C ([info]cdm137) wrote in [info]ucberkeley,
@ 2007-12-05 15:41:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
With their heads in the trees
I feel like I'm beating a dead horse here, but I figure if I don't post this [info]bearsnecessity will.

There's a great opinion piece in yesterday's Chronicle about the tree-sitters:

It's a Peter Pan protest. Activists go by kiddie names - Running Wolf, Redwood Mary, Midnight Matt. And they have a child's sense of what is important. In a world darkened by genocide, starvation and ignorance, they see fit to champion the cause of landscaped trees... (link)

Discuss.


(Post a new comment)


[info]conceptual
2007-12-05 09:10 pm UTC (link)
100% agree. It's hard to respect combative people who are uninterested in compromise. Personally I also find it hard to respect people who seem to have nothing better to do than hang out in a treehouse and use sidewalk chalk. For them to reference Guantanamo is insulting and ridiculous. I really just want to give them the finger every time I pass them.

(Reply to this)

CAN SOMEONE
[info]dangerrrdoll
2007-12-05 09:36 pm UTC (link)
COPY & PASTE IT TO MY COMMENT, "NEWS&MEDIA" IS BLOCKED AT WORK... LOL

(Reply to this) (Thread)

pt 1
[info]conceptual
2007-12-05 10:06 pm UTC (link)
With their heads in the trees
Debra J. Saunders

For a year now, protesters have been squatting on trees at UC Berkeley's Memorial Stadium to protest plans to build a $125 million sports training center. When protesters fall from one of the trees and break their bones, as has happened at least twice, people laugh and liberals start to wonder if perhaps there is a god.

Over the years, activists have lodged many protests to fight severe injustices in the world, such as racial inequality and genocide. At times, I've disagreed with protesters - on the Iraq war, for example - but I at least had to respect their commitment to make a difference on a life-and-death issue.

In the case of the "People's Perch" - as some are calling the yearlong Berzerkley tree-squat - never before has so much been done for a cause so trivial. The tree-sitters argue that in fighting to save some 100 trees, they are protecting "a healthy, functioning native oak ecosystem." One problem: The stadium property is not pristine wilderness. Most of those trees owe their existence to UC landscaping.

"People call us crazy monkey hippies," one tree-squatter told The Chronicle's Carolyn Jones, "but this is the greatest thing I've ever done." Except the tree squatters have achieved nothing. Alameda County Superior Court Judge Barbara Miller issued an injunction that barred the university from felling the trees. The squatters could have walked away 11 months ago, and the trees would still be standing. It's lawyers, not aging adolescents swinging in the trees, who have kept UC chain saws at bay.

While the tree-squatters have called UC "arrogant" and all-mighty, in fact, it is the oak activists who take the prize for arrogance and rule-breaking. A judge ruled that UC has to postpone the development project until she makes a final ruling, and UC complies. Judge Richard Keller issued an injunction in October barring protesters from living in the trees, with which they would not dream of complying. Activists trespass on university property, set up illegal homes, break fire rules by cooking with propane tanks in the treetops - and they know they have little to fear from campus police, probably the most politically correct police force in the country.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

pt 2
[info]conceptual
2007-12-05 10:06 pm UTC (link)
Their cause is so ludicrous that a student newspaper editorial faulted a TV story on the tree-sitters' Thanksgiving among the branches for failing to mention "the police officers who had to miss Thanksgiving with their own families because they had to patrol the oak grove."

Frustrated alumni, donors and taxpayers have let UC administrators know they'd like to see campus police do more than dodge human feces, write feckless citations and escort injured protesters to the emergency room.

Have you thought about tear gas? I asked UC Berkeley spokesman Dan Mogulof. He answered that "certain tactics" that would fly in corporate America or other areas "simply don't mesh with the culture, character and traditions of this university."

And: "Eventually, this protest will end, but we have to bring it to an end in a manner that is consistent with our values and our very strong desire not to have anyone injured in the process."

The university finally has put up chain-link and barbed-wire fences to isolate squatters from their supporters. At night, the university now shines floodlights into the trees. The tree-squatters have responded hysterically, charging that the university had turned the oak grove into Berkeley's "Guantanamo."

The People's Perch is a perfect example of the infantilization of the American Left's protest movement - and I say this aware that many good liberals are appalled at this spectacle.

Like young children, the tree-sitters have no sense of proportion. They can leave at any time. They eat and mix with others as they will. The worst they have to fear is five days in jail. Yet they equate their plight with that of Gitmo inmates?

It's a Peter Pan protest. Activists go by kiddie names - Running Wolf, Redwood Mary, Midnight Matt. And they have a child's sense of what is important. In a world darkened by genocide, starvation and ignorance, they see fit to champion the cause of landscaped trees, which, by the way, UC has offered to replace on a 3-to-1 basis.

