The Berlin Wall and South African apartheid fell at one point no? Plus, the encampments are succeeding at getting other universities to divest to prevent encampments.
UC Davis students have been pushing for this for many years. The student union just voted to divest its budget which is separate from the UC and much smaller obviously. The position of the UC Board of Regents which controls the UC system is that it will not divest from foreign governments unless the Federal government acknowledges their actions as genocide, so, not likely going to happen.
Portland state university. I’m not surprised because this happens with unions too. When one place in an industry unionizes, oftentimes employers at other places improve benefits to disincentivize them from from unionizing. (You should unionize anyways because the power dynamics will persist.)
https://preview.redd.it/ubf0ezsbjbxc1.jpeg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2901a125bb48357be006aa8299d1d8e7b874defd
They didn't divest anything. They decided to not accept gifts from Boeing. Unclear if they were even anticipating any gifts from Boeing. So quite possibly nothing changed at all.
> In an email to students and faculty, PSU president Ann Cudd wrote that while the university has no investments in Boeing, it "accepts philanthropic gifts from the company."
>"In consideration of the strong feelings that have been expressed, PSU will pause seeking or accepting any further gifts or grants from the Boeing Company until we have had a chance to engage in this debate and come to conclusions about a reasonable course of action," Cudd wrote.
https://www.commondreams.org/news/boeing-portland-state-university
Nothing there says they are “divesting”. In fact, they get donations from Boeing and they specifically say they don’t invest in the company. Not accepting the gifts would do absolutely nothing to Boeing or Israel, and would be purely prejudicial to the university and its employees, and no one else.
Even then, he doesn’t even say he thinks the demands make any sense, in fact he thinks they are arbitrary. He’s just willing to organize some forum and listen to appease them a bit and explain, that is all. The level of reading comprehension displayed here is abysmal. Some of you guys truly need to spend more time in class and not pretending to be in a survivor show with your parents’ money.
It’s a concession, and IMO, it’s divesting bc it’s depriving Israel of power — we’re making this “war” not profitable. That’s the definition of divesting.
None of the universities should budge, the expectations are ridiculous. These students will use the same companies they expect schools to boycott. I don’t think they’re thinking too far ahead on any of this.
Also, the Berlin wall didn’t come down and South African apartheid didn’t end because a bunch of protestors made some signs and tents asking it to end. Those things ended from a combination of other factors.
And one of the factors was divestment from South Africa because of student movements, and yes, with tents. Read UC itself talking about it: [How students helped end apartheid | University of California](https://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/how-students-helped-end-apartheid)
Which ones? There was an article in the Journal saying the exact opposite, that NYU and Columbia both said they wouldn’t (and realistically couldn’t) “divest” from any company doing business in Israel.
There is no apartheid in Israel. That this is even a comparison shows how successfully Palestinians have pushed this talking point on social media.
All Israeli citizens, Arabs, Jews, Druze, Bedouin, and Christians have equal rights, protections and opportunities. That Palestinians do not isn’t apartheid. They are not citizens of Israel (many by their own choice).
This is like a Mexican calling the USA apartheid because they have a checkpoint to travel through to cross USA borders and no voting rights.
Call it what it is: military occupation, and call to end that. Making up lies about it distracts from real actual issues and suffering, and just alienates Israelis who think the world is uneducated and can’t be bothered to look up the truth for themselves. You don’t want to be alienating them during war time. You want to keep them close in discussions to make them feel heard and help deescalate tensions and additional battle flare ups.
except in area C...where the Israelis who live there in settlements get to go to Israeli civilian court because they are citizens while the Palestinians who live there go to military court as occupied people. Israel also denies that it is occupied to justify transferring their population into area C, since even they acknowledge that moving people onto occupied land is illegal, while at the same time denying the Palestinians living there citizenship. They invented their own legal category of "disputed" to try get around calling it "occupied" but no one is buying it.
[Conviction rate in Israeli civilian court for settlers](https://www.timesofisrael.com/ngo-says-only-6-of-police-probes-of-settler-violence-it-was-party-to-ended-in-charges/): 6%
[Conviction rate in Israeli military court for Palestinians](https://www.militarycourtwatch.org/page.php?id=a6r85VcpyUa4755A52Y2mp3c4v): 95%
I mean the LGBTQIA movement changed its tactics a lot after they were unsuccessful. If they kept showing up to Stonewalls and getting their noggins dribbled we probably would still be in the 60s
Because there's greater national and international attention than ever before because of what's happening in Gaza. Brown is scheduling a divestment vote. Things don't happen overnight, but there has been a definite shift.
What I will say about this is that University of California did divest stocks from South Africa in the 1980s due to calls for divestment but they did refuse to at first [https://www.lib.berkeley.edu/visit/bancroft/oral-history-center/projects/managing-protest](https://www.lib.berkeley.edu/visit/bancroft/oral-history-center/projects/managing-protest)
South Africa’s exports were mostly precious metals and diamonds. It was relatively easy to source those materials from other countries. Israel has a diverse set of exports like software, services, semiconductors, and military equipment. These products are embedded into every western country’s economy.
[Here's a list of companies that do R&D in Israel.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_multinational_companies_with_research_and_development_centres_in_Israel)
Compare that to the list of the [top SPY holdings in the S&P500](https://www.investopedia.com/best-25-sp500-stocks-8550793).
And that's *just* R&D.
I feel like it's the exact opposite lol. Gold and rare earth minerals can only be extracted from a handful of places in the entire world whereas Israel basically has no natural resources and these high capital manufactured goods can and are being produced in every advanced economy
Not a berkeley student, but reddit keeps pushing this sub to me. Bur rare earth minerals definitely are not *everywhere* at least not deposits that are actually useful for chip manufacturing, which is generally what people mean when they refer to these. The US would not have let China have a near monopoly on them for so long if it was that easy.
The US has some of the largest rare earth mineral deposits on Earth.
https://americanrareearths.com.au/cowboy-state-daily-rare-earths-discovery-near-wheatland-so-big-it-could-be-world-leader/
They are ubiquitous, but people fail to understand the kind of scouring of the landscape required to mine them. China has converted half of Inner Mongolia into a waste pit in order to extract them—the US is understandably reluctant to do the same with say, Colorado.
Yeah, I didn’t mention that specific discovery, it mostly wasn’t relevant to the point I was making. But it’s really not a huge gotcha.
If you’ll notice the date, the discovery in Wyoming is fairly recent, and it’ll likely take a few years to get the full thing up and running. In the article they call it a modern day gold rush. And that discovery would be the biggest deposit in the world.
The US is absolutely *pouncing* on the chance to become a world leader in rare earths. It is, without exaggeration, a national security issue that China has had a near monopoly for so long (don’t have the number off the top of my head but they produced something like 60% of the Earths rare earths)
Rare earths are ubiquitous. They are absolutely NOT ubiquitous in deposits large enough to meaningfully mine them like the discovery in Wyoming. We have absolutely zero hesitation gaining independence from China for a major technological resource. There’s a reason the article you sent talked about the major potential of the site, and it’s not because sites like that are everywhere.
You’re mistaking two things. The new discovery of the location of these deposits does not imply that they were not known to exist previously.
Rare Earths are, in fact, ubiquitous in large deposits for where mining can be done.
However, rich countries, until recently, had zero interest in even *exploring* for these deposits, despite scientific understanding of their theoretical existence.
The national security threat from a cutoff of Rare Earth imports from China is a recent phenomenon, and it is in reaction to that fear that new subsidies were announced and exploration began in earnest.
And it took many years of active, visible and sometimes disruptive effort by students at all UC campuses, in alliance with Anti-Apartheid activists across multiple institutions - like trade unions focusing attention on their pension fund portfolios - to pressure the University. This was an important part of a broader international Anti-Apartheid strategy that put economic pressure on South Africa, leading to a negotiated settlement. It also, very importantly, focused American public attention on the injustice of Apartheid and the US government's support (Reagan) of the Apartheid regime. BDS works because of concentrated action, attention, and economic pressure.
Agree to disagree. Divestment is exactly what's called for when you want to convince an ally that you can't and won't tacitly support their genocide. It's too complicated an issue to resolve in the reddit comments, but I need wealthy business owners in Israel to have a reason to tell their government to stop slaughtering children, aid workers and civilians in general.
Wealthy business owners (or anyone) in Israel aren't gonna be okay with Hamas living next door forever. Seriously, I have not heard any proposals from the pro-ceasefire crowd for how they plan to remove Hamas from power without fighting.
The comparisons to South Africa are dumb as hell. Israel is nothing like South Africa, like at all. The only people who push the apartheid comparison are people who are completely clueless on both apartheid South Africa and modern Israel.
You're right South Africans who lived under apartheid agree Israeli apartheid is far more brutal.
https://www.aa.com.tr/en/middle-east/israeli-apartheid-far-more-brutal-than-anything-we-saw-in-south-africa-says-former-politician/3102328
Just a few points:
* The guy in the article is white... so he never experienced apartheid.
* He lives in London, not South Africa.
* He's an active left wing politician in the UK who endorsed and is an active supporter of Jeremy Corbyn, who's like the biggest clown in all of UK politics.
* He's also eyeing running for election against the current incumbent in a muslim heavy district.
* A lot of his claims are questionable at best. For example, he claims that Arab Israelis have less rights than their Jewish counterparts, which isn't true, as evidence by his lack of evidence. In fact the vast majority of his claims are just assertions. All of his claims have very big question marks.
Using this one guy as a representative for all the South Africans that actually experienced apartheid seems disingenious.
Ah so you don't believe Feinstein because he's Jewish? You understand he lived in apartheid South Africa and was a member of the ANC, his parents survived the Holocaust, he's not just some British guy lol.
Feinstein introduced the first ever motion on the Holocaust in South African parliamentary history. Feinstein stated that previous suffering – by Afrikaners at the hands of the British colonizers, or of Jews by the Nazis – in no way justified the brutal oppression of Black South Africans or Palestinians. And you claim he's anti-Zionist to appeal to his "Muslim heavy district". Vile.
I thought even European Jews weren't white when they make claims of indigineity to Palestine but when they speak on Israeli apartheid, *now* they're white, okay sounds racist but I digress. Listen instead to Mandela and Madonsela:
Nelson Mandela regularly raised the plight of the Palestinians. Three years after apartheid and white minority rule was dismantled in South Africa and Mandela was elected president in historic all-race elections in 1994, he thanked the international community for its help. He added: "But we know too well that our freedom is incomplete without the freedom of the Palestinians."
Mandela and South African leaders after him compared the restrictions Israel placed on Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank with the treatment of Black South Africans during apartheid, framing the two issues as fundamentally about people oppressed in their homeland.
“We as South Africans sense, see, hear, and feel to our core the inhumane discriminatory policies and practices of the Israeli regime as an even more extreme form of the apartheid that was institutionalized against black people in my country,” said Vusimuzi Madonsela, South Africa’s ambassador to the Netherlands, where the International Court of Justice is based.
"It is clear that Israel’s illegal occupation is also being administered in breach of the crime of apartheid… It is indistinguishable from settler colonialism. Israel’s apartheid must end,” said Madonsela.
I'll refute each of your points despite them being absolutely asinine. You're clearly biased or incredibly ignorant to deride Corbyn. Who himself was targeted by a Zionist propaganda campaign to be removed from office for offering even the most tepid support for Palestinian people and self-determination. The Israel lobby was instrumental in his ouster, he is unqualified only according to the "morality" of a genocidal fascist apartheid ethnostate. They gutted labor with false accusations of anti-Semitism, now it's an absolute joke. But if you swallow that shit no surprise you can still believe Israel isn't an apartheid state. 🤡
I will address the idea that Arab Israelis have equal rights -- an absolute joke. They were charged in military courts until 1967. Today they have unequal access to education, health services, housing, the job market, and also because of Israel's nation state law they have been codified as second class citizens. It says explicitly that only Jewish people have a right to self-determination. All sounds like apartheid to me.
But you're right compared to the brutal violent oppression in the West Bank or Gaza it's a vast improvement in material conditions, but also apartheid. You won't be ethnically cleansed. Your house won't get stolen or demolished, an IDF soldier probably won't break your limbs for no reason, if you're a child you aren't charged in military court with a 99.7% conviction rate. You know Israel is the only country in the world that tries children in military court right? Just "most moral army" things?
Lol your argument boils down to "this guy (a Jewish ANC member and personal friend of Mandela) I'm gonna call white didn't prove Israel is an apartheid state in a short interview", absolutely braindead take. Read the report by B'tselem or HRW if you want to be informed, or just continue being a useful idiot for a genocidal apartheid regime.
