tim@ism780c.UUCP (Tim Smith) (04/23/86)
In article <280@parcvax.Xerox.COM> bane@parcvax.Xerox.COM (John R. Bane) writes: > >They weren't just protesting apartheid, they were trying to get >Berkely to divest its South African investments. That IS doing >something constructive. > I don't think disrupting a school is constructive. If they want Berkely to divest, then they should convince the administration with rational arguments that it is in the interests of the school to do so. If the school does not agree with them, then they should refuse to associate with the school, not throw a tantrum. For example, if I found out that the supermarket I shop at ( Ralphs ) was helping to support apartheid, I would take my business to another supermarket, and let Ralphs know why. I would encourage other people to do the same. However, as long as investment in South Africa is legal, I think it would be wrong for me to try to physically prevent other people from shopping at Ralphs. The situation at a university is similar. These students were not forced to go to U.C.B. They are free to go to a school that does not support apartheid. They are also free to try to convince their Congressthings to pass laws making it illegal for U.S. corporations to invest in South Africa. -- Tim Smith sdcrdcf!ism780c!tim || ima!ism780!tim || ihnp4!cithep!tim
smithrd@gc49.UUCP (Randy D. Smith) (04/25/86)
In article <1950@ism780c.UUCP> tim@ism780c.UUCP (Tim Smith) writes: > >I don't think disrupting a school is constructive. If they want Berkely >to divest, then they should convince the administration with rational >arguments that it is in the interests of the school to do so. I think the people who built the shanties at the University of North Carolina were probably surprised that the Board of Governors agreed to hear their rational arguments in a quiet, peaceful setting. Really threw them off guard at how human those administrators were. Of course, the decision of the Board of Governors after hearing their arguments was to delay making a decision. They thought it would be best to decide at their next meeting on April 24. Of course, classes end that day, and the students would have exams and heading home to think about. But the Board had listened to their rational arguments, right?? > If the >school does not agree with them, then they should refuse to associate >with the school, not throw a tantrum. > >For example, if I found out that the supermarket I shop at ( Ralphs ) was >helping to support apartheid, I would take my business to another >supermarket, and let Ralphs know why... >-- >Tim Smith sdcrdcf!ism780c!tim || ima!ism780!tim || ihnp4!cithep!tim Not a good analogy. (1) Ralphs is presumably a *NON-GOVERNMENT-SUPPORTED* business concern. (2) The bond people build between themselves and their schools is not at all like that between themselves and their grocery stores (a closer analogy would have been possible if Ralphs were a co-op that people had more of a vested interest in). (3) Were picketers of businesses that discriminated against blacks in the 60s wrong? Should they have limited themselves to a simple economic boycott, as you seem to be suggesting? Or did some good result from the consciousness-raising that the picketing generated? -- Randy D. Smith (919) 279-5312 AT&T Federal Systems, Guilford Center, NC ...!ihnp4!gc49!smithrd
tim%ism780c@ism780c.UUCP (05/03/86)
In article <262@gc49.UUCP> smithrd@gc49.UUCP (Randy D. Smith) writes: >In article I write: >> >>For example, if I found out that the supermarket I shop at ( Ralphs ) was >>helping to support apartheid, I would take my business to another >>supermarket, and let Ralphs know why... > > Not a good analogy. (1) Ralphs is presumably a *NON-GOVERNMENT-SUPPORTED* > business concern. Suppose I buy a share of Ralphs stock ( if such a thnig exists ). Should that give me the right to blockade a Ralphs store because I don't like corporate policy? Since U.C.B. is a state school, I think that the problem needs to be dealt with at a state level. Thus, I think that the way to fight U.C.B. investment in South Africa ( or other state investment in S.A. ) is to convince the legislature that the people do not want tax money used for such things. In particular, I think that people organizing blockades could do a lot more to end apartheid by collecting signatures on a petition to send to the legislature. Or by working to elect legislators who agree with them on divestment. > Were picketers of businesses that discriminated against blacks in > the 60s wrong? Should they have limited themselves to a simple > economic boycott, as you seem to be suggesting? The original article said that it was a blockade at U.C.B., not a picket line. A picket line is fine, since those who happen to not agree with the picketers are not infringed upon. -- Tim Smith sdcrdcf!ism780c!tim || ima!ism780!tim || ihnp4!cithep!tim
