whoopsie. A sign of what's to come?

[lonestarnot]

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/12/13/BASN1B3D59.DTL

(12-12) 19:15 PST BERKELEY -- Eight people were in custody Saturday after a crowd of angry protesters broke windows and threw burning torches at UC Berkeley Chancellor Robert Birgeneau's campus residence in protest of fee hikes and budget cuts, authorities said.

As many as 75 people - some of them carrying torches - surrounded the mansion, known as University House, on the north side of campus off Hearst Avenue at about 11:15 p.m. Friday, police said.

The crowd, including a man taken into custody in a university protest a day earlier, chanted, "No justice, no peace," and began smashing planters, windows and lights. Several hurled their torches at the building, said campus spokesman Dan Mogulof.

[hobbit709]

1. No pitchforks?

Can't have a proper peasant uprising without torches AND pitchforks.

[lonestarnot]

2. I'm sure someone had one in their back pocket!

:evilgrin:

[fasttense]

3. Hmm, seems the pitchforks and torches have started to come out.

You know, that would make for a very good protest rally. A bunch of people coming out with pitchforks and torches (you could bring torches but not light them, or do fake torches with red paper).

We should start a protest call pitchforks and torches. You could even tie it into President Obama's speech where he told the banksters he was the only thing protecting them from the pitchforks and torches (or some such thing).

[pleah]

4. K&R LOL

[NYC_SKP]

5. Nah, that's just Berkeley being Berkeley.

I guess it's a sign of things to come in Berkeley.

[lonestarnot]

6. Maybe, maybe not.

[havocmom]

39. Or just Bay Area agent provocateurs provoking

It's not like there haven't been historical precedents of pushing to violence from inside groups to secure arrests and denouncements of certain movements.

[NJmaverick]

7. " protest of fee hikes and budget cuts,"

Remember when people used to protest important issues like Civil Right and the Vietnam War? A tuition hike riot is only indicative of the narcissistic trend of our nation.

[lonestarnot]

9. Wrong, not just a tuition hike, class war and I'd call that as important as Civil Rights and it is a

war. Thank you though.

[NJmaverick]

10. How exactly is a tuition hike a class war?

[lonestarnot]

12. When education becomes affordable to those at the top, something like trying to find a

short sleeved cotton shirt for under $100.00. What is so difficult here?

[NJmaverick]

14. Last I knew the state of California was in a very serious budget crisis

Wouldn't that lead one to expect an impact on the State Universities?

[lonestarnot]

16. 32% sounds like bankster increase.

[NJmaverick]

19. Am I correct in my understanding that this was a 32% hike in Student fees (usually a small

percentage of the total costs) and not tuition (which forms the bulk of the costs)?

[lonestarnot]

21. Tuition.

[NJmaverick]

22. Then why did the articles I read say "student fees"?

[lonestarnot]

24. Have a link to one? I didn't bother to look.

Perhaps I am wrong. My understanding was tuition.

[NJmaverick]

25. here

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/11/20/national/main5725596.shtml

[lonestarnot]

29. Here and tuition IS a student FEE.

:eyes:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/03/10/BAUC16CQNE.DTL

http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/11/20/california.tuition.protests/

[NJmaverick]

31. I wouldn't role my eyes if I were you (you sort of messed up)

Tuition is going up 9.3% back in March

We are talking student fees here and they are going up 32%

This is based on my article and your first article

Your second article suggests a 15% hike in tuition (which is still not 32%)

[lonestarnot]

33. The concern is not what it is called but who pays for it in any case.

:eyes: again.

[Nikki Stone1]

38. NJ Maverick: The CA system does not have "tuition" named "tuition" (It used to be free to attend)

When they started charging to attend school (after Prop 13), they couldn't call it "tuition" so they called it "fees". Trust me, I paid "fees"--and it was mostly tuition plus some health insurance and very small activity fee stuff. It's one of those little oddities in CA.

The goal, according to mike_c, who posts on DU and is a professor in the Cal State system, is to actually raise fees (tuition) across the state over 160% by the time it is all over. A student paying $2500 a semester will end up paying $6600 a semester--$5000/yr will go to $13,200/yr. THAT is ultimately what students will be fighting.

The upper middle class will be able to pay, but the lower middle and working class won't, even with subsidies. (Remember, this doesn't even count room and board.) The middle middle will struggle. And those that do go will be buried in student loan debt. I am so glad I already got my education in California, but I am fighting like hell to prevent this eventual goal. That's why we in CA are fighting every high percentage increase.

CA used to have the belief that every legal resident should be able to go to college and not have to pay. This was part of the master plan, back when CA was more socially aware than it is now.

[NJmaverick]

41. Fighting for lower tuition is reasonable. Rioting over it is not (IMO)

[lonestarnot]

42. Your definition of riot is different than mine clearly.

:D

[Nikki Stone1]

45. How much actual rioting was there? The press uses that word for small stuff these days.

I am worried about that because on Tuesday, a friend of mine is going to stand outside at a UC and protest the abuse of post docs. A post doc has a doctorate but is hired to be a kind of servant--they have no rights other than what the departments choose to give them, their pay is low, and the foreign ones are often threatened with loss of their work visas. Anyway, this friend of mine belongs to a union and is supporting the unionization of the post docs. It will be a peaceful protest with signs and chanting, so he says, but I am worried that the press might call it a riot if some yahoo throws a rock at a building.