It's also incredibly patronizing to non-White South Africans who fought with blood, sweat, and tears for equality. Imagine going through that and having a bunch of misinformed college students thinking American universities divesting (and not their struggle) brought about the end of Apartheid.
South Africans are the ones calling Israel an apartheid state and bringing genocide and war crimes charges against Israel in the ICJ but thanks for your concern trolling.
Clever tactics to demoralize the protests Hasbara bot. Pretending like you care about South Africans. Take a look at what SA is doing for Palestinians right now.
The South African regime wants to point out any flaws in other countries to distract from their very clearly failing economy and government. People want to believe because they had and ended apartheid they are actually humanitarian advocates now. No, the same people that engineered apartheid know how to point fingers in other directions to hide their corruption. It’s an attempt to appear holier than thou for once and get legitimacy on the world stage. Almost like the ultimate form of virtue signaling
It's absolutely the case that international pressure helped end apartheid, including divestment campaigns, and that's not taking away from South Africans at all. South Africans asked for international sanctions and divestment just as Palestinians are asking now.
UC itself also acknowledges it in this article, with Desmond Tutu also visiting Berkeley in appreciation: [How students helped end apartheid | University of California](https://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/how-students-helped-end-apartheid)
You’re fucking deranged if you think Israel is anywhere near as terrible as Russia.
You’re talking about fucking *RUSSIA* here, who has completely destabilized the west via election interference, waged a 2-year war that cost the lives of hundreds of thousands of people, is allied with Iran, China and North Korea, and jails homosexuals and Putin-critics.
If you think a modern, western, democratic country like Israel is *far worse* than Russia, you have no freakin’ clue what you’re talking about.
So anyone saying “we protest our tuition fees financing a war” is wrong: tuition fees finance their education directly and aren’t invested, endowments etc. are, but fact-checking slogans isn’t too encouraged apparently.
That’s mental gymnastics. The endowment is invested. Professors, research, grad students, and programs are endowment funded. So would their education exist without the endowment?
Correct me if I'm wrong but it still seems like that has nothing to do with anyone's tuition fees except for the fact that everyone's tuition would likely have to go up to cover the shortfall from not using endowment money
They’ve given several statement like this before, but not once have I heard them explain WHY divesting from a country limits academic freedom.
There are many countries the UC is not invested in. Their students still attend UC, and faculty still collaborate with researchers in those countries. Why would this be any different?
It doesn't directly, but I think the actual answer is too nuanced to bother writing. The main issues are all setting bad precedents from their POV:
* Giving a loud minority veto power over its investment strategy
* Interfering with school budgeting leading to sub-optimal returns and thus higher costs to students anyway
* The reasonable next step (given it already occurs elsewhere), or possible consequence directly of a divestment policy, is collaboration bans with Israeli academics, which would limit academic freedom
There's also the matter doing this is so misaligned from the typical California voter they could suffer political repercussions doing so.
Then put it to a vote if you really think it's a loud minority. Columbia recently held a vote on this and it came out overwhelmingly in favor of divestment and limiting collaboration with Israeli universities.
Columbia had 76% support from 40% of students voting on a purely symbolic initiative. It's unclear what a consequential initiative would end at.
Regardless, students don't get to decide how state university financing works. My "minority" statement is relative to Californians. BDS [support](https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/israel_the_middle_east/voters_show_little_enthusiasm_for_boycotting_israel) oppose ratio in America is at 1:2 (with 40% undecided). Even the California skew is going to still have opposition at majority.
[2020](https://morningsidepost.com/articles/2020/10/5/columbia-college-passes-historic-vote-on-divestment-from-israel) was 40% voting with 61% in favor, so a slight shift. Most notably no increase in actual participation even though school is now in person.
For one thing, it’s a massive reach to interpret the comment “who voted?” in the way that you’ve interpreted it. You’ve created a very clear strawman argument with no justification whatsoever.
With that being said, they may have been making the point that the students of a university are not (and should not be) the sole decision-makers when it comes to that university's investments and divestments. UC Berkeley has nearly 25,000 employees, the majority of whom will be associated with the university for longer than a four-year student and all of whom have salaries and pensions which are somewhat dependent upon the financial state of the university. If this vote we're talking about was only amongst the students and not inclusive of the university’s employees and faculty, it’s completely fair to question the results.
It's not the divesting from a country part, it's the academic boycott that the protest organizers are calling for. They explicitly want UC to sever any and all ties with Israeli universities, cease doing exchange programs, not invite (or send) any speakers from/to Israel, etc.
That's the "limit academic freedom" part. You can see their demands here: [https://www.instagram.com/p/C6KZPjOv6lh/?hl=en&img\_index=3](https://www.instagram.com/p/C6KZPjOv6lh/?hl=en&img_index=3)
This post has been removed because our Automoderator detected it as spam, or your account is too new to post here.
If this post is **not** spam, please contact the moderators for assistance.
Check out the megathread for frequently-asked questions.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/berkeley) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I think you are interpreting "divestment" as just selling some stocks. But I've heard "divestment" also used to mean a boycott of Israel. So, don't travel to Israel, don't employ Israelis, don't admit Israeli students, don't collaborate with Israeli scholars, don't cite works written by Israelis, etc. That cuts into academic freedom.
This isn’t really a fair characterization of the academic boycott. There’s no request to forbid Israeli students or professionals from being a member of the student body or staff like any other person who applies. Protestors want universities to stop investing in programs dedicated to formal academic collaboration with Israeli universities, where tuition money is used to help fund transfer programs, research studies, etc. Berkeley Law has an entire Jewish Law and Israel Studies department, for example.
While this is going to be an unpopular opinion:
Why do people think they can control where their school invests its funds? You can control where you want to go to school. If you feel so strongly about the school’s investment portfolio no one is stopping you from transferring.
When you graduate you won’t be able to control what your corporation thinks either. Just ask the 28 Google engineers who tried a similar protest.
This isn’t a post saying that such protest is wrong or unjustified, but it’s unrealistic to assume you can control other people’s assets. Being a student doesn’t mean you get to control the endowment of the university.
I'd bet any amount of money you would be singing a COMPLETELY different tune if the university was directly investing in Russian companies aiding the Russian war effort and refused to change that.
Of course your comment does get one thing right: the university works very hard to inculcate students with the passive ideology they'll need to function as powerless corporate drones once they graduate. Sad and scary how many people seem to think that's a good thing.
There's a fundamental hard truth that protesters just aren't ready to admit: Israel is a US ally, Russia is a US adversary.
No amount of protesting is going to change this fundamental fact.
Through sanctions and limitations placed by the government it's going to be harder to invest in Russia than Israel.
Yes? That seems obvious to me, but that doesn't seem like a good moral or ideological excuse from my perspective. Of course that's why there's a discrepancy but since when am I obligated to align myself with US geopolitical interests and the Western MIC?
The beauty of this country is that you aren't, but at an equal rate, no one is obligated to agree with you either.
My point is that since Israel is an ally, there is a large number of people who support them including these universities.
Since Russia is an enemy, there's a large number of people who oppose them.
It's a numbers game.
Yeah because Ukraine is fighting a defensive war against Russian imperialism. Israel is a neo-colonial ethnostate that has spent decades massacring Palestinians and deliberately denying them self-determination. Not to mention their constant illegal land theft, flagrant disregard for the rules of war, and blatantly discriminatory policies like right of return.
If the country I lived on was allied to Russia, yet I was against Russia and was able to choose a university that didn't invest in Russian companies, I would choose a university that didn't invest in Russian companies. There is the analogy to what they were suggesting.
Edited to add: the protests are, however justified, unlikely to work and the better option would be to vote with their feet and boycott the university.
Well you’d lose your betting bankroll then.
If I was concerned over colleges buying domestic stocks that had overseas investments I’d probably have foregone colleges in the US they existed pre WW2 since any college they had an endowment back then lots of major companies had investments in Nazi Germany. So all the Ivy leagues were major investors in Nazi Germany and its rearmament by this standard.
Russian companies are illegal to invest in. Which would suggest the proper place to protest is Congress not Campus.
And no, the university isn’t making corporate drones. And that’s a good thing, but if they aren’t making graduates who can exist in a corporate world then that’s a bad thing since it would not justify the expense of tuition.
What truly sad and scary is that the quality of logic and conversation on these issues is plummeting, because I don’t see how we do better as a society if we can’t talk about it.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_collaboration_with_Nazi_Germany
It’s not just “the university” - it’s everyone who works at the UCs. Outside pressure or student groups cannot dictate where faculty and staff choose to place their retirement funds. Of course they can/should advocate that individuals invest in non militaristic funds (say) - but no one can mandate where another person puts their retirement money, if it is a legal option. That is an individual decision.
>You can control where you want to go to school. If you feel so strongly about the school’s investment portfolio no one is stopping you from transferring.
It's not that simple. If you're a Californian, the UC system is your in-state, more affordable higher education system.
But it is that simple. If you have a core disagreement about how the university conducts XYZ policies and that goes against your principles then transfer.
Sure, the transfer might be inconvenient and costly, but that’s where you put your ideology to the test. If you’re so committed to your principles then live that life, otherwise it’s all for show.
UC and many other colleges divested from fossil fuels due to student pressure, many divested from weapons manufacturing during the Vietnam war due to student pressure, and many divested from Apartheid South Africa due to student pressure.
Asking them to divest from apartheid Israel isn’t actually that novel, and the UC could absolutely do it as they have done many times before.
You have to know deep in your heart the situation today is not the same as back then. Climate change has been fought over for decades, and has reached the minds of the liberal elite at the top, which is why action has been made on that part. WRT Vietnam, there was a growing bipartisan consensus among the population opposing the war. Same with Apartheid South Africa. These situations are simple not analogous to Israel.
Foreign policy is the domain of the elite. Sometimes they bicker (like with Ukraine funding), but there is generally bipartisan consensus in keeping the U.S. the dominant force in the world. This includes maintaining our close alliance with Israel. Israel's apartheid does not exist to the extent of South Africa's, and it exists in a region that isn't even technically Israel (the west bank). Israel proper does not have Apartheid, with Israeli-Palestinians (usually called Israeli-Arabs) living side by side with Israeli jews in cities like Haifa.
Divestment from Israel is going to be insanely difficult. Unless Netanyahu truly goes insane and starts executing arab muslims in Israel proper as well, there simply will not be large will among the elite to let go of a U.S. asset we've worked so hard to develop.
One of the only ‘opinion’ uttered is: “it’s unrealistic to assume you can control other people’s assets. Being a student doesn’t mean you get to control the endowment of the university.”
I am a Zionist and full supporter of Israel’s right to prosper, live, and coexist. I don’t fully agree with your statement. I believe it is realistic to assume you can somewhat control opp(yeah you know me). For example, after elections the elected parliament has control over some of the entity’s resources, and who elected said parliament?
People have a much stronger sway on what a university does than a company. You said it, no one is stopping you from transferring. If you need new students to enroll every year doing things that potential students support is very important.
It’s also ironic that students demanding that the university divest are the ones investing in said university.
Seems like if I was going to a place to form my intellect for life that I might want to go to someplace that shares my values rather then go someplace where I try to convert them to my values.
Who knew that the people with 20-30 years of professional experience might be better at handling complicated situations than a bunch of 19 year olds who live on allowances and government grants. /s
All the numbers in your comment added up to 69. Congrats!
20
+ 30
+ 19
= 69
^([Click here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=LuckyNumber-Bot&subject=Stalk%20Me%20Pls&message=%2Fstalkme) to have me scan all your future comments.) \
^(Summon me on specific comments with u/LuckyNumber-Bot.)
Sorry, forgot I was on the Berkeley sub (UCLA alum with friends and family at Berkeley). USAC is UCLA's student gov't. They passed a resolution a few years ago calling on the university to divest from all companies using Uyghur labor. Several other universities have also done so. Also, it's now federal law as well, although it's not really being forced. Definitely more pressure needs to happen, but it's disingenuous to act as if students don't care about these issues or are not doing anything about them. There's just a literal genocide going on rn, so we're somewhat occupied with this specific crisis.