In short, the tree-sitters have picked an unworthy cause. Given Judge Miller's injunction, their squatting is irrelevant. They could work to make the world a better place, but they've chosen to waste other people's time and money.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)

Re: pt 2 - [info]dangerrrdoll, 2007-12-05 10:18 pm UTC (Expand)
Re: pt 2 - [info]conceptual, 2007-12-05 10:20 pm UTC (Expand)
Re: pt 2 - [info]chrismu, 2007-12-06 07:12 am UTC (Expand)
Re: pt 2 - [info]conceptual, 2007-12-06 08:19 am UTC (Expand)
Re: pt 2 - [info]chrismu, 2007-12-06 09:01 am UTC (Expand)
Re: pt 2 - [info]conceptual, 2007-12-06 09:09 am UTC (Expand)
Re: pt 2 - [info]eigenvalue, 2007-12-07 05:28 am UTC (Expand)

[info]fallenthursday
2007-12-05 09:46 pm UTC (link)
Oh, definitely.

(Reply to this)


[info]arisrabkin
2007-12-05 09:47 pm UTC (link)
I'm not a big fan of the tree people, but I'll say this for them. Genocide, starvation, and ignorance are big and difficult problems that require a great deal of care and thought to deal with. This is a much more tractable problem. I think they do less harm protesting a new gym than they would tinkering with foreign policy.

The tree thing is a harmless amusement and a thing to show to tourists. It's mostly harmless.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]aepfelx
2007-12-05 10:09 pm UTC (link)
Harmless, eh?

I suspect this sentiment wouldn't be echoed by a friend of mine who was the victim of an attempted mugging next to campus in September, and didn't get a cop to show up until 20 minutes after the fact, with the cop telling him that almost everyone else on patrol from UCPD that night was at the oak grove busy dealing with the protesters' bullshit.

Or by people living next to the grove who've posted here complaining about the "protesters" littering the area with human waste thrown from the trees.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)

(no subject) - [info]ebonyandsnow, 2007-12-05 10:23 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]vokzal, 2007-12-06 09:08 am UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]cdm137, 2007-12-06 11:27 am UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]vokzal, 2007-12-06 05:08 am UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]cdm137, 2007-12-06 11:25 am UTC (Expand)

[info]chasingred
2007-12-05 11:32 pm UTC (link)
there are a ton of stuff aside from foreign policy that are still more serious. getting mosquito nets to parts of africa, trying to raise money for groups who are trying to get rid of landmines, etc etc.

seriously, even the suitcase clinic here in berkeley is a more worthwhile project than protesting some landscaping issue, which is frankly all i think this protest is about.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)

(no subject) - [info]asagray, 2007-12-06 12:08 am UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]chasingred, 2007-12-06 12:34 am UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]asagray, 2007-12-06 04:47 am UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]chasingred, 2007-12-06 08:24 am UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]asagray, 2007-12-06 08:27 am UTC (Expand)

[info]krypticnight
2007-12-05 10:05 pm UTC (link)
I support any movement that puts a thorn in the side of the athletic infrastructure here, which this school seems to shamefully emphasize. Tedford paid more than anyone in the UC system? At one of the top research institutions in the world? Shame on you, Berkeley community, shame on you.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]rayndrops
2007-12-05 10:18 pm UTC (link)
I don't think it's because we choose to pay him that much, I think it's because we have to. Otherwise he'd go elsewhere, we'd all be terribly sad, and alumni might not be as excited about giving us money (that can be used in other areas). So paying Tedford a ton of money is quite necessary in my opinion, as is enhancing the sports facilities. The tree people are just wasting everyone's money and time.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]sir_fitzy
2007-12-05 10:21 pm UTC (link)
Are you aware of just how much money the football program alone brings into UC Berkeley and the city of Berkeley every year? When the team is doing well (as it was doing this year), donations tend to rise tremendously. It's not as if athletics and academics cannot simultaneously excel.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]cdm137
2007-12-05 10:39 pm UTC (link)
You seem to be under the mistaken impression that somehow money that is earmarked for educational purposes is being shadily funneled into the athletics department to the detriment of students.

What you fail to realize is that for participation in the Pac-10, the athletics department receives $1.5 million (sometimes $2 million) from the BCS. In addition, there are ticket sales, merchandise sales, and loads of donations that come with the revival of Cal spirit (not all of which goes towards athletics). Overall, it's a net positive for the university and the students.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]cdm137
2007-12-06 12:46 am UTC (link)
Also, thanks for the first troll post of the thread. I figured the first one was bound to come from a dendrophile, but a close second is the skinny-little-internet-nerd-raging-against-jocks troll post. Bravo.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)

(no subject) - [info]barawulf, 2007-12-06 01:39 am UTC (Expand)

[info]bearsnecessity
2007-12-06 01:29 am UTC (link)
Do people pay for $200 ticket packages to watch professors lecture and researchers do their work?

