• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

BillBrasky Memorial Political Chat Thread

Biff Tannen said:
Why ? These "students" have obviously done the research for us. If the university holds stocks that profit off of this conflict, surely they're making money off of every other conflict. They don't just sit on the sidelines waiting for the the US to start shoveling money at a problem.
Click to expand...
TBF, there is a very active and longstanding movement on college campuses to divest from companies that deal arms and invest in technologies that are used to commit mass atrocities/suppress political action internationally.

I really think that these things that you are saying do not exist do, in fact, exist.
 
Biff Tannen said:
Why ? These "students" have obviously done the research for us. If the university holds stocks that profit off of this conflict, surely they're making money off of every other conflict. They don't just sit on the sidelines waiting for the the US to start shoveling money at a problem.
Click to expand...
I’m not chasing my tail for this weak shit, biff. I know you want so desperately to undermine the legitimacy of these protests by showing the protestors are hypocrites(!) but you don’t have a concise argument, plus who gives a fuck? 30 thousand dead Gazans don’t give a fuck, and being honest you don’t really care either. You just need a reason to oppose protesting, and you’d make one up if you couldn’t find one.
 
bym051d said:
I think this is one.



I don't necessarily think protesting against Israel is hypocritical. I do think it's more socially popular to be part of that movement and less socially popular to be part of the others.
Click to expand...

This is probably the smartest thing you’ve said.
 
Strickland33 said:
That's fair. I'm sorry.

But can you please engage with the point about US-involvement as a necessary condition for domestic protest movements? I'm not plugged in at all really to international movements, but I do read lots of commentary from folks who are advocating against the villains in these other humanitarian crises. They're just not connected directly to US-based investment. I think the "scene" is pretty coherent, but I could be wrong.
Click to expand...

You’ll get the posting while waiting on a haircut version.

I would favor us being more involved in foreign humanitarian events. You can say that you protest Israel because we give them arms, and that’s valid. You can also protest to get more aid and intervention in other cases.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
myDeaconmyhand said:
I’m not chasing my tail for this weak shit, biff. I know you want so desperately to undermine the legitimacy of these protests by showing the protestors are hypocrites(!) but you don’t have a concise argument, plus who gives a fuck? 30 thousand dead Gazans don’t give a fuck, and being honest you don’t really care either. You just need a reason to oppose protesting, and you’d make one up if you couldn’t find one.
Click to expand...

I don't have time to verify the protestors claims either, but i think my logic is pretty sound that a firm that profits off this conflict also profits off of other conflicts.
 
myDeaconmyhand said:
where are we supposed to be protesting the Russian military at?
Click to expand...
Wherever you want? Same place you protest Israel/the IDF? Same place you protest US politicians for US involvement with Israel -- you can also add in a protest against Pubs blocking funds that will save Ukrainian lives.
 
Strickland33 said:
I think there is a lot of it, but reasonable minds may differ. On my morning dog walk, there are no less than 5 Ukranian flags being flown by people who I'm pretty sure are not Ukranian. And there were countless pieces published and reported in the mainstream media that were extremely critical of Republicans blocking aid.

It's not politically expedient to protest a president and congressional leadership that are actively trying to rectify the situation. That's a big difference, imo, from the situation in Israel/Palestine, where protesters have been able to meaningfully move an extremely stubborn president and congressional leadership to 1) demand a conditional ceasefire and 2) stop providing military aid to Israel without conditions pertaining to crimes against humanity, genocide, etc. (whatever you want to call it - I don't have the energy to debate that right now)
Click to expand...
Not sure why when I keep talking about protests, you keep responding with flags and the media. I don't see much of a difference -- your conclusion is that Israel/Palestine protests have meaningfully moved the needle (I'm not sure that's the case), particularly the recent protests -- I think they've been counterproductive -- but there have not been Ukrainian protests that could have had the same effect and resulted in more/quicker aid. So, cart before the horse on that one. You're also assuming that there aren't politicians actively trying to rectify the Israel/Palestine situation.
 
Last edited:
Shooshmoo said:
Not sure why when I keep talking about protests, you keep responding with flags and the media. I don't see much of a difference -- your conclusion is that Israel/Palestine protests have meaningfully moved the needle (I'm definitely not sure that's the case), particularly the recent protests -- I think they've been counterproductive -- but there have not been Ukrainian protests that could have had the same effect and resulted in more/quicker aid. So, cart before the horse on that one. You're also assuming that there aren't politicians actively trying to rectify the Israel/Palestine situation.
Click to expand...

You’re assuming that there are. Only 30 some congressional members voted against the non conditional military aid to Israel, and a handful of them were isolationist republicans. I’d love to hear other examples you’ve come across of Dems trying to move the White House and use congressional authority to end the slaughter.

And also, when you say things like “I think they’ve been counterproductive,” you realize that’s an opinion right? I feel like lots of folks have discussed “moving the needle” on here in response to evidence of a needle moving.
 
Strickland33 said:
You’re assuming that there are. Only 30 some congressional members voted against the non conditional military aid to Israel, and a handful of them were isolationist republicans. I’d love to hear other examples you’ve come across of Dems trying to move the White House and use congressional authority to end the slaughter.

And also, when you say things like “I think they’ve been counterproductive,” you realize that’s an opinion right? I feel like lots of folks have discussed “moving the needle” on here in response to evidence of a needle moving.
Click to expand...
Yes, that's why I said "I think". So, on one side, you're arguing protests are moving the needle, and on the other you're arguing that just a small number of dems are trying to move the white house (and we know how Republicans feel about protests). Not sure how that is moving the needle. But, as you acknowledge, there are dems in Congress pushing the white house on this, and I expect that to continue. And that really doesn't address the point on Ukraine.
 
Liberals approve of 2 types of protests: peaceful, coordinated, corporate co-opted yuppie Democrat marches that don’t accomplish shit and are instantly forgettable, or the non violent Black civil rights marches from the 1960s where the participants got beaten and waterhosed.
 
Non politically of course, but if you had told me the week before exams that everyone was protesting the Russian occupation of DC, I’d probably have told you to keep it down and let me get back to studying. I guess kids have other concerns these days.
 
Just heard that UT-Austin is being flooded with offers to be a volunteer campus policeman.

@wakephan is this true ?
 
Shooshmoo said:
Yes, that's why I said "I think". So, on one side, you're arguing protests are moving the needle, and on the other you're arguing that just a small number of dems are trying to move the white house (and we know how Republicans feel about protests). Not sure how that is moving the needle. But, as you acknowledge, there are dems in Congress pushing the white house on this, and I expect that to continue. And that really doesn't address the point on Ukraine.
Click to expand...

I still don’t understand your point about Ukraine tbf. I’m getting the whatabout argument, but I don’t think that’s what you’re referring to.

How about this:

What would you like to see happen in regard to Ukraine that isn’t happening?

And how would protest tactics like marches, encampments, and BDS (feel free to name others) help achieve those ends?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top