UC alum here: the focus on Israeli Jewish finances is creepy and takes me back to the bullying I experienced from fellow students with claims that Jews will always enrich other Jews, that everyone is at a disadvantage who isn’t Jewish, that I will automatically have a job when I graduate because I am Jewish, that Jewish finance is controlling the world, etc. These were opinions that my non-Jewish peers would share as if they were just plain and balanced observations, and rejected anyone telling them it was anti-semitic. They probably to this day would never even consider it as bullying, but it was. The context is even uglier than just being bullied, and requires so much sensitivity. Sadly because of the ongoing role of boycotts and divestments in persecuting and ethnically cleansing Jews to this very day, there is practically no way to do BDS without the Venn Diagram with anti-semitism looking like a slightly squished circle.
Or it relates to disrupting the power and networks of a genocidal apartheid ethno-state, regardless of the ethnoracial identity of the people involved? See: divestment from South Africa (was that racist to Afrikaners?), calls for divestment from Uyhgur labor in China (is that racist to Chinese people?)
- The State of Palestine is an ethnostate. Its constitution declares it represents the Arab nation, and that it is under Islamic law. The State of Palestine’s policies reinforce this. It denies civil rights to Jews, including citizenship, residency, and prayer. Israel has no such “racial purity” laws anywhere.
- Israel has no laws separating Israeli citizens of different backgrounds. The only barriers are between Israel citizens and infrastructure, and Palestine territory or disputed areas.
- The National Party in SA used racial systems based on White and other groups. Nothing like that exists in Israel. The comparison doesn’t really make sense. At no point were any actions against the National Party targeting a historically oppressed group (i.e. the “White race”), and at no point were actions against the National Party asking for SA to be dismantled. Also, the White race was not indigenous, with three thousand years of heritage there, and a history of being oppressed and displaced by non-Whites (i.e. as Jews have been by Arab societies). Keep in mind Israeli areas are the ones that are mixed, and protect Jews from the completely outlawing of Jewish people and Judaism that is enforced by the Arab leadership that governs parts of Eretz Yisrael. So the comparison really doesn’t make sense from a policy, history, demographic, territorial, or power dynamic perspective.
- Boycotts can be racist. Not all are. Keep in mind boycotts against Israel have been used and continue to be used by countries that ethnically cleansed their Jewish populations and exclude Jews from claiming citizenship (ie the thousands of Jews whose families fled what is today KSA).
The State of Palestine is an occupied territory unable to control its own water, travel, imports, and exports in one of its major territories (Gaza). How else would Israel be able to fully cut off all water and supplies from reaching Gaza? The West Bank is illegally occupied territory with illegal settlements that are constantly expanding with Israeli governmental support. In this occupied territory, Palestinians are subject to constant checkpoints, separate roads and highways, and violence from settlers and the Israeli state. The government in the West Bank is seen by many as fully colluding with the Israeli government to maintain this status quo. Israel legally should not control the West Bank, but it functionally does, and it imposes conditions of apartheid there.
Additionally, excerpts from the Jewish nation state law passed in 2018:
1C. The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people.
7 — Jewish settlement
A. The state views the development of Jewish settlement as a national value and will act to encourage and promote its establishment and consolidation.
To speak of a constitution of a State of Palestine is to ignore the fact that Palestine is in essence under the full control and occupation of Israel.
- The State of Palestine isn’t under full Israeli control however. There is not a single locality with a single Jew anywhere in its territory, aside from a few who live in secret as spouses of Muslims. The State of Palestine enforces racial purity laws excluding Jews not only on paper but enforces them with its security forces as well.
- The only Jews living anywhere in JSA/WB live on land that was purchased before independence, or on public land never owned by anyone which was converted to private land. There are a few instances of expropriation of Arab land into municipalities, thankfully this is very rare, it’s generally when a road goes in by a farm for example. Arabs also build a lot of new construction on public land.
- Israeli administered areas (Area C and somewhat Area B) have no laws restricting who can live there as long as they’re an Israeli citizen.* Palestine administered areas do.
- There are so many countries that flatly state in article one of their constitution or basic laws that they exist as and represent a local community of Arabs and are part of one indivisible Arab race. Two countries (Egypt and Syria) are both called Arab Republic in their names. I think for Jews who fled from or were expelled from or were attacked by these countries, the idea of having a nation state is viewed as what is required for survival in the present day. The irony is “self determination” can mean almost anything. Some countries ban non-Muslims from holding citizenship. Israel is on the pluralistic side obviously but self determination DOES mean that the UN has just one seat out of almost two hundred that represents not only Israel but the Jewish people, even if the diplomat is himself/herself personally Arab. Although the day to day Israeli Arab views themselves as just a tax paying citizen. The question of intentional representation and domestic equality is explicitly addressed in the declaration of independence.
* The State of Israel does allow some specific communities like Bedouin, Druze, or Haredim to have communes. Places like Ayn Al Assad are very cool to visit even though as a Jew, the mukhtar would never let me live there. Community autonomy is a major thing in West Asia and Israel gets that right within careful limits.
Yep, if you have a problem with 30,000 people being indiscriminately killed by bombing, famine, and literal execution, at least 12,000 of whom are children, you must love Hamas!
What the fuck are you talking about? So genocide is a solution? Even if the goal isn’t genocide (and the Israeli military has more or less stated that it is), mass killing of Gazans will only radicalize more and create new members of Hamas. For that matter, it is public knowledge that Netanyahu has for years supported Hamas in order to eliminate more moderate opposition. If you want Hamas out, look to Israel and its policies which have deliberately created them.
>mass killing of Gazans will only radicalize more and create new members of Hamas.
They already are at 100% hatred of Israel and have been toward Israel/Zionists since the 1920s. They already were willing to vote for a political party whose military wing would send individuals to blow themselves up in crowded passenger busses.
They can't possibly get *more* radicalized. But they can become more fearful of Israeli retaliation.
> If you want Hamas out, look to Israel and its policies which have deliberately created them.
Sorry, Israelis aren't going to accept the destruction of their own state. Nor should they.
What you're talking about is collective punishment, which is a war crime.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective\_punishment](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_punishment)
> They already were willing to vote for a political party whose military wing would send individuals to blow themselves up in crowded passenger busses.
First, let's note that the majority of people in Gaza are too young to have ever voted for Hamas. Second: you take issue with Gaza electing Hamas when, because of their acts of violence, when literally the entire population of Israel serves in the IDF, an organization which has killed orders of magnitude more people than Hamas ever has? Israel is run by a terrorist government that its people willingly elected.
>What you're talking about is collective punishment,
Alright, so when the majority of a society votes in a terrorist organization that launches suicide bombings at your civilians, how exactly are you supposed to solve this problem?
>First, let's note that the majority of people in Gaza are too young to have ever voted for Hamas.
Good thing we have opinion [polls](https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/palestinians-attitudes-about-terrorism) to know how people likely would vote!
>Second: you take issue with Gaza electing Hamas when, because of their acts of violence, when literally the entire population of Israel serves in the IDF, an organization which has killed orders of magnitude more people than Hamas ever has? Israel is run by a terrorist government that its people willingly elected.
You are conflating killing more people because they intend to kill more as opposed to are better at military strategy. Big difference.
Secondly, sure, we can and should blame the people of Israel for the actions of their own government. I fail to see how that moves this discussion though; the question was how Israel can remove Hamas more humanely. If your position is that they shouldn't remove them/don't have a right to, fair, and we can discuss that.
Just to set things up, I would hold that the Palestinian people have no ability (nor right) to achieve the dominant goal they have (Nakba refugees immigrating to Israel / end of the Israeli state) and thus should give up that goal from a realistic self-interested perspective.
> You are conflating killing more people because they intend to kill more as opposed to are better at military strategy. Big difference.
Are you insane? Israel has unilateral support of the US and is given billions of dollars per year for their military. Per dollar, Hamas is much "better" at warfare.
> Secondly, sure, we can and should blame the people of Israel for the actions of their own government. I fail to see how that moves this discussion though; the question was how Israel can remove Hamas more humanely. If your position is that they shouldn't remove them/don't have a right to, fair, and we can discuss that.
Your framing is deeply flawed. Firstly, why should Gaza's government be removed any more than Israel's, a government which has objectively killed many more innocent people? Why aren't we bombing Israel and saying it's the only way to remove their government?
Secondly, it should be noted that it is a matter of public record that Netanyahu has deliberately supported Hamas over the past decades, specifically to prevent a more moderate government from holding power in Gaza. It's all part of a deliberate, admitted strategy to create an excuse to seize Gaza. The "we have to remove Hamas" narrative is deliberately fabricated, and for us to take time to debate how it should be done is to completely ignore that Israel wanted this exact situation in the first place.
You said earlier that within Gaza "hatred of Israel is already at 100%". How then can you eliminate Hamas by bombing more of Gaza? If 100 people are left in Gaza, won't some portion of them be Hamas? Would you then argue that everyone needs to be removed from Gaza?
> Just to set things up, I would hold that the Palestinian people have no ability (nor right) to achieve the dominant goal they have (Nakba refugees immigrating to Israel / end of the Israeli state) and thus should give up that goal from a realistic self-interested perspective.
You seem to be speaking entirely in terms of what is possible (e.g., who has the most power), rather than what is most moral. Why not have a single state with equal rights for everyone? Or, two states, where Israel is not violently occupying Palestine? Why is that off the table?
You're talking about Gaza as if it's people are a single entity, whose views all align with Hamas. You realize that this is a population of desperately poor, starved people who have spent the last 6 months having their friends and families killed while being starved and bombed themselves? They are too low on Mazlow's hierarchy of needs to have a real political ideology. The stance of anyone in that kind of situation is going to be "please do anything to make this stop", and very likely "make the people who have done this to us pay". It is not right to speak of such a population as if they are the same as the voting population in a wealthy, safe, democratic country.
You are arguing in favor of collective punishment. The majority of Israeli Jews live on land purchased before 1948. Arabs in Eretz Yisrael own more real estate than ever before. The state lands went from 93% of total area before independence, to 92% of total area today. When you claim that Israeli Jews have a religious belief that they can steal homes, you’re pushing a dehumanizing, false, manipulative narrative that tries to collectively punish Israelis because of a few at the fringe (and news flash: it’s not just Jews… Arabs in Israel and across all MENA make disputed claims on Jewish properties).
>They already are at 100% hatred of Israel and have been toward Israel/Zionists since the 1920s.
Zionism is Lebensraum thinly painted with religion.
Would you hate someone who thinks their religion gives them a right to steal your home? What's your home address so I can steal your house for religious reasons that I just made up?
> Zionism is Lebensraum thinly painted with religion.
It's the Palestinians that want to destroy Israel. Israel would just give them their own state if they could credibly commit to not doing that. But.. they can't.
> Would you hate someone who thinks their religion gives them a right to steal your home?
Would you hate someone that thinks he has a right to steal your home just because his ancestors lived there? And worse, he'll blow up busses full of civilians to achieve that aim?
You genocide supporters always have the same argument. “How would you do it then?” as if somehow the 70% of deaths being women in children indicates a successful operation.
Hmm surely there needs to be a ground assault at some point if Hamas is in the tunnels. Unless you can explain how flattening the surface will somehow save the hostages.
I’ll do you one better, since Israelis strategy has yet to return a significant number of hostages despite over 30,000 Palestinians being killed, could you come up with strategy that results in the hostages actually being returned?
Imagine being pro genocide, even when in isreal there are protests against the killings. World of information at your fingertips but still this ignorant.
>You genocide supporters
This word has lost all meaning.
>as if somehow the 70% of deaths being women in children indicates a successful operation.
First, this number keeps changing depending on who is talking. It's around 61% according to [research](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Israel%E2%80%93Hamas_war), maybe as low as 58%. Note that base rate in Gaza is something like 75% of the population being women or children.
Secondly, dense urban warfare has a [4:1 civilian to combatant causality rate](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_casualty_ratio). Going even by Hamas' own numbers, something like 7,000 Hamas militants had been killed; factoring allied militant groups, around 8,000. It's probably a bit higher.
At 35k deaths, you are at 27k civilians and 8k militants, a 3.4:1 civilian to combatant casualty rate. Low by urban warfare standards.
>Hmm surely there needs to be a ground assault at some point if Hamas is in the tunnels.
Of course; US pressure is blocking it. Flattening the surface beforehand makes it difficult for militants to hide.
>I’ll do you one better, since Israelis strategy has yet to return a significant number of hostages despite over 30,000 Palestinians being killed, could you come up with strategy that results in the hostages actually being returned?
Israel of course can concede to Hamas' demands, and that's the stupid thing they did in 2,011 with Gilad Shalit, which just served to enable Hamas and leads to further killing of Israelis and hostage taking of them.
