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

Are people operating under some kind of fantasy in which corporations don't manipulate governments?

originally posted by: Jamie1
Except the Harvard dining hall isn't contested territory.

If the Palestinian students at Harvard moved across to world to attend school in a country that's Israel's biggest ally then they have no reason to complain.

If they wanted to protest, then they should boycott by not attending Harvard.

Thanks for your input.

I'm not interested in discussing this topic with you.

I'm offended by Havard, anyone else?
If so, they should close it down, so i dont feel so offended anymore
*SMH*

a reply to: Jamie1

If the soda machine gets tossed from Harvard, do you think it will really help the Bedouins? Of do you think this is just a pissing contest over trying to prove who's right and who's wrong?

Who is right and who is wrong? I guess it depends on who you ask

Israel destroys Bedouin village in Negev for the 79th time

For decades, Israel has been funneling the Negev’s Bedouin tribes onto reservation towns that offer little economic hope to the families living there.

Since the late 1960s, Israeli policy has focused on concentrating the Bedouin population into a handful of government-developed towns—seven in total, plus 11 more villages that have gained recognition from the state.

That desert doesn't look like anything important to you? It's the historic and current home of a people that are going to be forced out against their will so other people can make money

You want to prove what - that they don't deserve to live their life the way they always have? Maybe they should just choose to be happy?

Are you really that arrogant - and that dishonest?

There was a point in time when Jewish people wouldn't buy Ford products. Pissing contest?

Why don't you just choose to be happy about the fact that people are exercising their right to peaceful protest?

:-)

originally posted by: DrJunk

originally posted by: Jamie1
Except the Harvard dining hall isn't contested territory.

If the Palestinian students at Harvard moved across to world to attend school in a country that's Israel's biggest ally then they have no reason to complain.

If they wanted to protest, then they should boycott by not attending Harvard.

Thanks for your input.

I'm not interested in discussing this topic with you.

Well then maybe you should just bypass the thread I created then? Yeah?

Back to your point, yes boycotting is a viable form of protests.

If Palestinian students actually cared about the issue and felt strongly about it, and looked at Harvard's ties to the investment banking world and Goldman Sachs, they would simply boycott Harvard.

Or if the Palestinian students really cared about the issue more than their own personal self-interest, they would boycott the United States and go home since the U.S. is Israel's biggest ally.

Throwing a tantrum over a soda machine in a dining hall is pathetic in terms of the message it sends, and the image it creates.

It makes those protesting look like spoiled, entitled, disingenuous brats who will gladly take the benefits of being in the U.S. and attending Harvard while pretending to make superficial "protests" that have zero impact.

a reply to: Jamie1

Thanks for your input.

I'm not interested in discussing this topic with you.

a reply to: Jamie1

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
a reply to: Jamie1

If the soda machine gets tossed from Harvard, do you think it will really help the Bedouins? Of do you think this is just a pissing contest over trying to prove who's right and who's wrong?

Who is right and who is wrong? I guess it depends on who you ask

Israel destroys Bedouin village in Negev for the 79th time

For decades, Israel has been funneling the Negev’s Bedouin tribes onto reservation towns that offer little economic hope to the families living there.

Since the late 1960s, Israeli policy has focused on concentrating the Bedouin population into a handful of government-developed towns—seven in total, plus 11 more villages that have gained recognition from the state.

That desert doesn't look like anything important to you? It's the historic and current home of a people that are going to be forced out against their will so other people can make money

You want to prove what - that they don't deserve to live their life the way they always have? Maybe they should just choose to be happy?

Are you really that arrogant - and that dishonest?

There was a point in time when Jewish people wouldn't buy Ford products. Pissing contest?

Why don't you just choose to be happy about the fact that people are exercising their right to peaceful protest?

:-)

I don't choose to be happy because of what others are doing or not doing. You should know that by now.

Interesting concept you raised.

I worked with a group who are known as being very spiritual, and connected to nature. They had been displaced by their government. When I met them I was expecting this beautiful, monk like people.

They weren't. They were very angry. All they talked about was blame, justice, and revenge.

I shared something with them. Why not be happy first, then once you're happy, then figure out a plan on what to do next.

They never stopped to think about that before. So that's what they did. They decided it was stupid to be angry. They were just further hurting themselves. They decided to seek to change their external situation, but coming from a place of being happy, not anger.

