Distinguishing Political Speech from Stupidity: A quick field guide.

I took a stroll over to the Campus Center here at UH Manoa a couple of hours ago, and was treated to an interesting sight. UH has been engaged in discussions with the Navy for a couple of years now about the possibility of getting Manoa designated as one of the Navy's University Affiliated Research Centers (UARC). There are a fair number of people on campus who are very much opposed to the idea, mostly because of concerns over the possibility of weapons research and/or classified research programs being conducted here. Personally, I'm not sure where I stand on the issue. I'm not a huge fan of classified research, but the UH proposal would have the bulk of the research being done in the basic sciences and in environmental research, with any classified work done off-campus.

Anyway, the talks have been ongoing for quite some time, and there is a very vocal group of students on campus who are very strongly opposed to the idea. They've been protesting every step of the way, and they've proven to be pretty good at it. They've passed out fliers, had marches through campus, hung banners through window, encouraged other students to write letters of opposition to local officials, mobilized support from faculty, and it's definitely had an effect.

Unfortunately, it would seem that at least one of those in opposition needs a quick refresher course on the difference between expressing a political opinion and being a bloody moron - because when I walked over to the Campus Center for my morning coffee, this is what I saw:

i-697a6d78cd3ba9a0477e535c38485d67-stupid3.jpg

i-092047c463cfef489a903ed58320a31f-stupid4.jpg

I've seen similar messages scrawled around campus before, but there was a big difference between the previous instances and this one. Before, they used chalk. This time, spray paint.

OK. If you want to be technical, writing on university buildings in chalk is an act of vandalism, but it's one that can be taken care of in five minutes by a groundskeeper with a garden hose, and it doesn't usually cause any actual property damage. I don't think that was the most effective technique that the UARC opponents used, but it really didn't hurt anybody.

i-520c13e5e4b54114e8f7add8fea2533b-stupid2.jpg

Spray paint, on the other hand, doesn't really wash off too well - the picture above is one of the patches where some of the maintenance guys tried and failed to scrub the paint off the wall. This means that somebody had to do a lot more work today than he previously planned on:

i-a467a3e46d068da1765597e7fa1bac53-stupid5.jpg

The Campus Center walkway walls, which weren't repainted all that long ago, now look like crap. A bunch of people had to do extra work to repair the damage. The school had to spend money to repair the damage this much, and will have to find more to fully restore the damage. And, if you were wondering, the reaction of people walking by and looking at the graffiti was pretty universally, "How stupid."

So, just to cover the unlikely event that the pinhead with the paint can is reading this, let me do a quick review of a couple of basic concepts.

(1) Political speech and expression can take a huge number of legitimate forms.

(2) Taking spray paint to somebody's wall is not one of them.

(3) Damaging somebody else's property is not a good idea, especially when that property isn't actually hurting anyone.

(4) Damaging property, particularly randomly, makes you look like a moron, and is much more likely to hurt your cause than help it.

(5) It's especially likely to piss off the people who have to clean up after you, especially when you don't have the courage to stand there, admit to doing it, and take the punishment that comes with such a bold act of civil disobedience.

Any questions?

More like this

It doesn't help that some factions can vandalize at will without fear of repercussion from the authorities. Fascist and racist groups usually have the sympathy of the local police. Check the incidence rates against the arrest rates. Swastikas almost never result in arrests, while pacifist/nuclear-disarmament/eco/green/leftist graffiti usually results in arrests.

But your point about defacing property to send a message is solid.

It's only loosely related, but how do you feel about Banksy, Mike?

By Ginger Yellow (not verified) on 12 Apr 2007 #permalink

Personally, I think that any such public posting, whether in chalk, paint or on paper, should be accompanied by the real name of the person doing the posting.

I am not impressed by anonymous comments, and am even less by destructive ones.

By Daniel Kim (not verified) on 10 May 2007 #permalink