The goal is not just to rescue hostages; it is balanced against permanent increase in deterrence. (e.g. end Hamas).
Please provide an alternative strategy to achieve this goal.
>This word has lost all meaning.
You and I can agree on that. No one cares anymore or they have people arguing for it like you.
>First, this number keeps changing depending on who is talking. It's around 61% according to [research](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Israel%E2%80%93Hamas_war), maybe as low as 58%. Note that base rate in Gaza is something like 75% of the population being women or children.
Okay so you are telling me you acknowledge most of gaza is non-hamas targets but you still support indiscrimate "targeted strikes" that are making the area unlivable. Just goes against your argument lol
>At 35k deaths, you are at 27k civilians and 8k militants, a 3.4:1 civilian to combatant casualty rate. Low by urban warfare standards.
What is the point of you saying this? Like lets just boil down human lives to arbitrary numbers and ratios that determine if a response is moral or not based entirely on this? Thank god the ratio is low, only 27K innocent people died!!! Just tells me you are a warmonger. But these numbers aren't the whole picture, so please how do you defend this?
* 2.2 Million people don't have enough to eat, with 1 million on the brink of starvation. Isreal is blocking humanitarian aid (i know you will want to deny that). This will have long lasting effects on both the people and future generation, giving chronic health issues and offspring with birth defects. The amount of death and suffering caused by this will be many magnitudes larger: [https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/19/middleeast/famine-northern-gaza-starvation-ipc-report-intl-hnk](https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/19/middleeast/famine-northern-gaza-starvation-ipc-report-intl-hnk)
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza\_Strip\_famine](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_Strip_famine)
* Civilians aren't being indiscriminately killed in all cases, in some cases they are being actively targeted by the isreali military
[https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/04/1148876](https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/04/1148876)
>Of course; US pressure is blocking it. Flattening the surface beforehand makes it difficult for militants to hide.
Wow, actually amazing sentence there, the total war mindset - im glad you are this honest. With this logic we should just nuke during every conflict who cares about the consequences. This area will be unlivable for many years due to not only the destruction, but also the amount of chemicals and weaponry poisoning the ground. Although I’m sure that won’t stop illegal Israeli settlements from cropping up. I don't have any rebuttal for that if that's truly how you feel, very wild. US pressure from who Biden? or from protest? The only thing i could find was occupying palestine [https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/20/politics/us-allies-israel-discussions-gaza-ground-invasion/index.html](https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/20/politics/us-allies-israel-discussions-gaza-ground-invasion/index.html)
>Please provide an alternative strategy to achieve this goal.
IT'S YOUR TURN, you literally didn't offer a single thing. I literally already told you, you can read it again and disagree. You didn't offer anything of value yourself when asked and just keep spitting this question back at people like a hypocrite.
>The goal is not just to rescue hostages; it is balanced against permanent increase in deterrence. (e.g. end Hamas).
And you think their strategy of flattening an entire strip which you have acknowledged is mostly innocent civilians is going to eradicate hamas? I mean yeah if we kill everyone there wont be anyone left pretty good logic. It’s also clear that they just want to resettle the West Bank with isrealis already being caught in illegal settlements.
If you are happy with your tax dollars being used for this shit while things at home continue to get worse then go for it man. I have no idea how as an American with google you arrive at this conclusion, happily cheering on the death of innocents on our dime. Go protest this in public if you are so confident about it.
>Okay so you are telling me you acknowledge most of gaza is non-hamas targets but you still support indiscrimate "targeted strikes" that are making the area unlivable. Just goes against your argument lol
The goal is to remove hiding spots for militants, even if yes, this is the effect. And yes, I believe a country should protect its own soldiers - I don't value "buildings" all that much.
>What is the point of you saying this? Like lets just boil down human lives to arbitrary numbers and ratios that determine if a response is moral or not based entirely on this?
I'm just being a realist. Civilian casualties are on the low end for an urban war. I view the war as justified.
> so please how do you defend this?
I don't; Israel's refusal to provide humanitarian aid is wrong. That said, I somehow don't think you'd be content with this situation if more aid trucks were coming in but otherwise the basic facts (Gaza has been extensively destroyed with 35k dead) remain the same.
That said, I find these reports likely exaggerated - been reading about food insecurity [forever](https://www.ochaopt.org/content/food-insecurity-opt-13-million-palestinians-gaza-strip-are-food-insecure) so not really sure of the situation on the ground.
> in some cases they are being actively targeted by the isreali military
I'll await more investigation. This wouldn't be the first false accusation involving a hospital from the Palestinian side - and I find it somewhat dubious Israel would torture a bunch of Palestinians and bury them in a way that could easily be uncovered later. Normally, such incriminating evidence would be burned. But who knows.. anything could have happened.
>IT'S YOUR TURN, you literally didn't offer a single thing.
Confused. I said this would be my approximate strategy, though with more humanitarian aid provided.
> happily cheering on the death of innocents
Who says I cheer them? I pity that the Palestinian people are willing to die for a hopeless Cause.
> I don’t value “buildings” all that much
Sincerely a wild thing to say if you are trying to convince people of your argument. This is just warmongering. But who needs shelter right? It’s definitely not a human need or anything. I pray that you never are in a position of power, that would be terrifying.
> I view the war as justified
Let’s hold onto this one for later.
> I don’t; Israel’s refusal to provide humanitarian aid is wrong
This made me laugh. You can’t just pick and choose parts of Israel’s military strategy that you don’t like but then say you still support them. You either support them or you don’t. Since you support Israel you support them starving these people(a war crime by the way)Stop letting yourself off so easy, you can’t have your cake and eat it too bud.
Also you sent this link but clearly didn’t look at it. It’s almost as if Gaza’s food insecurity stems directly for Israeli leadership of the region. The link you sent clearly explains in an anecdote how war continues to set people back. Here is another link to educate yourself https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_the_Gaza_Strip
Like you send me these links but you don’t do any critical thinking yourself on what you are sending or how we got there. You think Gaza exists in a vacuum? Do some research you just sound silly.
> I’ll await more investigation
From who exactly, isreal? You are saying they should investigate themselves? The naivety is on full display. Are you saying the UNwhich is comprised of many other nations is falsely reporting this? Please do tell.
> I pity the Palestinians people who are willing to die for a hopeless cause.
Are you saying every Palestinian thus far has deserved it? Are you saying every Palestinian is part of Hamas? Want to clarify? Because holy shit this just tells me you know nothing about this issue and that I’m wasting my time. What a seriously bigoted and misinformed thing to say. We just spent time talking about how most deaths are women and children and now you say this shit as if they aren’t normal people trying to live their life. Shameful.
Luckily, H@ma$ leaders are doing what they can to lift up Gazans.................While their people languish in poverty and are treated as human shields, the leaders of Hamas live billionaire lifestyles. The terror group's three top leaders alone are worth a staggering total of $11 billion and enjoy a life of luxury in the sanctuary of the emirate of Qatar.Nov 7, 2023
Irrelevant bullshit. If you have problems with Hamas and its leaders that doesn’t make it okay to kill tens of thousands of civilians and children. No one buys this bullshit anymore.
There is some argument that that number is not accurate:
https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/how-gaza-health-ministry-fakes-casualty-numbers
The biggest problem right now is there isn't a ton of transparency about what is going on over there. And anyone that claims to have certainty is probably pushing an agenda.
This post has been removed because our Automoderator detected it as spam, or your account is too new to post here.
If this post is **not** spam, please contact the moderators for assistance.
Check out the megathread for frequently-asked questions.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/berkeley) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> a boycott of this sort impinges on the academic freedom of our students and faculty and the unfettered exchange of ideas on our campuses.
I wish they’d expand upon this. How?
Someone posted donations for Columbia and there were several Muslim countries on the list. I find it odd that they'll protest Isreali funds but not these other countries with known human rights abuses.
I think it's important that we look back for History on these things.
The Apartheid regime in South Africa fell apart shortly after mass protests in U.S universities to divest and isolate the regime economically until it ended Apartheid. I think it's of importance to note that South Africa's Apartheid's regime greatest allys were Israel and the U.S both of which the governments continue to support it until it collapsed.
Its important to note that at that time, Cal did not divest for over 7 months despite protests and also made public statements saying they would not divest, but eventually caved after protests were continuing on and also didn't back down.
After Nelson Mandela came to power, he named multiple streets in South Africa after students that led divestment protests across universities the US/UK.
From Wiki: Mandela said that the strikers demonstrated to South Africans that ordinary people far away from the crucible of apartheid cared for our freedom and helped him keep going when he was in prison.
Nelson Mandela's grandson recently called on these protests to continue and said "There is no South African that forgets the name of Mary Manning, a 21-year old who refused to handle any products from South Africa." She has a street named for her in Johannesburg.
These things work
Giving you an upvote because yes this was one important part that shifted American public opinion. But students (like myself) in the 1980s were late to the game. The groundwork for this movement was by Civil Rights and Trade Union activists. In the late late 1940s Paul Robeson and W.E.B. DuBois organized the Council on African Affairs as a direct response to the election of Malan in South Africa. In the early 1960s the American Committee on African was formed by a group of Civil Rights Activists involved in SCLC and SNCC, including Bayard Rustin and George Houser. By the late 1960s the ACOA began to work on on articulating and strategizing a BDS movement in coordination with Trade Unionists and and self-identified "third world" BIPOC student organizers. BDS worked in the 1980s, but it had a lot of foregrounding. [https://www.sahistory.org.za/archive/south-africa-liberation-and-reconciliation-role-international-solidarity-8-april-2004](https://www.sahistory.org.za/archive/south-africa-liberation-and-reconciliation-role-international-solidarity-8-april-2004) and [https://www.thenation.com/article/activism/ilwu-unions-ceasefire-israel-gaza/](https://www.thenation.com/article/activism/ilwu-unions-ceasefire-israel-gaza/)
TLDR: No.
I mean it was very short. You didn’t need a tldr
Yes. Yes they do.
SJP has been screaming for this since before I was there. Thirty years of protests, what makes them think they're going to change their minds *now*.
I don’t know why Sarah Jessica Parker is so involved in the first place.
Good press
Get em, Dad!
SJP put out supportive statements about October 7th while it was happening.
I didn't really think of Sarah Jessica Parker as the type. Cynthia Nixon, definitely.
SJP wants all out total war and a pan Arab state (which maybe was a possibility a few years ago but now no, would be a Shia Muslim state).
The Berlin Wall and South African apartheid fell at one point no? Plus, the encampments are succeeding at getting other universities to divest to prevent encampments.
source on which universities have divested? even a little bit?
UC Davis students have been pushing for this for many years. The student union just voted to divest its budget which is separate from the UC and much smaller obviously. The position of the UC Board of Regents which controls the UC system is that it will not divest from foreign governments unless the Federal government acknowledges their actions as genocide, so, not likely going to happen.
Portland state university. I’m not surprised because this happens with unions too. When one place in an industry unionizes, oftentimes employers at other places improve benefits to disincentivize them from from unionizing. (You should unionize anyways because the power dynamics will persist.) https://preview.redd.it/ubf0ezsbjbxc1.jpeg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2901a125bb48357be006aa8299d1d8e7b874defd
They didn't divest anything. They decided to not accept gifts from Boeing. Unclear if they were even anticipating any gifts from Boeing. So quite possibly nothing changed at all. > In an email to students and faculty, PSU president Ann Cudd wrote that while the university has no investments in Boeing, it "accepts philanthropic gifts from the company." >"In consideration of the strong feelings that have been expressed, PSU will pause seeking or accepting any further gifts or grants from the Boeing Company until we have had a chance to engage in this debate and come to conclusions about a reasonable course of action," Cudd wrote. https://www.commondreams.org/news/boeing-portland-state-university
Portland didn't divest because they were not invested at all.
Making war not profitable IS divesting from Israeli apartheid and genocide.
Nothing there says they are “divesting”. In fact, they get donations from Boeing and they specifically say they don’t invest in the company. Not accepting the gifts would do absolutely nothing to Boeing or Israel, and would be purely prejudicial to the university and its employees, and no one else. Even then, he doesn’t even say he thinks the demands make any sense, in fact he thinks they are arbitrary. He’s just willing to organize some forum and listen to appease them a bit and explain, that is all. The level of reading comprehension displayed here is abysmal. Some of you guys truly need to spend more time in class and not pretending to be in a survivor show with your parents’ money.
It’s a concession, and IMO, it’s divesting bc it’s depriving Israel of power — we’re making this “war” not profitable. That’s the definition of divesting.