It worked. They reached some compromises with the government, and moved forward, leaving the chips on their shoulders behind them.

Everybody gets to make that choice. Most people, when they see that being happy is a choice, choose happiness because it feels better AND it allows them to find intelligent solutions to their real world problems.

Try it.

Think of a problem you're angry about. Be happy first, then try to find a solution to your problem when you're happy, and when you're not blaming somebody else for your problem. You might be surprised the solutions you'll find. You might even stop seeing that you even have a problem.

a reply to: Jamie1

Think of a problem you're angry about. Be happy first, then try to find a solution to your problem when you're happy, and when you're not blaming somebody else for your problem. You might be surprised the solutions you'll find. You might even stop seeing that you even have a problem.

Is this thread a solution to a problem you had after you decided to be happy?

You are like the Pied Piper of happy - follow me children...

I support peaceful protest - even when I don't agree with the position. I do agree with this one. I'm pretty happy about that too - go figure

A boycott is a normal reaction to not wanting to support a group that wants to profit from the misery of someone else. Why not tell the government of Israel to be happy with the land they already occupy, instead of telling Palestinians to not bother people with their silly problems

Harvard will survive this - no worries there. If they change out their soda making machines as a result of all this protest - will you care? Who will you tell to just shut up then - and why?

Your thread is a protest - why bother with it if you were coming from a position of being happy?

Maybe the story you're telling yourself has a few plot holes

:-)

a reply to: Jamie1

I think it was the brands in the machines that got them mad. Judea Ginger Ale and Samaria Soda.

a reply to: pavil

Your forgot Rabbinical Root Beer.

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
a reply to: Jamie1

Think of a problem you're angry about. Be happy first, then try to find a solution to your problem when you're happy, and when you're not blaming somebody else for your problem. You might be surprised the solutions you'll find. You might even stop seeing that you even have a problem.

Is this thread a solution to a problem you had after you decided to be happy?

You are like the Pied Piper of happy - follow me children...

I support peaceful protest - even when I don't agree with the position. I do agree with this one. I'm pretty happy about that too - go figure

A boycott is a normal reaction to not wanting to support a group that wants to profit from the misery of someone else. Why not tell the government of Israel to be happy with the land they already occupy, instead of telling Palestinians to not bother people with their silly problems

Harvard will survive this - no worries there. If they change out their soda making machines as a result of all this protest - will you care? Who will you tell to just shut up then - and why?

Your thread is a protest - why bother with it if you were coming from a position of being happy?

Maybe the story you're telling yourself has a few plot holes

:-)

I'm super happy I made this thread because I learned a lot I didn't know before, and got to see a lot of perspectives I didn't have before.

The more perspectives I see and hear, the more I grow, the more I become, and the more I can contribute.

So to answer your question, growth is a reason to "bother" with anything. If we're learning and growing, we have more resources and options.

Voicing a perspective is not a form of protest unless you are demanding others take on your beliefs or comply with some requested action.

The whole soda machine issue wasn't about the students protesting. It was about the mid-level bureaucrats at Harvard initially going along with the premise of removing the machines because somebody might possibly be offended in the future.

It was about the idea of fabricating a concept (a story) called microaggression that only makes it easier for people to find things to be offended by.

I'm all for helping people solve problems, and it's always easier to find intelligent solutions (at least in my experience) from a place of being calm, happy, grateful, and empowered instead of from a place of anger or blame. Blame is very disempowering, which is why it's almost always followed by anger, which feels like you're getting your power back.

Only problem is that anger almost always triggers anger in the person you're blaming. They become defensive because people rarely, if ever, wake up thing they're doing bad things. Their beliefs, in their world, is that they're doing things that are ok. When they're told they're wrong, it usually doesn't trigger change. It usually triggers an even more entrenched defense of why they're right.

That's why becoming aware of our own thoughts, our beliefs, is so important. It frees us from reacting.

I really enjoy the conversations with you because you're communicating from a place of intelligence and not fear or anger. It's easy to see your perspective and appreciate it. When people are communicating from a place of anger, it's also easy to see their perspective, but there is usually no give and take, no pitch and catch, until they move from a state of anger to some other state.

I'm pretty sure that I read some place that the majority of the employees in the company that makes these machines are Palestinian.

