Harvard students protest soda fountains, claim dispensers are 'microaggression'

originally posted by: LewsTherinThelamon

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: Jamie1

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: Jamie1

Do you think our government should deem certain protests against the law under penalty of incarceration, based on your opinion of the protest's validity? Do you think the offending entity should be prohibited by law from acquiescing to said protests?

lol of course not.

What would make you think that?

So you agree that it's a GOOD thing that these students are allowed to protest, yes? And it's a GOOD thing when protests are allowed to bring about change, yes?

I don't think complaining about the "microaggression" caused by a soda machine is going to stop the Israeli government from bullying the Palestinians.

Well, obviously they do, so they are exercising their right to protest, which we want to protect. Maybe they think protesting against a lot of microaggressions may lead to more attention being paid to the larger situation. Maybe this is just the beginning of a whole lot of "little" protests. Maybe that's their strategy. Whatever - it's their right to do so, even if you think it's stupid.

Sorry folks but all I see is Microjihad.

cancer doesn't punch you in the face.
it kills you

one cell at a time.

originally posted by: Jamie1

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: Jamie1

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: Jamie1

Do you think our government should deem certain protests against the law under penalty of incarceration, based on your opinion of the protest's validity? Do you think the offending entity should be prohibited by law from acquiescing to said protests?

lol of course not.

What would make you think that?

So you agree that it's a GOOD thing that these students are allowed to protest, yes? And it's a GOOD thing when protests are allowed to bring about change, yes?

Of course!

I also think it's a good thing for those being protested against to stand up to bullying and being coerced by threats of "possible offense" taken by people who choose to be offended.

And who wins will depend on how large of a protest/boycott can be generated. I'm sure there were those who tried to stand up to the "bullying" of Martin Luther King's protesters - but the protesters won out, didn't they?

a reply to: LewsTherinThelamon

And one way to do that is to stop funding the corporations the Israeli government bulldozes people out of their homes for. If Sodastream is one of those (which it is) cutting their profits is a good thing, yes?

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: LewsTherinThelamon

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: Jamie1

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: Jamie1

Do you think our government should deem certain protests against the law under penalty of incarceration, based on your opinion of the protest's validity? Do you think the offending entity should be prohibited by law from acquiescing to said protests?

lol of course not.

What would make you think that?

So you agree that it's a GOOD thing that these students are allowed to protest, yes? And it's a GOOD thing when protests are allowed to bring about change, yes?

I don't think complaining about the "microaggression" caused by a soda machine is going to stop the Israeli government from bullying the Palestinians.

Well, obviously they do, so they are exercising their right to protest, which we want to protect. Maybe they think protesting against a lot of microaggressions may lead to more attention being paid to the larger situation. Maybe this is just the beginning of a whole lot of "little" protests. Maybe that's their strategy. Whatever - it's their right to do so, even if you think it's stupid.

Whatever--it's my right to criticize their micropremise.

They need to put the PBR and American Spirits down and do something that would actually make a difference. Not microcomplaining about the potential for something stupid to cause microoffense might be a good start.

A vending machine company isn't the guilty party. The Israeli government is.

This microissue is a distraction when the US is allied with Israel and provides aid to their military.

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: LewsTherinThelamon

And one way to do that is to stop funding the corporations the Israeli government bulldozes people out of their homes for. If Sodastream is one of those (which it is) cutting their profits is a good thing, yes?

No, it's not.

I would wager my soul that there are innocent Israeli citizens that are supported by that company who want nothing to do with their government's war. Just like in the US. Regular people have families to take care of.

It wouldn't make us any better to help put innocent civilians out of work because their government sucks.

Those companies would not be able to do anything without help from the Israeli government.

A better way to do it would be to protest our government for aiding the Israeli military. Those companies can't drop bombs on innocent Palestinians. Militaries can, though.

originally posted by: LewsTherinThelamon


Whatever--it's my right to criticize their micropremise.

Well if you are so offended by their actions, then you are of course within your right to protest them, if it's that important to you.

originally posted by: [post=18831117]Jamie1

I wonder what happens when students start claiming they will become offended if somebody else is offended by them being offended?

This could get tricky.

"Dean... I want you to expel Danny because he might become offended at the thought of me becoming offended because Suzie didn't become offended over the fact that our #2 pencils are causing global warming and killing the rain forests."

This is where we're at now, not where we're heading.