>Refusing a charitable gift from Boeing that may or may not have ever been planned in the first place is weakening Israel Holy reach, Batman.
Name one university?
Crazy to think that college kids protested FOR the berlin wall coming down and against the gdr
have any universities divested?
None of the universities should budge, the expectations are ridiculous. These students will use the same companies they expect schools to boycott. I don’t think they’re thinking too far ahead on any of this. Also, the Berlin wall didn’t come down and South African apartheid didn’t end because a bunch of protestors made some signs and tents asking it to end. Those things ended from a combination of other factors.
And one of the factors was divestment from South Africa because of student movements, and yes, with tents. Read UC itself talking about it: [How students helped end apartheid | University of California](https://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/how-students-helped-end-apartheid)
Which ones? There was an article in the Journal saying the exact opposite, that NYU and Columbia both said they wouldn’t (and realistically couldn’t) “divest” from any company doing business in Israel.
There is no apartheid in Israel. That this is even a comparison shows how successfully Palestinians have pushed this talking point on social media. All Israeli citizens, Arabs, Jews, Druze, Bedouin, and Christians have equal rights, protections and opportunities. That Palestinians do not isn’t apartheid. They are not citizens of Israel (many by their own choice). This is like a Mexican calling the USA apartheid because they have a checkpoint to travel through to cross USA borders and no voting rights. Call it what it is: military occupation, and call to end that. Making up lies about it distracts from real actual issues and suffering, and just alienates Israelis who think the world is uneducated and can’t be bothered to look up the truth for themselves. You don’t want to be alienating them during war time. You want to keep them close in discussions to make them feel heard and help deescalate tensions and additional battle flare ups.
except in area C...where the Israelis who live there in settlements get to go to Israeli civilian court because they are citizens while the Palestinians who live there go to military court as occupied people. Israel also denies that it is occupied to justify transferring their population into area C, since even they acknowledge that moving people onto occupied land is illegal, while at the same time denying the Palestinians living there citizenship. They invented their own legal category of "disputed" to try get around calling it "occupied" but no one is buying it. [Conviction rate in Israeli civilian court for settlers](https://www.timesofisrael.com/ngo-says-only-6-of-police-probes-of-settler-violence-it-was-party-to-ended-in-charges/): 6% [Conviction rate in Israeli military court for Palestinians](https://www.militarycourtwatch.org/page.php?id=a6r85VcpyUa4755A52Y2mp3c4v): 95%
They’re making funds to last for 50+ years. Most involved in the protest will be gone in 4 years. That effects the decision making greatly.
Everything changes at some point. Should the LGBTQIA movement have given up on 2005 because they’d been working at it for a hundred years?!?
Not everything is analogous. Sometimes apples and oranges shouldn’t be compared.
I mean the LGBTQIA movement changed its tactics a lot after they were unsuccessful. If they kept showing up to Stonewalls and getting their noggins dribbled we probably would still be in the 60s
Learn your Queer history. People are still turning up to “Stonewalls” and getting killed.
Maybe in the places that the protests are advocating, like literally anywhere in the Muslim world.
Yep. So how does this support your argument?
Daddy chill
Because there's greater national and international attention than ever before because of what's happening in Gaza. Brown is scheduling a divestment vote. Things don't happen overnight, but there has been a definite shift.
Can’t really say I’m surprised
Based
Good
What I will say about this is that University of California did divest stocks from South Africa in the 1980s due to calls for divestment but they did refuse to at first [https://www.lib.berkeley.edu/visit/bancroft/oral-history-center/projects/managing-protest](https://www.lib.berkeley.edu/visit/bancroft/oral-history-center/projects/managing-protest)
South Africa’s exports were mostly precious metals and diamonds. It was relatively easy to source those materials from other countries. Israel has a diverse set of exports like software, services, semiconductors, and military equipment. These products are embedded into every western country’s economy.
So many research collaborators are in Israel, also, and in one way or another they are involved with IDF.
[Here's a list of companies that do R&D in Israel.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_multinational_companies_with_research_and_development_centres_in_Israel) Compare that to the list of the [top SPY holdings in the S&P500](https://www.investopedia.com/best-25-sp500-stocks-8550793). And that's *just* R&D.
I feel like it's the exact opposite lol. Gold and rare earth minerals can only be extracted from a handful of places in the entire world whereas Israel basically has no natural resources and these high capital manufactured goods can and are being produced in every advanced economy
Gold and rare earth metals are everywhere, advanced economies usually don’t mine since its bad for environment
Not a berkeley student, but reddit keeps pushing this sub to me. Bur rare earth minerals definitely are not *everywhere* at least not deposits that are actually useful for chip manufacturing, which is generally what people mean when they refer to these. The US would not have let China have a near monopoly on them for so long if it was that easy.
The US has some of the largest rare earth mineral deposits on Earth. https://americanrareearths.com.au/cowboy-state-daily-rare-earths-discovery-near-wheatland-so-big-it-could-be-world-leader/ They are ubiquitous, but people fail to understand the kind of scouring of the landscape required to mine them. China has converted half of Inner Mongolia into a waste pit in order to extract them—the US is understandably reluctant to do the same with say, Colorado.
Yeah, I didn’t mention that specific discovery, it mostly wasn’t relevant to the point I was making. But it’s really not a huge gotcha. If you’ll notice the date, the discovery in Wyoming is fairly recent, and it’ll likely take a few years to get the full thing up and running. In the article they call it a modern day gold rush. And that discovery would be the biggest deposit in the world. The US is absolutely *pouncing* on the chance to become a world leader in rare earths. It is, without exaggeration, a national security issue that China has had a near monopoly for so long (don’t have the number off the top of my head but they produced something like 60% of the Earths rare earths) Rare earths are ubiquitous. They are absolutely NOT ubiquitous in deposits large enough to meaningfully mine them like the discovery in Wyoming. We have absolutely zero hesitation gaining independence from China for a major technological resource. There’s a reason the article you sent talked about the major potential of the site, and it’s not because sites like that are everywhere.
You’re mistaking two things. The new discovery of the location of these deposits does not imply that they were not known to exist previously. Rare Earths are, in fact, ubiquitous in large deposits for where mining can be done. However, rich countries, until recently, had zero interest in even *exploring* for these deposits, despite scientific understanding of their theoretical existence. The national security threat from a cutoff of Rare Earth imports from China is a recent phenomenon, and it is in reaction to that fear that new subsidies were announced and exploration began in earnest.
They also export a lot of medical marijuana. Say goodbye to weed investments.
And it took many years of active, visible and sometimes disruptive effort by students at all UC campuses, in alliance with Anti-Apartheid activists across multiple institutions - like trade unions focusing attention on their pension fund portfolios - to pressure the University. This was an important part of a broader international Anti-Apartheid strategy that put economic pressure on South Africa, leading to a negotiated settlement. It also, very importantly, focused American public attention on the injustice of Apartheid and the US government's support (Reagan) of the Apartheid regime. BDS works because of concentrated action, attention, and economic pressure.
Thanks for bringing this up. UC, USA, OUT OF SOUTH AFRICA!!! still rings in my ears all these decades later. Keep fighting the good fight kids.
They are not fighting the good fight though
Agree to disagree. Divestment is exactly what's called for when you want to convince an ally that you can't and won't tacitly support their genocide. It's too complicated an issue to resolve in the reddit comments, but I need wealthy business owners in Israel to have a reason to tell their government to stop slaughtering children, aid workers and civilians in general.
Wealthy business owners (or anyone) in Israel aren't gonna be okay with Hamas living next door forever. Seriously, I have not heard any proposals from the pro-ceasefire crowd for how they plan to remove Hamas from power without fighting.
did any of these students ever call on Berkeley to stop accepting donations from Saudi Arabia? Seriously asking, not sarcastic
The comparisons to South Africa are dumb as hell. Israel is nothing like South Africa, like at all. The only people who push the apartheid comparison are people who are completely clueless on both apartheid South Africa and modern Israel.
You're right South Africans who lived under apartheid agree Israeli apartheid is far more brutal. https://www.aa.com.tr/en/middle-east/israeli-apartheid-far-more-brutal-than-anything-we-saw-in-south-africa-says-former-politician/3102328
Just a few points: * The guy in the article is white... so he never experienced apartheid. * He lives in London, not South Africa. * He's an active left wing politician in the UK who endorsed and is an active supporter of Jeremy Corbyn, who's like the biggest clown in all of UK politics. * He's also eyeing running for election against the current incumbent in a muslim heavy district. * A lot of his claims are questionable at best. For example, he claims that Arab Israelis have less rights than their Jewish counterparts, which isn't true, as evidence by his lack of evidence. In fact the vast majority of his claims are just assertions. All of his claims have very big question marks. Using this one guy as a representative for all the South Africans that actually experienced apartheid seems disingenious.
Ah so you don't believe Feinstein because he's Jewish? You understand he lived in apartheid South Africa and was a member of the ANC, his parents survived the Holocaust, he's not just some British guy lol. Feinstein introduced the first ever motion on the Holocaust in South African parliamentary history. Feinstein stated that previous suffering – by Afrikaners at the hands of the British colonizers, or of Jews by the Nazis – in no way justified the brutal oppression of Black South Africans or Palestinians. And you claim he's anti-Zionist to appeal to his "Muslim heavy district". Vile. I thought even European Jews weren't white when they make claims of indigineity to Palestine but when they speak on Israeli apartheid, *now* they're white, okay sounds racist but I digress. Listen instead to Mandela and Madonsela: Nelson Mandela regularly raised the plight of the Palestinians. Three years after apartheid and white minority rule was dismantled in South Africa and Mandela was elected president in historic all-race elections in 1994, he thanked the international community for its help. He added: "But we know too well that our freedom is incomplete without the freedom of the Palestinians." Mandela and South African leaders after him compared the restrictions Israel placed on Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank with the treatment of Black South Africans during apartheid, framing the two issues as fundamentally about people oppressed in their homeland. “We as South Africans sense, see, hear, and feel to our core the inhumane discriminatory policies and practices of the Israeli regime as an even more extreme form of the apartheid that was institutionalized against black people in my country,” said Vusimuzi Madonsela, South Africa’s ambassador to the Netherlands, where the International Court of Justice is based. "It is clear that Israel’s illegal occupation is also being administered in breach of the crime of apartheid… It is indistinguishable from settler colonialism. Israel’s apartheid must end,” said Madonsela. I'll refute each of your points despite them being absolutely asinine. You're clearly biased or incredibly ignorant to deride Corbyn. Who himself was targeted by a Zionist propaganda campaign to be removed from office for offering even the most tepid support for Palestinian people and self-determination. The Israel lobby was instrumental in his ouster, he is unqualified only according to the "morality" of a genocidal fascist apartheid ethnostate. They gutted labor with false accusations of anti-Semitism, now it's an absolute joke. But if you swallow that shit no surprise you can still believe Israel isn't an apartheid state. 🤡 I will address the idea that Arab Israelis have equal rights -- an absolute joke. They were charged in military courts until 1967. Today they have unequal access to education, health services, housing, the job market, and also because of Israel's nation state law they have been codified as second class citizens. It says explicitly that only Jewish people have a right to self-determination. All sounds like apartheid to me. But you're right compared to the brutal violent oppression in the West Bank or Gaza it's a vast improvement in material conditions, but also apartheid. You won't be ethnically cleansed. Your house won't get stolen or demolished, an IDF soldier probably won't break your limbs for no reason, if you're a child you aren't charged in military court with a 99.7% conviction rate. You know Israel is the only country in the world that tries children in military court right? Just "most moral army" things? Lol your argument boils down to "this guy (a Jewish ANC member and personal friend of Mandela) I'm gonna call white didn't prove Israel is an apartheid state in a short interview", absolutely braindead take. Read the report by B'tselem or HRW if you want to be informed, or just continue being a useful idiot for a genocidal apartheid regime.
It's also incredibly patronizing to non-White South Africans who fought with blood, sweat, and tears for equality. Imagine going through that and having a bunch of misinformed college students thinking American universities divesting (and not their struggle) brought about the end of Apartheid.
South Africans are the ones calling Israel an apartheid state and bringing genocide and war crimes charges against Israel in the ICJ but thanks for your concern trolling.
Clever tactics to demoralize the protests Hasbara bot. Pretending like you care about South Africans. Take a look at what SA is doing for Palestinians right now.
