Columbia University expels some students who seized building last year, suspends others

[iemanja]

35. What evidence do you have of a charge of false imprisonment?

At my university, protesters occupied the administrative building. Employees were locked inside. The protesters were arrested and shortly released. That would not have happened had there been a charge of false imprisonment.

You are ignoring my main point, that this is all connected to the Trump administration's efforts to impose authoritarian rule. You are supportive of Columbia's retaliation against students, which is turn came about as a result of Trump's revocation of 400 million dollars in grants and its demands to control the content of instruction and admissions in its international affairs program. Do you support that as well? Do you justify governmental control over private education and speech because you dislike the content of the speech the protesters engaged in? Do you not understand that would amount to collaboration with authoritarianism? Would you see institutions of higher education decimated and civil liberties revoked simply because you don't like the content of speech? Because that is what this is about. Your points are distraction designed to justify your support for the eradication of this particular kind of speech.

if you think occupying buildings justifies any and all actions that the government takes against protesters and an institution of higher education, how do you not apply the same standard to the Civil Rights movement? The difference lies in the content of the speech and their causes. Is that how you justify authoritarianism in the modern case--simply because you disagree with it?

If we don't stand up to authoritarianism, what hope is there for our country?

Note that this is also connected to Trump's assault on the press. The goal is both cases is an authoritarian state. It is short-sighted to put your disagreement with the protesters' cause over the authoritarian project it is connected to.