posted
I heard the author of this piece on the radio today, speaking about the incident. (Related article)
It's so nice to know that dialogue in one of our finest universities (not to mention my dad's alma mater) occurs in such a . . . polite and reasonable manner. Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't mind a bit of fun in a thread, but I was hoping for some serious discussion as well . . .
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't think you're going to get anything other than agreement that these kinds of tactics are lame regardless of who is using them.
Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ok . . . any comments on what Harvard should do to prevent a recurrence? I haven't come up with any solutions that don't make me a bit queasy. Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Freedom of speech!! I was protesting, and you are violating my rights as an american citizen! Do you see how the CIA SILENCES anyone who tries to point out to others about their sick and wrongful ways? I MUST be right if they are silencing me like this! FREEDOM OF SPEECH DOES NOT EXIST WHEN DEALING WITH THE CIA!!"
Which isn't to say ejecting them was the wrong thing to do, I think they should have been, as well. But thats exactly what I see them doing if they were.
And then running home and posting in their blogs, and on the forums they go to that the CIA was not allowing them to "peacefully" protest.
However, they are being talked about here. So, in that way they are effective.
It was a rather immature way to present their ideas, but these are college kids. Not all people mature at the same rate. Posts: 410 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: I don't actually understand why they WEREN'T.
I found myself thinking the same thing when I read the article.
quote:But thats exactly what I see them doing if they were.
Yes, but I think that's better than letting them stay inside.
This reminds me of a story. One time Bob the Lawyer, myself, and one other good friend, Eric, were living with a couple of guys we didn't really know during a school term. It was their place and we were subletting rooms from their friends. One of the other guys had a friend who shall hereafter be referred to as the Pile of Human Filth (PHF; hygeine was evidently not his strong suit). The PHF used to come over to play video games with his friend and sometimes other people (I should note, here, that all video gaming devices and games were supplied to the living room by Eric, and, when I later procured a GameCube, myself). He would then crash on the couch.
The PHF used to like to wear a black hooded sweatshirt with three red anarchy symbols on the sleeve (yes, this caused me to immediately make value judgments about his intellect and character when I met him, and yes, I'm a bad person). One evening BtL happened to be in the living room at the same time as the PHF and some other people (I was not present), and the subject of anarchy came up. BtL asked the PHF how exactly civilization could be expected to endure (as, presumably, continued availability of electricity for purposes of playing other people's video games was important to the PHF's existence) in the absence of government. The PHF replied that anarchy did not necessarily imply the absence of government. BtL, believing himself to be at least passingly familiar with the definition of the word 'anarchy,' checked it in the dictionary. Indeed, anarchy carries with it a 'no government' stipulation.
"Consider the source," replied the PHF.
Value judgments affirmed. Some people are simply so monumentally stupid that you may as well eject them for heckling despite what they'll say, because no one with half a brain would listen anyway.
I read that three times, and I still have a hard time believing it. Not implying it's not truthful/factual, but... but.. yeah.
Posts: 7954 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
twinky, Anarchy really doesn't neccesitate no government as in the sense of "central bodies that coordinate activities that because of economies of scale or other constraints need to be centralized". Showing how anarchy won't work because it means "no government" is pretty much equivilent to showing how democracy won't work because it will devolve into mob rule. Your avergage "I'm so bad-ass; I hate authority and wear a bunch of anarchy symbols." anarchist most likely doesn't give much thought to the necessary complexity of a potential anarchical system, but not all people who in some way support anarachy are so unthinking as to be stymied by basic arguments like that.
---
I'd be interested to know how many people were actually involved in this disruption. No doubt they were idiots, but in this case, the serious people on any side are holding them up as such. It was gratifying to see the original article writer show how everyone, especially the legitimate progressive student organization that organized an appropriate, responsible protest, were decrying the actions of this group of chuckleheads.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Your avergage "I'm so bad-ass; I hate authority and wear a bunch of anarchy symbols." anarchist most likely doesn't give much thought to the necessary complexity of a potential anarchical system, but not all people who in some way support anarachy are so unthinking as to be stymied by basic arguments like that.
Absolutely. My point was that the sorts of protesters discussed in the article and the PHF have something in common: they're idiots of the same type as those who buy and wear Che Guevara t-shirts while enjoying their first-world middle-class comforts as much as possible.
Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hey, they could have been legacies. As our President has shown, you don't necessarily need good grades or SAT scores to get into the Ivy League.
edit: Or maybe they play football. Here's a conversation some of the guys I hung out with Freshman year had.
Dave: "Hey Rodney, I bet no one could break this window with their head." Rodney: "Oh yeah. *crash*" Me: "Holy crap. Rodney just broke that safety window with his head."
And yes, Rodney was at Penn because he played football.
---
There's plenty of stupidity and immaturity at any college, even *gasp* the Ivies. In this case, as I said, I think it would be important to know how many people were part of the immature hijinks, especially in comparison to the people on all sides that are saying, "That was just stupid and harmful to your cause." This sounds like the jerky fringe, not big, but loud.
posted
I discovered politics at the innocent age of 12, when my friend and I found a stack of Time Magazines in a trashcan by the 7-11. We didn't tell our parents, and we went into my bedroom with them, getting our kicks out of the latest essay on Clintons scandaleous life.
Posts: 9754 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Squick, the estimate I heard yesterday was that there were 50 attendees -- 40 students in the "there for serious reasons" group, and 10 in the "how much of a disturbance can we create" group.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Monkeys]](graemlins/monkeys.gif)
![[Grumble]](graemlins/grumble.gif)
I don't mind a bit of fun in a thread, but I was hoping for some serious discussion as well . . .
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
