At the University of Virginia, the chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine declared that it “unequivocally supports Palestinian liberation and the right of colonized people everywhere to resist the occupation of their land by whatever means they deem necessary.”
We unequivocally support the right to kill the civilians… but it’s not good that they died?
I unequivocally support the right of police to shoot a person who points a gun at them but I still don’t think it’s good when people with guns in their hand get shoot by police.
It’s classic for cases of self-defense to see the act of self-defense as rightful but still see it as unfortunate.
So, does killing any Israeli under any circumstances classify as self-defense? Or was there something especially wrong about the psychedelic trance music festival so that it had to be stopped immediately?
It seems like political topics have a habit of being mind-killing. This is not complicated.
The position of the student groups is that acts by groups that are oppressed against their oppressor (and that includes citizens of the country) are self-defense. While it’s easy to disagree with that position, pretending that it isn’t their position, seems strange to me.
So, although you and me might disagree about it, it is the position of the students at University of Virginia that killing people at psychedelic trance music festival is legitimate self-defense. It might be a strange position, but it is their honest position. Is this correct?
Now I would like someone to experimentally verify this. Like, visit the University of Virginia and collect signatures under statement literally saying “killing people at psychedelic trance music festival is legitimate self-defense if Palestinians do it”.
That is, I am curious how many students actually say “whatever” and mean literally whatever, and how many say “whatever” but only imagine a few examples that many people would agree with. I might be surprised, of course; but that’s the point of doing experiments.
It’s the position of one student group at the University of Virginia and a student group founded for the Palestinian cause. I would not expect that the student group is representative of all students of the University of Virginia.
Most students at the University are likely going to have positions that are less extreme than those of the “Students for Justice in Palestine” group.
I would expect that you could find some extreme student that are willing to sign “killing people at psychedelic trance music festival is legitimate self-defense if Palestinians do it” but nobody that’s willing to sign “it was good the people at the psychedelic trance music festival got killed”.
(of course, it would likely be helpful if the person who’s asking isn’t a white man but checks a few diversity boxes)
We unequivocally support the right to kill the civilians… but it’s not good that they died?
I unequivocally support the right of police to shoot a person who points a gun at them but I still don’t think it’s good when people with guns in their hand get shoot by police.
It’s classic for cases of self-defense to see the act of self-defense as rightful but still see it as unfortunate.
So, does killing any Israeli under any circumstances classify as self-defense? Or was there something especially wrong about the psychedelic trance music festival so that it had to be stopped immediately?
It seems like political topics have a habit of being mind-killing. This is not complicated.
The position of the student groups is that acts by groups that are oppressed against their oppressor (and that includes citizens of the country) are self-defense. While it’s easy to disagree with that position, pretending that it isn’t their position, seems strange to me.
So, although you and me might disagree about it, it is the position of the students at University of Virginia that killing people at psychedelic trance music festival is legitimate self-defense. It might be a strange position, but it is their honest position. Is this correct?
Now I would like someone to experimentally verify this. Like, visit the University of Virginia and collect signatures under statement literally saying “killing people at psychedelic trance music festival is legitimate self-defense if Palestinians do it”.
That is, I am curious how many students actually say “whatever” and mean literally whatever, and how many say “whatever” but only imagine a few examples that many people would agree with. I might be surprised, of course; but that’s the point of doing experiments.
It’s the position of one student group at the University of Virginia and a student group founded for the Palestinian cause. I would not expect that the student group is representative of all students of the University of Virginia.
Most students at the University are likely going to have positions that are less extreme than those of the “Students for Justice in Palestine” group.
I would expect that you could find some extreme student that are willing to sign “killing people at psychedelic trance music festival is legitimate self-defense if Palestinians do it” but nobody that’s willing to sign “it was good the people at the psychedelic trance music festival got killed”.
(of course, it would likely be helpful if the person who’s asking isn’t a white man but checks a few diversity boxes)