[NJmaverick]

48. Well the last one involved broken windows and torches tossed

Common sense would dictate that anyone wanting to protest must remain vigilant to the mood of the crowd and get out of there if things start to turn violent or unlawful.

[Nikki Stone1]

51. Here again, the question is how many and by whom? The reason I ask is

that in some protests over the years, troublemakers have glommed on, either by accident or design, and have sabotaged peaceful protest. We see it with the G-20 protests all the time. I am wondering, Berkeley being Berkeley, if some glommers-on decided that they would break a window or throw a torch. That's why I asked how many. If 50% of the crowd was doing this stuff, then I can see your point. But if it was one or two glommers, then I can't get too upset about it.

[NJmaverick]

58. Sadly the world is such that a minority of trouble makers can ruin the reputation a large group

Harder to guard against such a thing, although public denunciation and assisting the police in finding and arresting the troublemakers may help solve the issue.

[Nikki Stone1]

57. Here is my take on this: One of the guys was an agent provocateur

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=7216574&mesg_id=7217255

Judging from the facts, it appears we have an agent provocateur: John Friesen, 25, of Fullerton (Orange County). He is not a UC student. But he is present through the protests.

Basically, there had been a 4-day protest at Berkeley that ended the day before. It must have been fairly peaceful because we didn't hear much about it. John Friesen, along with 66 others, gets arrested at that protest, but then gets let go.

The next night, John Friesen is part of a crowd of 75 that attacks the Chancellor's house. Out of that crowd, only 8 get arrested. (67 are let go). This means that the violence must have been restricted pretty much to this little group.

Of the 8, 6 are non-students. SIX. That means that most of the violence was being done by non students. One of those arrested non-students is John Friesen.

Friesen is a thead in this. Let's see if they let him go on Monday. I think the purpose of this Chancellor's thing is make sure that every student protest of fees from now on is seen as a major event where the UC will bring out their police apparatus and, since Ahnold has called it terrorism, the Homeland Security apparatus.

I think the students will be bullied into not protesting these insane tuition hikes. The CA system eventually wants to raise tuition over 150%. This is about changing the very nature of higher education in CA. In order to do this, they need to keep the kids pliant and their parents paying. Associate all protests with "angry flame-thowers and window-breakers" and you've delegitimized the movement.

[villager]

30. Because in Calfornia, in the UC's, they have always used the phrase "student fees" instead of

"tuition."

That's why.

The idea was the the UC's were always supposed to be free for qualified Californians.

When the first modest charges cropped up, they decided to call them "student fees" instead. Charging $10,000 a year -- without factoring in housing, books, etc. -- is anathema to what the UC's are supposed to be about, and what their role was supposed to be in California.

It is, absolutely, class war, since it guarantees so many fewer Californians - among the qualified ones -- can afford to go there...

[NJmaverick]

32. What about the California Budget crisis?

you think that has played a role in things?

[villager]

35. Well, it's the excuse, certainly...

But what about the salaries to chancellors and administrators?

There are plenty of questions about whether any raises in the face of deficits "needed" to be as shockingly steep as they are...

[NJmaverick]

40. So this is a raise riot?

[lonestarnot]

44. You are a riot!

:rofl:

[NJmaverick]

46. So is this

"Eight people were in custody Saturday after a crowd of angry protesters broke windows and threw burning torches at UC Berkeley Chancellor Robert Birgeneau's campus residence"

You really should spend more time learning and less time insulting. You might find you have better and more informed positions.

[lonestarnot]

49. Define targeted residence as riot. "Are your childrens bein' teached?"

[XemaSab]

61. Here's my take on it:

In 10 years these students will be paying taxes.

Either they're going to stay in California, get jobs in California, and pay taxes in California, or else they are going to move to somewhere else, get jobs there, and pay taxes there.

By making the state unwelcome for students, we're shooting ourselves in the foot.

[KittyWampus]

26. Universities are paying HUGE sums to the Administrators and becoming more business like

and not in the positive sense of the word "business".

[NJmaverick]

28. That hardly seems like a good excuse for a riot

[lonestarnot]

34. Hardly a riot. WTF is wrong with you?

[Nikki Stone1]

56. NJ, here are the facts from the paper:

Only 8 out of the 75 protesters were arrested. This tells me that the violence was restricted to a few.

Only 2 of the 8 were actual students.

"Six nonstudents, Julia Litmancleper, 20, of San Francisco; John Friesen, 25, of Fullerton (Orange County); Donnell Allen, 41, of San Francisco; David Morse, 41, of Oakland; Laura Thatcher, 21, of Rolling Hills Estates (Los Angeles County); and James Carwil, 31, of Brooklyn, N.Y., were arrested on the same charges.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/12/13/BASN1B3D59.DTL#ixzz0ZaVK1VIs

(And being from Jersey, you might want to tell me what some 30 year old Brooklyn man was doing there.)