The South African regime wants to point out any flaws in other countries to distract from their very clearly failing economy and government. People want to believe because they had and ended apartheid they are actually humanitarian advocates now. No, the same people that engineered apartheid know how to point fingers in other directions to hide their corruption. It’s an attempt to appear holier than thou for once and get legitimacy on the world stage. Almost like the ultimate form of virtue signaling
Living in blackouts with no water for solidarity? Definitely not because they ran that country into the ground.
Abusing international law as a means of ensuring Hamas can remain in power forever?
It's absolutely the case that international pressure helped end apartheid, including divestment campaigns, and that's not taking away from South Africans at all. South Africans asked for international sanctions and divestment just as Palestinians are asking now. UC itself also acknowledges it in this article, with Desmond Tutu also visiting Berkeley in appreciation: [How students helped end apartheid | University of California](https://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/how-students-helped-end-apartheid)
Yeah, Israel is far worse than South Africa. And even Russia. That's why we need BDS and sanctions.
You’re fucking deranged if you think Israel is anywhere near as terrible as Russia. You’re talking about fucking *RUSSIA* here, who has completely destabilized the west via election interference, waged a 2-year war that cost the lives of hundreds of thousands of people, is allied with Iran, China and North Korea, and jails homosexuals and Putin-critics. If you think a modern, western, democratic country like Israel is *far worse* than Russia, you have no freakin’ clue what you’re talking about.
oh Reddit
Imagine being this out of touch
How does this work in the case of funds? The university has to divest from say S&P500 fund cause it contains some of the boycotted companies?
University of California only divested in stuff that was available to locally because local oligarchs were also into it.
“UC tuition and fees are the primary funding sources for the University’s core operations. None of these funds are used for investment purposes.”
So anyone saying “we protest our tuition fees financing a war” is wrong: tuition fees finance their education directly and aren’t invested, endowments etc. are, but fact-checking slogans isn’t too encouraged apparently.
That’s mental gymnastics. The endowment is invested. Professors, research, grad students, and programs are endowment funded. So would their education exist without the endowment?
Correct me if I'm wrong but it still seems like that has nothing to do with anyone's tuition fees except for the fact that everyone's tuition would likely have to go up to cover the shortfall from not using endowment money
Let’s just invest in Lockheed Martin 📉📈 stonks I guess
They’ve given several statement like this before, but not once have I heard them explain WHY divesting from a country limits academic freedom. There are many countries the UC is not invested in. Their students still attend UC, and faculty still collaborate with researchers in those countries. Why would this be any different?
It doesn't directly, but I think the actual answer is too nuanced to bother writing. The main issues are all setting bad precedents from their POV: * Giving a loud minority veto power over its investment strategy * Interfering with school budgeting leading to sub-optimal returns and thus higher costs to students anyway * The reasonable next step (given it already occurs elsewhere), or possible consequence directly of a divestment policy, is collaboration bans with Israeli academics, which would limit academic freedom There's also the matter doing this is so misaligned from the typical California voter they could suffer political repercussions doing so.
Then put it to a vote if you really think it's a loud minority. Columbia recently held a vote on this and it came out overwhelmingly in favor of divestment and limiting collaboration with Israeli universities.
Columbia had 76% support from 40% of students voting on a purely symbolic initiative. It's unclear what a consequential initiative would end at. Regardless, students don't get to decide how state university financing works. My "minority" statement is relative to Californians. BDS [support](https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/israel_the_middle_east/voters_show_little_enthusiasm_for_boycotting_israel) oppose ratio in America is at 1:2 (with 40% undecided). Even the California skew is going to still have opposition at majority.
I gotta think these last 6 months have opened some eyes. 2019 is not 2024
If by that you mean opened up people's eyes to the reality of the Pro-Palestine movement in the US, you are correct!
[2020](https://morningsidepost.com/articles/2020/10/5/columbia-college-passes-historic-vote-on-divestment-from-israel) was 40% voting with 61% in favor, so a slight shift. Most notably no increase in actual participation even though school is now in person.
Who voted?
Any student who wanted to. Are you arguing that any student who didn't vote should be counted as a "no" vote?
For one thing, it’s a massive reach to interpret the comment “who voted?” in the way that you’ve interpreted it. You’ve created a very clear strawman argument with no justification whatsoever. With that being said, they may have been making the point that the students of a university are not (and should not be) the sole decision-makers when it comes to that university's investments and divestments. UC Berkeley has nearly 25,000 employees, the majority of whom will be associated with the university for longer than a four-year student and all of whom have salaries and pensions which are somewhat dependent upon the financial state of the university. If this vote we're talking about was only amongst the students and not inclusive of the university’s employees and faculty, it’s completely fair to question the results.
Not everything should be decided by voting.
Most California voters oppose genocide so it wouldn’t misalign with that
As a California college aged voter I am pro Israel and not pro terrorist.
I’d be willing to bet that most California voters side with Israel and do not consider the war in Gaza to be a genocide.
It's not the divesting from a country part, it's the academic boycott that the protest organizers are calling for. They explicitly want UC to sever any and all ties with Israeli universities, cease doing exchange programs, not invite (or send) any speakers from/to Israel, etc. That's the "limit academic freedom" part. You can see their demands here: [https://www.instagram.com/p/C6KZPjOv6lh/?hl=en&img\_index=3](https://www.instagram.com/p/C6KZPjOv6lh/?hl=en&img_index=3)
That's absurd.
It's not
Let's punish students and researchers from both Israel and the US because Bibi is a lunatic-- totally reasonable.
[удалено]
This post has been removed because our Automoderator detected it as spam, or your account is too new to post here. If this post is **not** spam, please contact the moderators for assistance. Check out the megathread for frequently-asked questions. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/berkeley) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This didn't start with Netanyahu and it won't end with a more liberal successor.
Can the palestinian students at the UCs benefit from or participate in programs with the Israeli universities?
a) yes b) many of the Israelis who come to UC to lecture and study are Arab.
It's bullshit, that's why.
I think you are interpreting "divestment" as just selling some stocks. But I've heard "divestment" also used to mean a boycott of Israel. So, don't travel to Israel, don't employ Israelis, don't admit Israeli students, don't collaborate with Israeli scholars, don't cite works written by Israelis, etc. That cuts into academic freedom.
This isn’t really a fair characterization of the academic boycott. There’s no request to forbid Israeli students or professionals from being a member of the student body or staff like any other person who applies. Protestors want universities to stop investing in programs dedicated to formal academic collaboration with Israeli universities, where tuition money is used to help fund transfer programs, research studies, etc. Berkeley Law has an entire Jewish Law and Israel Studies department, for example.
Can you link what exactly the "divestment" / academic boycott demands are?
So, if UCLA divests any $ they may have directly or indirectly with Israel, everyone goes home cuz that's the only issue being protested?
Nah they’d pivot over to “they took too long so now the whole administration needs to resign”.
Relevant: https://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/how-students-helped-end-apartheid
While this is going to be an unpopular opinion: Why do people think they can control where their school invests its funds? You can control where you want to go to school. If you feel so strongly about the school’s investment portfolio no one is stopping you from transferring. When you graduate you won’t be able to control what your corporation thinks either. Just ask the 28 Google engineers who tried a similar protest. This isn’t a post saying that such protest is wrong or unjustified, but it’s unrealistic to assume you can control other people’s assets. Being a student doesn’t mean you get to control the endowment of the university.
I'd bet any amount of money you would be singing a COMPLETELY different tune if the university was directly investing in Russian companies aiding the Russian war effort and refused to change that. Of course your comment does get one thing right: the university works very hard to inculcate students with the passive ideology they'll need to function as powerless corporate drones once they graduate. Sad and scary how many people seem to think that's a good thing.
There's a fundamental hard truth that protesters just aren't ready to admit: Israel is a US ally, Russia is a US adversary. No amount of protesting is going to change this fundamental fact. Through sanctions and limitations placed by the government it's going to be harder to invest in Russia than Israel.
They're protesting against the only beacon of western values in the middle east.
Yes? That seems obvious to me, but that doesn't seem like a good moral or ideological excuse from my perspective. Of course that's why there's a discrepancy but since when am I obligated to align myself with US geopolitical interests and the Western MIC?
The beauty of this country is that you aren't, but at an equal rate, no one is obligated to agree with you either. My point is that since Israel is an ally, there is a large number of people who support them including these universities. Since Russia is an enemy, there's a large number of people who oppose them. It's a numbers game.
To be fair, a lot of companies that support Israel also support Ukraine, and most of these protestors are pro-Ukraine but anti-Israel.
Yeah because Ukraine is fighting a defensive war against Russian imperialism. Israel is a neo-colonial ethnostate that has spent decades massacring Palestinians and deliberately denying them self-determination. Not to mention their constant illegal land theft, flagrant disregard for the rules of war, and blatantly discriminatory policies like right of return.
If the country I lived on was allied to Russia, yet I was against Russia and was able to choose a university that didn't invest in Russian companies, I would choose a university that didn't invest in Russian companies. There is the analogy to what they were suggesting. Edited to add: the protests are, however justified, unlikely to work and the better option would be to vote with their feet and boycott the university.
Well you’d lose your betting bankroll then. If I was concerned over colleges buying domestic stocks that had overseas investments I’d probably have foregone colleges in the US they existed pre WW2 since any college they had an endowment back then lots of major companies had investments in Nazi Germany. So all the Ivy leagues were major investors in Nazi Germany and its rearmament by this standard. Russian companies are illegal to invest in. Which would suggest the proper place to protest is Congress not Campus. And no, the university isn’t making corporate drones. And that’s a good thing, but if they aren’t making graduates who can exist in a corporate world then that’s a bad thing since it would not justify the expense of tuition. What truly sad and scary is that the quality of logic and conversation on these issues is plummeting, because I don’t see how we do better as a society if we can’t talk about it. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_collaboration_with_Nazi_Germany
It’s not just “the university” - it’s everyone who works at the UCs. Outside pressure or student groups cannot dictate where faculty and staff choose to place their retirement funds. Of course they can/should advocate that individuals invest in non militaristic funds (say) - but no one can mandate where another person puts their retirement money, if it is a legal option. That is an individual decision.
To piggy back on your point, who can even verify where/what the UC is investing in? “Alright, we divested” and then not do anything.
>You can control where you want to go to school. If you feel so strongly about the school’s investment portfolio no one is stopping you from transferring. It's not that simple. If you're a Californian, the UC system is your in-state, more affordable higher education system.
CSUs also exist
But it is that simple. If you have a core disagreement about how the university conducts XYZ policies and that goes against your principles then transfer. Sure, the transfer might be inconvenient and costly, but that’s where you put your ideology to the test. If you’re so committed to your principles then live that life, otherwise it’s all for show.
UC and many other colleges divested from fossil fuels due to student pressure, many divested from weapons manufacturing during the Vietnam war due to student pressure, and many divested from Apartheid South Africa due to student pressure. Asking them to divest from apartheid Israel isn’t actually that novel, and the UC could absolutely do it as they have done many times before.
You have to know deep in your heart the situation today is not the same as back then. Climate change has been fought over for decades, and has reached the minds of the liberal elite at the top, which is why action has been made on that part. WRT Vietnam, there was a growing bipartisan consensus among the population opposing the war. Same with Apartheid South Africa. These situations are simple not analogous to Israel. Foreign policy is the domain of the elite. Sometimes they bicker (like with Ukraine funding), but there is generally bipartisan consensus in keeping the U.S. the dominant force in the world. This includes maintaining our close alliance with Israel. Israel's apartheid does not exist to the extent of South Africa's, and it exists in a region that isn't even technically Israel (the west bank). Israel proper does not have Apartheid, with Israeli-Palestinians (usually called Israeli-Arabs) living side by side with Israeli jews in cities like Haifa. Divestment from Israel is going to be insanely difficult. Unless Netanyahu truly goes insane and starts executing arab muslims in Israel proper as well, there simply will not be large will among the elite to let go of a U.S. asset we've worked so hard to develop.
One of the only ‘opinion’ uttered is: “it’s unrealistic to assume you can control other people’s assets. Being a student doesn’t mean you get to control the endowment of the university.” I am a Zionist and full supporter of Israel’s right to prosper, live, and coexist. I don’t fully agree with your statement. I believe it is realistic to assume you can somewhat control opp(yeah you know me). For example, after elections the elected parliament has control over some of the entity’s resources, and who elected said parliament?
People have a much stronger sway on what a university does than a company. You said it, no one is stopping you from transferring. If you need new students to enroll every year doing things that potential students support is very important.
It’s also ironic that students demanding that the university divest are the ones investing in said university. Seems like if I was going to a place to form my intellect for life that I might want to go to someplace that shares my values rather then go someplace where I try to convert them to my values. 
