<p>12.12.2009</a> - Protesters attack Berkeley chancellors home</p>
<p>This is a tad bit overboard.</p>
<p>ugh. Time for the internet tough-boys to start advocating this kind of crap.</p>
<p>Game over. What is the point of that?</p>
<p>What was the protest about? I don’t understand what they mean by “opening” the university.</p>
<p>Berkeley’s toooooooo liberal atmosphere is sometimes tooooo bad for its state.</p>
<p>6 out of the 8 arrested weren’t even students</p>
<p>the people of this city are such morons…</p>
<p>people are so dumb, why would you risk getting kicked out of school??? and why would you come from another school to partake in the protest?? i just don’t get it.</p>
<p>Didn’t you guys hear? Burning down the chancellors house will magically make all the problems go away.</p>
<p>@ Chairman Meow - I heard it clears up acne as well. Double bonus.</p>
<p>I also learned that justice is attacking people you don’t like.</p>
<p>@indiscreet: Only if you have the money to back up the bribes necessary. 
But yea, I’ve gotten that vibe here in the Bay. Anyone familiar with barbarism? I thought we were supposed to be -past- that.</p>
<p>Haven’t you heard? barbarism is the new “progress”.</p>
<p>It’s the Regents who are the problem. We should have them fired.</p>
<p>@kdmom: the “open university” is a slogan advocating for access to higher education to be open to anyone. People in the state of CA are afraid that, as the fees go up, this will bar access to millions of Californians because the cost is too much. Remember, the reason why the UC system exists in the first place was to offer collegiate opportunities to CA youth in order to fuel CA’s economy and work force. Look it up in the mission statement.</p>
<p>In addition, many professors actually support this view, and have given free lectures at the open university because they side with the protesters. So the liberal people y’all keep bashing? Yeah, lots of them are your very own professors. I guess liberalism attracts intellectual talent.</p>
<p>And please everyone, @anonymousername is totally right, a majority these arsonists were not even students, so please do not generalize and degenerate the efforts of thousands of your fellow students to that of some heretical crazy nuts. That would be stupid of you. Even Chancellor Birgeneau said he does not think ill of his own student protesters because of what happened.</p>
<p>Lastly, if you think it is the Regents who are the problem, then it is obvious that you have a strong opinion, and you should voice your opinion as such! Please do not just sit there and complain about the protesters or whatever. Just get involved. I know it is different but remember the Holocaust? Don’t be another bystander and let this balloon out of proportion.</p>
<p>Yes, this is exactly the same as the Holocaust.</p>
<p>Man, your second paragraph has soo many logical errors/fallacies… although it’s natural for people to jump to conclusions to brag about their side. </p>
<p>I guess I should list them.
1). Appeal to authority (does being a professor automatically make you qualified to talk about anything?), not even a neutral one (professors in question are all from UC)
2). Professor at Berkeley not necessarily = to “intellectual talent”
3). “y’all”? One person said, “Berkeley is tooo liberal” (notice the emphasized “to”; it implies he dislikes radicalism). Everyone else was just denouncing the actions of the arsonists.
4). Hasty generalization much? Berkeley professors (intellectual?) => protest (liberal?) means that general intellectualism=> “liberalism [in general]”?
5). Intellect=Sense of justice?</p>
<p>Feel free to just disregard logic, assume I’m making a political claim because I contradicted you, and launch ad hominem attacks on me.</p>
<p>And don’t you dare compare this situation to the Holocaust. That’s seriously messed up.</p>
<p>A lot of the professors in the Political Science, Economics, Haas departments, etc. (schools) actually held class on the day of all these protests and walk-outs because they OPPOSE these actions and see them for what they are: pointless, a waste of time, a waste of energy and time focusing on the wrong places.</p>
<p>+1 Quixotic</p>
<p>If you take the protest out of context, then it seems overboard. However, looking at the circumstances that led up to it, I’d say that I have to agree with this one. And, I was strongly against the preceeding protest of occupying Wheeler. My position on that one hasn’t changed.</p>
<p>The difference here is that the Chancellor ordered the police to just arrest protesters during “Open University” without warning. They were at least supposed to be asked to leave and given the opportunity to do so. It seems like a clear violation of rights with no fault on behalf of the protesters. I mean, usually, I can enter Wheeler hall pretty much any time I like, provided that the doors are open, and if it’s late, I don’t have to leave until the custodian (or other authority) tells me I need to leave. In OU, they wren’t told to leave – it’s good they were all released, but if it was me, that’s a formal complaint. In any case, police should have de-escalated the situation by first asking everyone to leave and then arresting those who did not comply.</p>
<p>So, this led to the protest on the Chancellor’s house. I, just like the ones who were there, felt that the Chancellor and police have committed an act that is just as bad, if not worse, than the free speech violations of the 60s. When the forces blatantly use force in this way, I feel that violent protest is justified. I’m not saying that’s the best way to solve things or even a good idea, but I don’t see anything truly wrong. It’s a wake-up call.</p>
<p>The issue was further escalated when it seems like some innocent bystanders who were just there were arrested. Again, they weren’t asked to leave.</p>
<p>Of course, if there was a protest, I wouldn’t actually be there because I actually have quite a lot of things to do, and being a realist, it isn’t worth my time/effort. However, deep down, I’m hoping for major change in the upper echelons and the UCPD.</p>
<p>It’s fine and all that you literally endorse terrorism and recklessly violent radicalism for a cause you can’t even say you support out of altruism, but why should any of us care about what you have to say?</p>
<p>“this is out of context! It may look like I’m yelling for the death of my political opponent, but my cause is sooo good!”</p>
<p>“there’s nothing wrong about trespassing on a persons property while hurling flaming objects in the hopes of condemning them to a fiery death. It’s just an artistic form of argument to convince them that they’re not safe if they don’t listen to our demands.” LOL whatanoob.</p>