UC Berkeley Op-Eds Pour In to Student Paper Confirming Violence Will Continue
“Violence as self-defense” against words they don’t like.A string of opinion pieces were published in The Daily Californian, the school paper for UC Berkeley, in the wake of the riots started by violent leftist fascists who believe free speech rights apply only to them. The takeaway from reading these pieces? Expect more of the same in the future. Violence is the only way in their eyes and they will show no mercy; they will sweep the leg.
Senior staff writer Haruka Senju published five pieces under the single title, “Violence as self-defense,” which he said argues “in favor of the use of violence in protests” such as the kind that broke out at the canceled Milo Yiannopoulos event.
One piece was submitted by an illegal immigrant student, Juan Prieto, titled “Violence helped ensure safety of students.” This “undocumented student” is a-okay with the violence because it only affected “replaceable property at my school." In essence, his was a thank-you letter:
Arguments on campus, on the other hand, revolve around students defying the acts the AntiFas — an anarchist and anti-fascist group that uses black bloc techniques to meet its ends — took that night. They want to ensure that there is a distinction between the rioters and the students who were there to protest peacefully.
Well, I’m here to thank the radical measures the AntiFas took to ensure my safety…
My campus did nothing to stand between my undocumented community and the hateful hands of radicalized white men — the AntiFas did. A peaceful protest was not going to cancel that event, just like numerous letters from faculty, staff, Free Speech Movement veterans and even donors did not cancel the event. Only the destruction of glass and shooting of fireworks did that. The so-called “violence” against private property that the media seems so concerned with stopped white supremacy from organizing itself against my community.
Neil Lawrence wrote in his piece, “Black bloc did what campus should have,” how he and his friends donned face masks and mingled with the Antifa to become a part of the confusion:
We were not, as the news, the chancellor and concerned progressives have alleged, “unaffiliated white anarchists.” Behind those bandanas and black T-shirts were the faces of your fellow UC Berkeley and Berkeley City College students, of women, of people of color, of queer and trans people.
The bloc was made up of people with the most to fight for and the most to lose.
Now, personally, I prefer to attend protests in cocktail dresses and eyeliner… [but] when I went out to make good on my promise to revoke Yiannopoulos’ gay card, I wore black and covered my face…
Antifa was there to protect UC Berkeley students when the administration was not. Within 15 minutes of the bloc’s arrival on Sproul Plaza, Yiannopoulos was being rushed from the building. These were not acts of violence.
They were acts of self defense.
And to Yiannopoulos and all your friends who invited you and hosted you and defended your “right” to speak: I recommend you learn your lesson.
Our shields are raised against you. No one will protect us? We will protect ourselves.
Alumna Nisa Dang told everyone to “Check your privilege when speaking of protests” in her piece. She believes that the very definition of a protest includes an expectation of violence. She defined what happened as “a routine Berkeley protest” and said to hell with the idea of “peaceful dialogue:”
In light of recent events, there has been a resurgence of the belief that in order for a protest to be effective, it must also be nonviolent. This belief especially plagues liberals, who are talented in drafting long Facebook posts about how they are down with the cause, but not really because windows were broken and some white nationalists got their asses beat. Here’s looking at you, Berkeley.
I’m here to explain to this particular segment of the “jolted from a coma, but went back to bed” crowd that they are wrong. Listen closely, because if I have to hear this flawed, problematic and deeply cowardly line of reasoning the next time some people invite a violent fascist-endorsing hate monger to UC Berkeley, we’re fighting.
“I put my safety and my freedom on the line because letting Yiannopoulos speak was more terrifying to me than potential injury or arrest,” wrote Desmond Meagley, warning campus Republicans who invited Yiannopoulos to “prepare to get attacked” if anything like this happens again.
Meagley also clarified that the participants, “these so-called militants are campus students, Berkeley residents and Bay Area locals; teachers, journalists, musicians, parents and athletes, united by love and concern for their peers.”
And on and on these op-eds go, saying the physical injuries and property damage and threats to “kill Trump” were infinitely less violent than the words coming out of a person’s mouth. They also made clear that going through the proper, peaceful channels on campus to urge the cancelation of a conservative speech didn't work and that violence is the only way to shut them down. This is the Left’s literal war on free speech. Berkeley set the standard of expectation of what’s to come and these op-eds confirm that conformity to progressive politics is the only solution, or else get a bat to your face.
Apparently, there's no need for these anymore: #Tolerance, #LoveTrumpsHate.
http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/uc-berkeley-op-eds-pour-student-paper-confirming-violence-will-continue