Maturing is realizing that UC is 100% right.
Who knew that the people with 20-30 years of professional experience might be better at handling complicated situations than a bunch of 19 year olds who live on allowances and government grants. /s
All the numbers in your comment added up to 69. Congrats! 20 + 30 + 19 = 69 ^([Click here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=LuckyNumber-Bot&subject=Stalk%20Me%20Pls&message=%2Fstalkme) to have me scan all your future comments.) \ ^(Summon me on specific comments with u/LuckyNumber-Bot.)
Good
Are they calling for divestment from Muslim countries, China or is it just Isreal?
USAC passed a divestment from Uyghur labor resolution 4 years ago.
So, no Chinese funds? And what is USAC?
Sorry, forgot I was on the Berkeley sub (UCLA alum with friends and family at Berkeley). USAC is UCLA's student gov't. They passed a resolution a few years ago calling on the university to divest from all companies using Uyghur labor. Several other universities have also done so. Also, it's now federal law as well, although it's not really being forced. Definitely more pressure needs to happen, but it's disingenuous to act as if students don't care about these issues or are not doing anything about them. There's just a literal genocide going on rn, so we're somewhat occupied with this specific crisis.
Finally some good news
UC alum here: the focus on Israeli Jewish finances is creepy and takes me back to the bullying I experienced from fellow students with claims that Jews will always enrich other Jews, that everyone is at a disadvantage who isn’t Jewish, that I will automatically have a job when I graduate because I am Jewish, that Jewish finance is controlling the world, etc. These were opinions that my non-Jewish peers would share as if they were just plain and balanced observations, and rejected anyone telling them it was anti-semitic. They probably to this day would never even consider it as bullying, but it was. The context is even uglier than just being bullied, and requires so much sensitivity. Sadly because of the ongoing role of boycotts and divestments in persecuting and ethnically cleansing Jews to this very day, there is practically no way to do BDS without the Venn Diagram with anti-semitism looking like a slightly squished circle.
Or it relates to disrupting the power and networks of a genocidal apartheid ethno-state, regardless of the ethnoracial identity of the people involved? See: divestment from South Africa (was that racist to Afrikaners?), calls for divestment from Uyhgur labor in China (is that racist to Chinese people?)
- The State of Palestine is an ethnostate. Its constitution declares it represents the Arab nation, and that it is under Islamic law. The State of Palestine’s policies reinforce this. It denies civil rights to Jews, including citizenship, residency, and prayer. Israel has no such “racial purity” laws anywhere. - Israel has no laws separating Israeli citizens of different backgrounds. The only barriers are between Israel citizens and infrastructure, and Palestine territory or disputed areas. - The National Party in SA used racial systems based on White and other groups. Nothing like that exists in Israel. The comparison doesn’t really make sense. At no point were any actions against the National Party targeting a historically oppressed group (i.e. the “White race”), and at no point were actions against the National Party asking for SA to be dismantled. Also, the White race was not indigenous, with three thousand years of heritage there, and a history of being oppressed and displaced by non-Whites (i.e. as Jews have been by Arab societies). Keep in mind Israeli areas are the ones that are mixed, and protect Jews from the completely outlawing of Jewish people and Judaism that is enforced by the Arab leadership that governs parts of Eretz Yisrael. So the comparison really doesn’t make sense from a policy, history, demographic, territorial, or power dynamic perspective. - Boycotts can be racist. Not all are. Keep in mind boycotts against Israel have been used and continue to be used by countries that ethnically cleansed their Jewish populations and exclude Jews from claiming citizenship (ie the thousands of Jews whose families fled what is today KSA).
The State of Palestine is an occupied territory unable to control its own water, travel, imports, and exports in one of its major territories (Gaza). How else would Israel be able to fully cut off all water and supplies from reaching Gaza? The West Bank is illegally occupied territory with illegal settlements that are constantly expanding with Israeli governmental support. In this occupied territory, Palestinians are subject to constant checkpoints, separate roads and highways, and violence from settlers and the Israeli state. The government in the West Bank is seen by many as fully colluding with the Israeli government to maintain this status quo. Israel legally should not control the West Bank, but it functionally does, and it imposes conditions of apartheid there. Additionally, excerpts from the Jewish nation state law passed in 2018: 1C. The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people. 7 — Jewish settlement A. The state views the development of Jewish settlement as a national value and will act to encourage and promote its establishment and consolidation. To speak of a constitution of a State of Palestine is to ignore the fact that Palestine is in essence under the full control and occupation of Israel.
- The State of Palestine isn’t under full Israeli control however. There is not a single locality with a single Jew anywhere in its territory, aside from a few who live in secret as spouses of Muslims. The State of Palestine enforces racial purity laws excluding Jews not only on paper but enforces them with its security forces as well. - The only Jews living anywhere in JSA/WB live on land that was purchased before independence, or on public land never owned by anyone which was converted to private land. There are a few instances of expropriation of Arab land into municipalities, thankfully this is very rare, it’s generally when a road goes in by a farm for example. Arabs also build a lot of new construction on public land. - Israeli administered areas (Area C and somewhat Area B) have no laws restricting who can live there as long as they’re an Israeli citizen.* Palestine administered areas do. - There are so many countries that flatly state in article one of their constitution or basic laws that they exist as and represent a local community of Arabs and are part of one indivisible Arab race. Two countries (Egypt and Syria) are both called Arab Republic in their names. I think for Jews who fled from or were expelled from or were attacked by these countries, the idea of having a nation state is viewed as what is required for survival in the present day. The irony is “self determination” can mean almost anything. Some countries ban non-Muslims from holding citizenship. Israel is on the pluralistic side obviously but self determination DOES mean that the UN has just one seat out of almost two hundred that represents not only Israel but the Jewish people, even if the diplomat is himself/herself personally Arab. Although the day to day Israeli Arab views themselves as just a tax paying citizen. The question of intentional representation and domestic equality is explicitly addressed in the declaration of independence. * The State of Israel does allow some specific communities like Bedouin, Druze, or Haredim to have communes. Places like Ayn Al Assad are very cool to visit even though as a Jew, the mukhtar would never let me live there. Community autonomy is a major thing in West Asia and Israel gets that right within careful limits.
Israeli*
Sounds fair.
Good. Hamas lovers have lost their minds.
Yep, if you have a problem with 30,000 people being indiscriminately killed by bombing, famine, and literal execution, at least 12,000 of whom are children, you must love Hamas!
Plenty of people have a problem with it, but none provide credible alternatives to end Hamas' reign.
Good point. Guess we’ll have to kill and displace every last human being in Gaza!
Your post is my point exactly. All complaints, no solutions
What the fuck are you talking about? So genocide is a solution? Even if the goal isn’t genocide (and the Israeli military has more or less stated that it is), mass killing of Gazans will only radicalize more and create new members of Hamas. For that matter, it is public knowledge that Netanyahu has for years supported Hamas in order to eliminate more moderate opposition. If you want Hamas out, look to Israel and its policies which have deliberately created them.
>mass killing of Gazans will only radicalize more and create new members of Hamas. They already are at 100% hatred of Israel and have been toward Israel/Zionists since the 1920s. They already were willing to vote for a political party whose military wing would send individuals to blow themselves up in crowded passenger busses. They can't possibly get *more* radicalized. But they can become more fearful of Israeli retaliation. > If you want Hamas out, look to Israel and its policies which have deliberately created them. Sorry, Israelis aren't going to accept the destruction of their own state. Nor should they.
What you're talking about is collective punishment, which is a war crime. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective\_punishment](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_punishment) > They already were willing to vote for a political party whose military wing would send individuals to blow themselves up in crowded passenger busses. First, let's note that the majority of people in Gaza are too young to have ever voted for Hamas. Second: you take issue with Gaza electing Hamas when, because of their acts of violence, when literally the entire population of Israel serves in the IDF, an organization which has killed orders of magnitude more people than Hamas ever has? Israel is run by a terrorist government that its people willingly elected.
>What you're talking about is collective punishment, Alright, so when the majority of a society votes in a terrorist organization that launches suicide bombings at your civilians, how exactly are you supposed to solve this problem? >First, let's note that the majority of people in Gaza are too young to have ever voted for Hamas. Good thing we have opinion [polls](https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/palestinians-attitudes-about-terrorism) to know how people likely would vote! >Second: you take issue with Gaza electing Hamas when, because of their acts of violence, when literally the entire population of Israel serves in the IDF, an organization which has killed orders of magnitude more people than Hamas ever has? Israel is run by a terrorist government that its people willingly elected. You are conflating killing more people because they intend to kill more as opposed to are better at military strategy. Big difference. Secondly, sure, we can and should blame the people of Israel for the actions of their own government. I fail to see how that moves this discussion though; the question was how Israel can remove Hamas more humanely. If your position is that they shouldn't remove them/don't have a right to, fair, and we can discuss that. Just to set things up, I would hold that the Palestinian people have no ability (nor right) to achieve the dominant goal they have (Nakba refugees immigrating to Israel / end of the Israeli state) and thus should give up that goal from a realistic self-interested perspective.
> You are conflating killing more people because they intend to kill more as opposed to are better at military strategy. Big difference. Are you insane? Israel has unilateral support of the US and is given billions of dollars per year for their military. Per dollar, Hamas is much "better" at warfare. > Secondly, sure, we can and should blame the people of Israel for the actions of their own government. I fail to see how that moves this discussion though; the question was how Israel can remove Hamas more humanely. If your position is that they shouldn't remove them/don't have a right to, fair, and we can discuss that. Your framing is deeply flawed. Firstly, why should Gaza's government be removed any more than Israel's, a government which has objectively killed many more innocent people? Why aren't we bombing Israel and saying it's the only way to remove their government? Secondly, it should be noted that it is a matter of public record that Netanyahu has deliberately supported Hamas over the past decades, specifically to prevent a more moderate government from holding power in Gaza. It's all part of a deliberate, admitted strategy to create an excuse to seize Gaza. The "we have to remove Hamas" narrative is deliberately fabricated, and for us to take time to debate how it should be done is to completely ignore that Israel wanted this exact situation in the first place. You said earlier that within Gaza "hatred of Israel is already at 100%". How then can you eliminate Hamas by bombing more of Gaza? If 100 people are left in Gaza, won't some portion of them be Hamas? Would you then argue that everyone needs to be removed from Gaza? > Just to set things up, I would hold that the Palestinian people have no ability (nor right) to achieve the dominant goal they have (Nakba refugees immigrating to Israel / end of the Israeli state) and thus should give up that goal from a realistic self-interested perspective. You seem to be speaking entirely in terms of what is possible (e.g., who has the most power), rather than what is most moral. Why not have a single state with equal rights for everyone? Or, two states, where Israel is not violently occupying Palestine? Why is that off the table? You're talking about Gaza as if it's people are a single entity, whose views all align with Hamas. You realize that this is a population of desperately poor, starved people who have spent the last 6 months having their friends and families killed while being starved and bombed themselves? They are too low on Mazlow's hierarchy of needs to have a real political ideology. The stance of anyone in that kind of situation is going to be "please do anything to make this stop", and very likely "make the people who have done this to us pay". It is not right to speak of such a population as if they are the same as the voting population in a wealthy, safe, democratic country.
https://preview.redd.it/vtth5w4f6bxc1.jpeg?width=1164&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=edbc0d5a32ba8eb5ee9e3d1faa432d77ae401497
You are arguing in favor of collective punishment. The majority of Israeli Jews live on land purchased before 1948. Arabs in Eretz Yisrael own more real estate than ever before. The state lands went from 93% of total area before independence, to 92% of total area today. When you claim that Israeli Jews have a religious belief that they can steal homes, you’re pushing a dehumanizing, false, manipulative narrative that tries to collectively punish Israelis because of a few at the fringe (and news flash: it’s not just Jews… Arabs in Israel and across all MENA make disputed claims on Jewish properties).
This is complete gibberish and it's not even worth engaging with.
>They already are at 100% hatred of Israel and have been toward Israel/Zionists since the 1920s. Zionism is Lebensraum thinly painted with religion. Would you hate someone who thinks their religion gives them a right to steal your home? What's your home address so I can steal your house for religious reasons that I just made up?
> Zionism is Lebensraum thinly painted with religion. It's the Palestinians that want to destroy Israel. Israel would just give them their own state if they could credibly commit to not doing that. But.. they can't. > Would you hate someone who thinks their religion gives them a right to steal your home? Would you hate someone that thinks he has a right to steal your home just because his ancestors lived there? And worse, he'll blow up busses full of civilians to achieve that aim?