Ive personally attempted this at work and received a mix of amused agreement to my point from many and became the "insensitive jackass" to very few. Apparently that is a professionally appropriate title as no consequences were received by the offender as I am clearly not a 4 legged hybrid horse mutant. I dared not disagree with said offender as to not become yet a larger "insensitive jackass".

a reply to: LewsTherinThelamon

I would wager my soul that there are innocent Israeli citizens that are supported by that company who want nothing to do with their government's war. Just like in the US. Regular people have families to take care of.

Yes, there are Israeli's protesting within Israel, they also boycott companies like Sodastream.

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: LewsTherinThelamon

I would wager my soul that there are innocent Israeli citizens that are supported by that company who want nothing to do with their government's war. Just like in the US. Regular people have families to take care of.

Yes, there are Israeli's protesting within Israel, they also boycott companies like Sodastream.

And that part about what I said regarding the US giving aid to Israel's military? The actual entity responsible for bombing Palestine?

Did Sodastream kill the Palestinians?

No.

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: LewsTherinThelamon


Whatever--it's my right to criticize their micropremise.

Well if you are so offended by their actions, then you are of course within your right to protest them, if it's that important to you.

I like how you and Kali are avoiding my main argument--that this issue is frivolous and is distracting from the fact that the US government gives aid money to Israel's military--the actual organization responsible for bombing Palestine.

Do you have anything to say to that? That getting worked up over a vending machine because it could be offensive is stupid if your goal is to stop human right's abuses? When those abuses are caused by a military power? Not some company that is merely guilty by association.

"We can't take down Israel's government so we'll make ourselves feel righteous by complaining about something stupid."

a reply to: LewsTherinThelamon

What is wrong with doing both? Boycott is a powerful tool.

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: LewsTherinThelamon

What is wrong with doing both? Boycott is a powerful tool.

If we boycott Sodastream, we hurt innocent people, and we're wasting effort when we could be protesting our government for giving aid to Israel's military.

If Sodastream is actually guilty of human right's abuses, then they deserve to be boycotted. But the war between Israel and Palestine is not the responsibility of one company.

It would be like attacking the symptom instead of the disease.

a reply to: LewsTherinThelamon

How about making a symbolic gesture to bring attention to a situation? Rosa Parks refusing to give up her seat on the bus seems like such a small thing, but the media storm started discussions, much like this one, and eventually led to much larger protests with many more people involved, and looked how that turned out.

a reply to: LewsTherinThelamon

If you support Sodastream you encourage growth which will end up costing more Palestinian lives and homes.

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: LewsTherinThelamon

How about making a symbolic gesture to bring attention to a situation? Rosa Parks refusing to give up her seat on the bus seems like such a small thing, but the media storm started discussions, much like this one, and eventually led to much larger protests with many more people involved, and looked how that turned out.

Rosa Parks broke the law, she was a bad-ass. She had consequences that she faced but decided to fight an unjust law anyway. It would be like one of us protesting drug laws by going around and snorting coke in public places (which would be glorious, but breaking unjust laws on purpose is a discussion for another thread).

That cannot be compared to PC self-righteousness. By having no personal risk and complaining that a soda machine is going to offend someone.

I am sure we could think of a better gesture.

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: LewsTherinThelamon

If you support Sodastream you encourage growth which will end up costing more Palestinian lives and homes.

Sodastream will only make it as far as Israel's military can carry them.

a reply to: LewsTherinThelamon

You're constantly using the word micro to associate this as a "small" issue...

That's not what a micro-aggression is...

A micro-aggression is something that wasn't intended to cause an offence but does...
An example of this is a harmless (in intention) joke about a touchy subject, use your imagination.


However, SodaStream is not a micro (small) issue...

It is tied into a harmful history against indigenous Palestinian Tribes who were forcefully evicted from their land to make way for a Corporation to build a Factory...


This has been explained numerous times, thus your whole input in this thread upto this post has been ignorant.
I dare say I doubt it will improve.

a reply to: LewsTherinThelamon

It would be like attacking the symptom instead of the disease.

I take it you've never heard the saying "Think Big, Start Small"...

Or you have and it fell on deaf ears.

a reply to: LewsTherinThelamon

soda machine is going to offend someone.

Soda Machine = SodaStream Factory = Illegal Displacement Of Palestinians = Occupation = Root Cause Of The Offence Taken!


& yet you make it seem so trivial.