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)

(no subject) - [info]chasingred, 2007-12-06 01:33 am UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]cdm137, 2007-12-06 01:46 am UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]chasingred, 2007-12-06 01:48 am UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]bearsnecessity, 2007-12-06 12:22 pm UTC (Expand)

[info]conceptual
2007-12-05 10:11 pm UTC (link)
ok now that I am done being angry let's lol.

"'People call us crazy monkey hippies but this is the greatest thing I've ever done.'"

"When protesters fall from one of the trees and break their bones, as has happened at least twice, people laugh"

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]elitist_doll
2007-12-05 10:46 pm UTC (link)
lol!

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]ebonyandsnow
2007-12-05 10:17 pm UTC (link)
Preeetty much how I feel. It's frustrating trying to work on increasing access to medicine and health care where it's most needed without anybody batting an eye, but with so much ridiculous and useless ruckus going on for a couple hundred trees... I'm not saying that I'm against environmental causes... but as the article says, it's all about proportion.

(Reply to this)


[info]eigenvalue
2007-12-05 11:05 pm UTC (link)
this is a pretty good piece.

the author says that Running Wolf is a "kiddie name" though.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]pinappl919
2007-12-05 11:36 pm UTC (link)
well, running wolf has been acting like a child...

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)

(no subject) - [info]chrismu, 2007-12-06 07:16 am UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]chasingred, 2007-12-06 08:25 am UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]chrismu, 2007-12-06 09:05 am UTC (Expand)
yes.
[info]honkyplease
2007-12-06 12:13 am UTC (link)
"They could work to make the world a better place, but they've chosen to waste other people's time and money."

(Reply to this)


[info]bearsnecessity
2007-12-06 01:27 am UTC (link)
Heh, it's funny that you think that I'd post this. I do agree with everything she's saying, but I have run out of things to say about this farce of a protest.

The treesitters are irrelevant. They are of some interest to a few dorky Daily Cloggers (if you actually read that silliness of a blog, there's at least a mention one every four posts) and the amusement of tourists/opponent fans. And some embarrassment to us. Whatever. I'm far more concerned with rumoring allegations of our football team quitting down the stretch than some rich Ivy League lacrosse dude/"activist" hitting turf and breaking arm.

So I've tuned them out. The treesitters will eventually be removed and the Oaks will be gone, and we can return to rooting for Cal football in a normal way. I hope.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]cdm137
2007-12-06 01:28 am UTC (link)
Amen

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]kaleidyscopeize
2007-12-06 04:31 am UTC (link)
All I have to say about the article is FUCK YEA. Tree sitters have made me hate hippies even more than I already do from going to school here.

- former hippie

(Reply to this) (Thread)(Expand)


[info]conceptual
2007-12-06 08:20 am UTC (link)
haha I love this

(Reply to this) (Parent)

(no subject) - [info]vokzal, 2007-12-06 09:16 am UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]chasingred, 2007-12-06 09:22 am UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]vokzal, 2007-12-06 07:33 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]chasingred, 2007-12-06 07:42 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]cigsandcoffeee, 2007-12-06 07:22 pm UTC (Expand)
From an environmentalist point of view
(Anonymous)
2007-12-17 04:49 am UTC (link)
Personally, I consider myself an environmentalist (i actually do a lot of work reducing green house gases being emitted by the campus)

And I CANT STAND the tree sitters. I would support the idea if they were Berkeley students in those trees, but most of them are not. They are just your run of the mill weird hippies that protest everything yet they do nothing constructive to actually make a difference and give us green folk that are working really hard to make a difference a bad name.

I also find it retarded that I find supporters passing out fliers on sproul about the trees.

I find it a little hypocritical. Yes i do understand the fact that they are "old growth trees" (if you count... 100 years old, old growth). Passing out fliers....made of paper? Isn't the whole point about saving the trees? Also, Yet you sit there in these trees and do nothing about the other trees being cut 50 feet away from you.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: From an environmentalist point of view
[info]luv2dancer
2007-12-17 04:55 am UTC (link)
(BTW thats me above, i forgot to sign in)

In the end, I don't think its going to make a difference. I think they ARE going to cut those trees down regardless. Football is extremely important to CAL and if the university doesnt see a huge student support for this, they are totally going to disregard it. No cal students in the trees, no support, even the ASUC senate has extended their support for the new athletic center. Def trespassing on university property and not representing the university community.

Also a comment on the guy who broke his arm while trying to get out of the tree to see his dad, you're stupid, its your fault you forgot to put on your harness before swinging out.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…