So basically, we have 67 people, possibly students/possibly not, marching around the Chancellor's house. Not smart, but I can understand why students might think that was a good idea, especially at Berkeley. Of course, they do seem to have had a beef:

The incident came a day after university police arrested 66 people - including Friesen - in connection with a four-day protest last week at Wheeler Hall. The building was also the site of a Nov. 20 occupation and clash between protesters and officers from several law-enforcement agencies.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/12/13/BASN1B3D59.DTL#ixzz0ZaWSYPQl

OK: Here's the important name: Friesen.

So, here we have a guy who was NOT A STUDENT who was arrested the day before (and obviously let go) at another protest.

The crowd, including a man taken into custody in a university protest a day earlier, chanted, "No justice, no peace," and began smashing planters, windows and lights.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/12/13/BASN1B3D59.DTL#ixzz0ZaWxBBQ1

I don't know about you, but this Friesen guy sounds like an agent provocateur or a professional protester. He's not a student. He got arrested at another protest with 66 others the day before (now that's a lot of arrests.) But somehow, he got released and got involved in this second protest. Now of course, everyone is in custody.

At this point, I am wondering how much of the unarrested crowd (the other 67 from the Chancellor's house incident) are also non students.

UC students have actually gotten a lot more docile over the years. Remember the UCLA students who stood and watched while campus police tasered a guy who didn't show his student ID a couple of years ago? The UC students are not what they were. That is why this crazy incident strikes me odd. There have been legitimate (peaceful) protests of tuition hikes over the past month, but this one at the Chancellor's house will now give the UCs the excuse to bring out the big guns, especially with Ahnold calling it "terrorism." Now THAT scares me. Real students may not feel able to protest or may be afraid of protesting--even though they should protest--because of this incident.

Cui bono?

[XemaSab]

60. Read the fine print

Only two of them were students.

[Freddie Stubbs]

53. Six of the eight arrested aren't even students

[Earth_First]

8. So let me get this right..

This is to be desired as heroic, while folks breaking windows at citibank, bank of america et. al at NAFTA/WTO/IMF demonstrations which protest the hikes and rate increases of the working class folks is to be condemned?

Bizzaro world!

[FraDon]

11. My first thought :: agents provocateur

There have been several of these "insurrection-like" events recently. I have seen way too many of these incidents over the decades. Beware the spit-shine sneakers! Keep asking /investigating: who benefits from these provocations?

[lonestarnot]

13. Who benefits from making education unaffordable?

[hobbit709]

15. an educated peasant is a uppity peasant.

and the lords don't want any trouble from the serfs.

[lonestarnot]

17. Fascists want to own ALL the pitchforks!

[robdogbucky]

47. My first thought to your message title:

Them or him?

There or here?




Just my dos centavos


robdogbucky

[HughMoran]

18. Someone give them the addresses of Wall St. and Healthcare execs.

:yoiks:

[lonestarnot]

20. If the banksters lived in fear of reprisal for their actions do you think they would think twice

about their crimes of shock and awe economics?

[HughMoran]

50. One can only imagine

I can sometimes sympathize with those who wish it would get worse - a lot worse - before it gets better. But then I look at my teenage daughters and my ambivalence disappears.

[lonestarnot]

52. Someone had to fight for suffrage and someone had to fight for civil rights doncha think?

[HughMoran]

59. Of course

...and I would hope that my children would continue the battle. I don't think a depression is required to motivate them however.

[Hatchling]

23. It usually starts on college campuses. nt

[intheflow]

62. Actually, that phenomenon only came about in the late 20th century.

Before that not that many people went on to higher ed, it was only for rich people or amazingly gifted people. Prior to college being a prerequisite to getting a job with a living wage, the rioters tended to be poor people--labor, women, people of color, and veterans. These kind of tuition hikes seek to make people poor again--which will, I fear, make more people (students and non) rage against the system in the form of rioting. It won't just be about college tuition, either.

I abhor all forms of violence, but as someone who owes $100K in student loans and only makes $18K/year, I can certainly understand what motivates poor people to riot.

[KittyWampus]

27. I would like to point out that University Administrators have had steadily rising salaries and percs

[The Straight Story]

36. damn hippies, here in midwest we take guns instead of torches, get more done that way

:rofl:

[OnceUponTimeOnTheNet]

37. Is there any video of this. Nothing on youtube on Fridays riot.

[tekisui]

43. They only call it Class War when we fight back.

knr.

[arcadian]

54. Wonder how many servants this guy has?

[Lorien]

55. I'm generally not a fan of violence, but I do wish that the Bankster and

insurance CEOs who ultimately caused the recession would face similar mobs. The rich have been waging class warfare since 1980 and they've been winning. If the people need to push back with pitchforks and torches, then so be it.

[Odin2005]

63. Go protesters!

:woohoo:

[JVS]

64. I support the students!