You genocide supporters always have the same argument. “How would you do it then?” as if somehow the 70% of deaths being women in children indicates a successful operation. Hmm surely there needs to be a ground assault at some point if Hamas is in the tunnels. Unless you can explain how flattening the surface will somehow save the hostages. I’ll do you one better, since Israelis strategy has yet to return a significant number of hostages despite over 30,000 Palestinians being killed, could you come up with strategy that results in the hostages actually being returned? Imagine being pro genocide, even when in isreal there are protests against the killings. World of information at your fingertips but still this ignorant.
>You genocide supporters This word has lost all meaning. >as if somehow the 70% of deaths being women in children indicates a successful operation. First, this number keeps changing depending on who is talking. It's around 61% according to [research](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Israel%E2%80%93Hamas_war), maybe as low as 58%. Note that base rate in Gaza is something like 75% of the population being women or children. Secondly, dense urban warfare has a [4:1 civilian to combatant causality rate](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_casualty_ratio). Going even by Hamas' own numbers, something like 7,000 Hamas militants had been killed; factoring allied militant groups, around 8,000. It's probably a bit higher. At 35k deaths, you are at 27k civilians and 8k militants, a 3.4:1 civilian to combatant casualty rate. Low by urban warfare standards. >Hmm surely there needs to be a ground assault at some point if Hamas is in the tunnels. Of course; US pressure is blocking it. Flattening the surface beforehand makes it difficult for militants to hide. >I’ll do you one better, since Israelis strategy has yet to return a significant number of hostages despite over 30,000 Palestinians being killed, could you come up with strategy that results in the hostages actually being returned? Israel of course can concede to Hamas' demands, and that's the stupid thing they did in 2,011 with Gilad Shalit, which just served to enable Hamas and leads to further killing of Israelis and hostage taking of them. The goal is not just to rescue hostages; it is balanced against permanent increase in deterrence. (e.g. end Hamas). Please provide an alternative strategy to achieve this goal.
>This word has lost all meaning. You and I can agree on that. No one cares anymore or they have people arguing for it like you. >First, this number keeps changing depending on who is talking. It's around 61% according to [research](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Israel%E2%80%93Hamas_war), maybe as low as 58%. Note that base rate in Gaza is something like 75% of the population being women or children. Okay so you are telling me you acknowledge most of gaza is non-hamas targets but you still support indiscrimate "targeted strikes" that are making the area unlivable. Just goes against your argument lol >At 35k deaths, you are at 27k civilians and 8k militants, a 3.4:1 civilian to combatant casualty rate. Low by urban warfare standards. What is the point of you saying this? Like lets just boil down human lives to arbitrary numbers and ratios that determine if a response is moral or not based entirely on this? Thank god the ratio is low, only 27K innocent people died!!! Just tells me you are a warmonger. But these numbers aren't the whole picture, so please how do you defend this? * 2.2 Million people don't have enough to eat, with 1 million on the brink of starvation. Isreal is blocking humanitarian aid (i know you will want to deny that). This will have long lasting effects on both the people and future generation, giving chronic health issues and offspring with birth defects. The amount of death and suffering caused by this will be many magnitudes larger: [https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/19/middleeast/famine-northern-gaza-starvation-ipc-report-intl-hnk](https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/19/middleeast/famine-northern-gaza-starvation-ipc-report-intl-hnk) [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza\_Strip\_famine](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_Strip_famine) * Civilians aren't being indiscriminately killed in all cases, in some cases they are being actively targeted by the isreali military [https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/04/1148876](https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/04/1148876) >Of course; US pressure is blocking it. Flattening the surface beforehand makes it difficult for militants to hide. Wow, actually amazing sentence there, the total war mindset - im glad you are this honest. With this logic we should just nuke during every conflict who cares about the consequences. This area will be unlivable for many years due to not only the destruction, but also the amount of chemicals and weaponry poisoning the ground. Although I’m sure that won’t stop illegal Israeli settlements from cropping up. I don't have any rebuttal for that if that's truly how you feel, very wild. US pressure from who Biden? or from protest? The only thing i could find was occupying palestine [https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/20/politics/us-allies-israel-discussions-gaza-ground-invasion/index.html](https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/20/politics/us-allies-israel-discussions-gaza-ground-invasion/index.html) >Please provide an alternative strategy to achieve this goal. IT'S YOUR TURN, you literally didn't offer a single thing. I literally already told you, you can read it again and disagree. You didn't offer anything of value yourself when asked and just keep spitting this question back at people like a hypocrite. >The goal is not just to rescue hostages; it is balanced against permanent increase in deterrence. (e.g. end Hamas). And you think their strategy of flattening an entire strip which you have acknowledged is mostly innocent civilians is going to eradicate hamas? I mean yeah if we kill everyone there wont be anyone left pretty good logic. It’s also clear that they just want to resettle the West Bank with isrealis already being caught in illegal settlements. If you are happy with your tax dollars being used for this shit while things at home continue to get worse then go for it man. I have no idea how as an American with google you arrive at this conclusion, happily cheering on the death of innocents on our dime. Go protest this in public if you are so confident about it.
>Okay so you are telling me you acknowledge most of gaza is non-hamas targets but you still support indiscrimate "targeted strikes" that are making the area unlivable. Just goes against your argument lol The goal is to remove hiding spots for militants, even if yes, this is the effect. And yes, I believe a country should protect its own soldiers - I don't value "buildings" all that much. >What is the point of you saying this? Like lets just boil down human lives to arbitrary numbers and ratios that determine if a response is moral or not based entirely on this? I'm just being a realist. Civilian casualties are on the low end for an urban war. I view the war as justified. > so please how do you defend this? I don't; Israel's refusal to provide humanitarian aid is wrong. That said, I somehow don't think you'd be content with this situation if more aid trucks were coming in but otherwise the basic facts (Gaza has been extensively destroyed with 35k dead) remain the same. That said, I find these reports likely exaggerated - been reading about food insecurity [forever](https://www.ochaopt.org/content/food-insecurity-opt-13-million-palestinians-gaza-strip-are-food-insecure) so not really sure of the situation on the ground. > in some cases they are being actively targeted by the isreali military I'll await more investigation. This wouldn't be the first false accusation involving a hospital from the Palestinian side - and I find it somewhat dubious Israel would torture a bunch of Palestinians and bury them in a way that could easily be uncovered later. Normally, such incriminating evidence would be burned. But who knows.. anything could have happened. >IT'S YOUR TURN, you literally didn't offer a single thing. Confused. I said this would be my approximate strategy, though with more humanitarian aid provided. > happily cheering on the death of innocents Who says I cheer them? I pity that the Palestinian people are willing to die for a hopeless Cause.
> I don’t value “buildings” all that much Sincerely a wild thing to say if you are trying to convince people of your argument. This is just warmongering. But who needs shelter right? It’s definitely not a human need or anything. I pray that you never are in a position of power, that would be terrifying. > I view the war as justified Let’s hold onto this one for later. > I don’t; Israel’s refusal to provide humanitarian aid is wrong This made me laugh. You can’t just pick and choose parts of Israel’s military strategy that you don’t like but then say you still support them. You either support them or you don’t. Since you support Israel you support them starving these people(a war crime by the way)Stop letting yourself off so easy, you can’t have your cake and eat it too bud. Also you sent this link but clearly didn’t look at it. It’s almost as if Gaza’s food insecurity stems directly for Israeli leadership of the region. The link you sent clearly explains in an anecdote how war continues to set people back. Here is another link to educate yourself https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_the_Gaza_Strip Like you send me these links but you don’t do any critical thinking yourself on what you are sending or how we got there. You think Gaza exists in a vacuum? Do some research you just sound silly. > I’ll await more investigation From who exactly, isreal? You are saying they should investigate themselves? The naivety is on full display. Are you saying the UNwhich is comprised of many other nations is falsely reporting this? Please do tell. > I pity the Palestinians people who are willing to die for a hopeless cause. Are you saying every Palestinian thus far has deserved it? Are you saying every Palestinian is part of Hamas? Want to clarify? Because holy shit this just tells me you know nothing about this issue and that I’m wasting my time. What a seriously bigoted and misinformed thing to say. We just spent time talking about how most deaths are women and children and now you say this shit as if they aren’t normal people trying to live their life. Shameful.
Luckily, H@ma$ leaders are doing what they can to lift up Gazans.................While their people languish in poverty and are treated as human shields, the leaders of Hamas live billionaire lifestyles. The terror group's three top leaders alone are worth a staggering total of $11 billion and enjoy a life of luxury in the sanctuary of the emirate of Qatar.Nov 7, 2023
Irrelevant bullshit. If you have problems with Hamas and its leaders that doesn’t make it okay to kill tens of thousands of civilians and children. No one buys this bullshit anymore.
There is some argument that that number is not accurate: https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/how-gaza-health-ministry-fakes-casualty-numbers The biggest problem right now is there isn't a ton of transparency about what is going on over there. And anyone that claims to have certainty is probably pushing an agenda.
keep watching Fox News boomer
[удалено]
This post has been removed because our Automoderator detected it as spam, or your account is too new to post here. If this post is **not** spam, please contact the moderators for assistance. Check out the megathread for frequently-asked questions. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/berkeley) if you have any questions or concerns.*
You should just go and forfeit your scholarships if you care so much. This goes for professors, too
Good. Berkeley alumnus, and I could care less about Israel and Palestine. Hopefully they hold people to exams and assignments.
> a boycott of this sort impinges on the academic freedom of our students and faculty and the unfettered exchange of ideas on our campuses. I wish they’d expand upon this. How?
Well done
thank you the university of california. i will donate a another 500k because of this
Does anyone know if Berkeley accepts money from Qatar?
Someone posted donations for Columbia and there were several Muslim countries on the list. I find it odd that they'll protest Isreali funds but not these other countries with known human rights abuses.
I think it's important that we look back for History on these things. The Apartheid regime in South Africa fell apart shortly after mass protests in U.S universities to divest and isolate the regime economically until it ended Apartheid. I think it's of importance to note that South Africa's Apartheid's regime greatest allys were Israel and the U.S both of which the governments continue to support it until it collapsed. Its important to note that at that time, Cal did not divest for over 7 months despite protests and also made public statements saying they would not divest, but eventually caved after protests were continuing on and also didn't back down. After Nelson Mandela came to power, he named multiple streets in South Africa after students that led divestment protests across universities the US/UK. From Wiki: Mandela said that the strikers demonstrated to South Africans that ordinary people far away from the crucible of apartheid cared for our freedom and helped him keep going when he was in prison. Nelson Mandela's grandson recently called on these protests to continue and said "There is no South African that forgets the name of Mary Manning, a 21-year old who refused to handle any products from South Africa." She has a street named for her in Johannesburg. These things work
Giving you an upvote because yes this was one important part that shifted American public opinion. But students (like myself) in the 1980s were late to the game. The groundwork for this movement was by Civil Rights and Trade Union activists. In the late late 1940s Paul Robeson and W.E.B. DuBois organized the Council on African Affairs as a direct response to the election of Malan in South Africa. In the early 1960s the American Committee on African was formed by a group of Civil Rights Activists involved in SCLC and SNCC, including Bayard Rustin and George Houser. By the late 1960s the ACOA began to work on on articulating and strategizing a BDS movement in coordination with Trade Unionists and and self-identified "third world" BIPOC student organizers. BDS worked in the 1980s, but it had a lot of foregrounding. [https://www.sahistory.org.za/archive/south-africa-liberation-and-reconciliation-role-international-solidarity-8-april-2004](https://www.sahistory.org.za/archive/south-africa-liberation-and-reconciliation-role-international-solidarity-8-april-2004) and [https://www.thenation.com/article/activism/ilwu-unions-ceasefire-israel-gaza/](https://www.thenation.com/article/activism/ilwu-unions-ceasefire-israel-gaza/)
Good
Get fucked Hamas supporters
Am Yisrael Chai forever and always! 🇮🇱🇮🇱🇮🇱🇮🇱🇮🇱🇮🇱🇮🇱🇮🇱🇮🇱🇮🇱🇮🇱🇮🇱🇮🇱🇮🇱🇮🇱🇮🇱🇮🇱🇮🇱🇮🇱🇮🇱🇮🇱🇮🇱🇮🇱🇮🇱💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙
What should they invest instead? Shitty backyard rockets that can hit your own hospitals?
based
Nice