jablow@brahms.BERKELEY.EDU (Eric Robert Jablow) (05/07/86)
In article <2125@ism780c.UUCP> tim@ism780c.UUCP (Tim Smith) writes: >In article <262@gc49.UUCP> smithrd@gc49.UUCP (Randy D. Smith) writes: >>In article I write: >>> > >Since U.C.B. is a state school, I think that the problem needs to be >dealt with at a state level. Thus, I think that the way to fight >U.C.B. investment in South Africa ( or other state investment in >S.A. ) is to convince the legislature that the people do not want >tax money used for such things. > >In particular, I think that people organizing blockades could do a lot >more to end apartheid by collecting signatures on a petition to send >to the legislature. Or by working to elect legislators who agree with >them on divestment. And here in California, you don't even need to do that; you can set up an electoral initiative. Howard Jarvis succeeded with Proposition 13; you can do the same thing. Or is that too democratic for you? >-- >Tim Smith sdcrdcf!ism780c!tim || ima!ism780!tim || ihnp4!cithep!tim ----------------------- Speaking for the majority, Judge Whirter wrote, "Nobody has the right to act like a God-damned idiot, or to treat other people like dirt, or to tear down all the time without having something better to replace it with, and then come around and ask us for favors. "Congress in Crisis: The Proximity Bill" Garrison Keillor Respectfully, Eric Robert Jablow MSRI ucbvax!brahms!jablow
jsdy@hadron.UUCP (Joseph S. D. Yao) (05/07/86)
Not that this issue thrills me, but I feel in a nitpickety mood. In article <2125@ism780c.UUCP> tim@ism780c.UUCP (Tim Smith) writes: >In article <262@gc49.UUCP> smithrd@gc49.UUCP (Randy D. Smith) writes: >>In article I write: >>> >>>For example, if I found out that the supermarket I shop at ( Ralphs ) was >>>helping to support apartheid, I would take my business to another >>>supermarket, and let Ralphs know why... >> Not a good analogy. (1) Ralphs is presumably a *NON-GOVERNMENT-SUPPORTED* >> business concern. >Suppose I buy a share of Ralphs stock ( if such a thnig exists ). Should >that give me the right to blockade a Ralphs store because I don't like >corporate policy? It d o e s give you the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y to monitor tha actions of Ralph's, that it continue to act in a way consistent with your moral principles (please let me keep my illusions). If they fail, you must make your views known as effectively as possible and "reasonable" (interpretations abound). If the majority of stock- holders wish to persist in actions which you consider immoral, honour demands that you either withdraw from Ralph's or (if you consider their actions a moral outrage to the world) bring public attention and pressure to bear on them. Note that, in the case of a university, the former course of action may be impractical. My. Meek, mild, conservative me said t h a t ??? >Since U.C.B. is a state school, I think that the problem needs to be >dealt with at a state level. Many schools, I believe UCB (or at least UC) included, have independent Boards of Trustees that manage an independent Trust fund. If no UCBer can confirm this, I'll ask an alum (my mom). >picket line. A picket line is fine, since those who happen to not >agree with the picketers are not infringed upon. Innocent, aren't we? Picket lines can get very nasty to those who do not agree with their views. I don't remember that happening with the peace protests in my day (but then, it was my day, and I have no historical perspective); but I know that work strikes often seek to keep scab labour out. -- Joe Yao hadron!jsdy@seismo.{CSS.GOV,ARPA,UUCP}