said:
Ideologically we are on the same side, but your statement is an absolute lie.

Most protests are NOT intended to cause any property damage, engage in any vandalism. They are simply intended to express a political point of view or opposition to a certain policy, through purely peaceful and non-violent means. They are about SPEECH and nothing more.
Click to expand...

To be effective, protests need to be noticed. Getting notice by disruption and vandalism tends to be counterproductive - the resentment far outweighs the benefit of getting noticed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom