After congressional criticism and subpoenas, Columbia suddenly decided to skip speaking to student protesters and go to hearings.
“We’ve never seen anything like this, where the students have suffered sanctions before a finding of their responsibility for violations of the rules,” Franke said, “And the sanctions that they received before any finding of guilt are far more stringent than anything we’ve seen with much more disruptive protests.”.
The crackdown on students taking part in pro-Palestine protests began in November, when the school suspended campus chapters of Students for Justice in Palestine and Jewish Voice for Peace after those groups led an unsanctioned rally. Then in early April, the school suspended four students for hosting an unapproved rally which featured a speaker who is an alleged member of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, which has been designated by the United States as a terrorist organization
As protests sprouted on campuses across the U.S. with students calling their schools to divest from companies with connections to Israel, Republican lawmakers have decried the demonstrations as hotbeds of antisemitism. While antisemitic incidents have occurred on campuses since October 7, along with anti-Muslim and anti-Arab incidents, House Republicans such as Foxx have conflated them with any and all protests for divestment from Israel or in opposition to Israel’s campaign in Gaza. High-profile congressional hearings on antisemitism in college campuses by Foxx’s committee have since led to the resignation of presidents of elite schools, including Harvard, the University of Pennsylvania, and most recently, Shafik of Columbia.
Lmao i remember watching live when the zionist mob descended on the extremely organized and peaceful protest camp and started physically assaulting people with metal pipes and wooden clubs. Weird how that isnt the primary focus here.
From what I understand it's not even that much money. The logic seems to be that the idea of democratic money management must be stomped out regardless of the cause it's advocated for.
My university is trying to write a new policy to handle student protests. The first draft basically said "don't disrupt anything or make anyone uncomfortable" "don't protest in a way that is loud or visible" "only protest during approved times and at the approved locations" "also: immediately disperse if asked to by any member of the university staff".
It was hilariously unaware of the definition of "protest".
It's not unaware. It's a policy that allows protest as an abstract idea, as long as nobody actually ever does it. It's reminiscent of Zizeks visiting grandma joke.
“Is it Georgia the repressive country or Georgia the aspiringly-repressive US state” has been replaced by “Is it Colombia the sometimes unstable and badly governed country or Columbia the sometimes unstable and always badly governed US university”