It seems that some people in the thread are trying to actively deny the existence and pervasiveness of microaggressive behaviors. The term was coined in the 1970s, at Harvard coincidentally enough. I understand that I speak from a position of priviledge, as my wife got one of her graduate degrees in conflict analysis, and I've had years to bounce ideas off of her, but the concept isn't really hard to understand for anyone actually trying to understand it.

Here's a nice blog on the subject, for anyone interested in knowing more about instances of microaggressive behaviors.

www.microaggressions.com...

a reply to: Jamie1

I really enjoy the conversations with you because you're communicating from a place of intelligence and not fear or anger. It's easy to see your perspective and appreciate it. When people are communicating from a place of anger, it's also easy to see their perspective, but there is usually no give and take, no pitch and catch, until they move from a state of anger to some other state.

I'm not completely sure you're not more than one person Jamie - even if you are only more than one person in your own head. I enjoy arguing with you too (yes - arguing) :-)

But, I'm definitely not someone that believes in a steady diet of happy and nice - or of happy as a one word symbol of our ultimate goal, so - there is that

The whole soda machine issue wasn't about the students protesting. It was about the mid-level bureaucrats at Harvard initially going along with the premise of removing the machines because somebody might possibly be offended in the future.

It was about the idea of fabricating a concept (a story) called microaggression that only makes it easier for people to find things to be offended by.

This is a fair point (that I disagree with) but it at least is a little less troll-y and worthy of an entire thread

I'm not as offended by people feeling offended as you seem to be

Go ahead - do another little happy dance around that statement - but until I hear you admit that there's a place in this world for righteous indignation - I'm afraid I'm going to call you on it each and every time

Have a nice day Jamie...

:-)

It's true our university higher learners truly are dumber than rocks, if these are our future leaders I want off this planet.

originally posted by: JIMC5499
I'm pretty sure that I read some place that the majority of the employees in the company that makes these machines are Palestinian.

yes, in this thread

a reply to: Stormdancer777
It's a complicated situation

If you want to understand it a little better - there's plenty of information out there - here's a start:

The cynical use of Palestinian workers in the SodaStream controversy
As a rule, Palestinians working for Israelis in the West Bank hate the settlements and the occupation. But they have to feed their families, so they swallow their pride.

These were news stories in highly reputable media, their treatment of the issue was balanced, the quotes from the Palestinians – many taken while they were outside the plant – seemed credible. To people who don’t understand the occupation (and they include even intelligent, informed, liberal-minded folks like Johansson), this is very persuasive testimony. And so the hasbaratists have jumped on it. Honest Reporting, one of the most successful of the many pro-Israel, anti-Arab “media watchdogs,” stamped the Palestinians’ accounts all over its website in posts such as “Fighting BDS – SodaStream Workers Speak Out” and “SodaStream shows that BDS is the real obstacle to peace,”

Butter wouldn’t melt in these propagandists’ mouths. To understate things, it is rather cynical using those Palestinian workers as a weapon against the boycott and, by extension, on behalf of the settlements and occupation. Cynical because those Palestinians don’t support the settlements or occupation in the slightest. Some put the issue out of their minds, some are reluctant to talk about it out loud, but most of them, if the boss isn’t looking, will tell you that of course they’re against the settlements and Israeli rule, but they have to feed their families.

This source is definitely pro-Palestine, but if you want all you have to do is Google Oxfam and Sodastream - you will get pro-Israeli versions of the same story - plus many, many more articles both pro and con

Maybe they should tell their Palestinian friends to stop actual aggression, and then we won't need to worry about micro-aggression.

a reply to: DrJunk

If that is how you feel why do you even bother posting that and wasting your time? I'll tell you this: I have not seen anyone else put the effort into posting that what you said. I feel the same way you do most of the time on this site. I don't feel the need to waste site resources(except in this case) pointing it out. I bring this up out of pure curiosity. I have seen you respond with the same exact words in many of your replies.

The post you quoted and responded to brought up a fair point to your argument. So what gives? Is your refusal to respond yet the reason you respond driven by ego? Arrogance? The feeling that because I am right you are wrong? Boredom?

By the way. If you are going to say:

Thanks for your input.

I'm not interested in discussing this topic with you.

Don't bother to respond.....