The definition of serious is in the article: Acled defines peaceful protests as ones without serious physical violence or property damage, Doyle said. Its bar for categorising a demonstration as violent includes “physical violence that rises above pushing or shoving” or property destruction that involves “breaking a window or worse”, he said. 97% didn't meet that definition. It wouldn't chill me, but I can't speak to how other Jews would feel. However, Black students have had to put up with white supremacists demonstrating or speaking at universities. LGBTQ+ students have had to put up with anti-LGBTQ hate groups speaking or demonstrating at universities. Could that have chilled some of them? Sure. But part of being at a university is being uncomfortable at times. (Hell, when I was in college and law school, Black students had to deal with much, much worse things.)
So to be clear You would take the same staunch stance protecting protestors that were blocking lgbtq students from getting to class, shouting threats, writing demeaning, threatening graffiti on campus and chanting Go home homos None of that would rise to “violent” or damages.
To be clear, the definition is the definition. What matters is whether they're consistent, and I have not seen any evidence that they aren't. If you have a problem with their definition, take it up with the data scientists who run the database. Here's the website: ACLED | Bringing Clarity to Crisis
Ok.. can you answer the question though. Would you would take the same staunch stance for freedom of speech if it was a bunch of students keeping lgbtq students from getting to class, writing despicable graffiti on school buildings and gathering in large crowds and shouting go home homos.. Or trade out lgbtq students with black students on campus You would side with the protestors shouting such terrible things?
My answer is that the university should apply its policies evenhandedly and not infringe on people's free speech rights based on their message. Nothing prevents them from arresting or removing a student for damaging property (like graffitiing a university building).
But that wasn’t my question Will you or would you support the protestors rights so staunchly given what I outlined above. I don’t ask about the university or college. I asked would YOU support the people blocking the paths, writing graffiti, screaming insults at lgbtq students the way you have supported pro Palestinian protestors and their rights to do that to Jewish kids. It can be answered with a simple Yes or No.
You haven’t and you know exactly why you have not answered it. Because if the protests in campuses acted the exact same way towards LGTBQ or black students you would NOT be taken such a staunch stance supporting them. You can claim it’s all about freedom of speech for you but you’re not willing to say yes… I would defend those protestors right to protest exactly as I have defended the pro Palestinian protestors…. says otherwise. That’s fine. Just be honest about it. It’s not about the freedom of speech for you. It’s about “who” is being oppressed, “who” is doing the protesting and “who” is being protested.
Why? If we are truly discussing freedom of speech and being blind to who and what is actually being protested why should it matter? And I’m not lecturing anyone. I asked a simple question. He has dodged it at least two times. What about you? Would you defend the freedom speech for those protesting LGTBQ rights on campus? Pickett lines, disrupting class? I can say without hesitation that I would not support that. Nor do I support the pro Palestinian protests that have disrupted, insulted, kept from class and made to feel unsafe. Colleges and Universities have duty to keep ALL their students safe, to provide an atmosphere where learning / education can be achieved without fear, without disruption.
I guess you are missing the irony. At any rate, your question was not simple. It was laced with red herrings and riddled with bias.
Feel free not to answer. It’s fine. I managed to do it and I bet many here could answer in the same way. No worries. And it’s not irony.
You're asking a compound question and demanding a yes or no answer. I told you that a university shouldn't discriminate based on the message of the speaker. Hold them each to the same standard. That is a universal principle that protects anti-Black and anti-LGBTQ protesters. If you feel that doesn't answer your question, clarify what your question is.
Diane Roberts possibly being sarcastic. Of course, she my not realize she is making the opposition’s point in comparing the protests to civil rights protests of the 60s, which the leading candidate for President and the Florida governor have both governed and campaigned against Look at the civil rights nonsense in the 1950s and 1960s: Sure, the March on Washington, the Freedom Rides and that business in Selma bullied the federal government into letting Black people sit in the front of the bus and even vote, but was it really worth all the discomfort it caused the nice White People Who Built America? If only that Martin Luther King fellow hadn’t been so impatient. I’m sure we would have gotten around to giving minorities some rights. Eventually. Some of these smart-mouthed campus wokesters will argue that it was their protests that pushed Columbia and other schools to dump perfectly good stocks in the private prison industry. Back in 1985, students at that same, now-notorious New York alleged institution of higher learning blockaded Hamilton Hall and threw such a tantrum the university had no choice but to divest from funds involved in South Africa, just because they didn’t approve of apartheid. They are actually proud of this. Why those student protesters should get off the universities’ lawns
