Our Back-To-School Newsletter

As the campus prepares for the start of the new academic year, worries about continuing expressions of antisemitism and anti-Zionism, campus disruptions, and possible outbursts of violence mount. As we covered in our August 6 newsletter, various terror-adjacent organizations are plotting new disruptions, some openly declaring their intent to engage in “armed resistance.” On August 22, USC experienced the first—relatively minor—disruption, organized by SJP.

According to the Daily “Voice for Hamas” Trojan (“Community Members Protest Outside Coliseum During Convocation,” August 22, 2024):

Roughly 17 community members participated in a protest outside the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum as students filed in for convocation Thursday morning. Protesters held signs that read “USC FUNDS GENOCIDE” and “LONG LIVE THE STUDENT INTIFADA.”

The demonstrators chanted “Israel bombs, USC pays, how many kids did you kill today?” And “not another nickel, not another dime, no more money for Israel’s crimes.” Convocation attendees largely did not participate in the chants.

Protesters also passed out pamphlets that alleged “USC lied during and after meetings with students for peace negotiations about students’ security, the use of violent police force, and punishments!” The community members alleged that USC President Carol Folt had a “very strong relationship” with USC Hillel and USC Chabad, and that the organizations had been the proprietors of “extreme violence against pro-Palestinian students on campus.”

Although protests outside of campus boundaries are protected by the First Amendment, as the image below shows, the protesters are masked, which is in tension with anti-mask laws.

Protestors holding signs reading “USC FUNDS GENOCIDE” and “LONG LIVE THE STUDENT INTIFADA” as students filed into convocation. Image source: “Community members protest outside Coliseum during convocation,” Zachary Whalen via Daily Trojan).

Their slogans, such as “Long Live The Student Intifada,” need to be taken seriously. We have to assume they mean what they say—so we must be vigilant about SJP and other pro-terror groups.

SJP is not not an accredited student organization at USC, however, they are active on our campus and have been involved in previous antisemitic actions—such as bullying Rose Ritch out of her elected position in the student government and mobbing Professor Strauss. And, of course, they were the main contingent of “peaceful protestors.” The administration should firmly refuse to recognize this and other groups, show zero tolerance for their actions when they violate university policies, and resolve not to negotiate with them. The failure to hold these groups accountable—how many USC protesters were expelled, exactly?—is asking for future misbehavior.

Liberals Must Start Taking Anti-Israel Activists at Their Word

From Mosaic Magazine:

Behind the willingness on the mainstream left to indulge the anti-Israel radicals, argues Jonathan Chait, is a tendency to romanticize them while ignoring their actual ideas. Chait, a staunchly liberal journalist who makes some unsympathetic and highly dubious claims about Israel, sees this tendency in some of his own colleagues, who tend to ascribe “the most sympathetic possible motives” to the protesters while avoiding any examination of their “actual beliefs.” Take, for instance, Students Allied for Freedom and Equality (SAFE), the branch of Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) that interrupted Kamala Harris’s speech in Detroit:

SAFE, like other branches of SJP, takes an eliminationist posture toward Israel. It has employed violent rhetoric preceding Israel’s operation in Gaza. A SAFE rally in January 2023 featured calls of “intifada revolution,” smashing the “Zionist entity,” claims that Israelis “water their invasive species with Palestinian blood,” and so on. SAFE celebrated the October 7 attacks. In March, its president wrote on social media, “Until my last breath, I will utter death to every single individual who supports the Zionist state. Death and more. Death and worse.”

Would progressives have taken a cooler view of the demonstrators had they possessed a clearer view of their objectives? Some might. But others would not. Progressives tend to take a romantic view of left-wing protest. Protesters occupy a special category of political actor, freed of any responsibility or agency and judged only as a counterweight against the worst excesses of whatever they oppose. They represent an idealistic impulse and revulsion at the status quo, and since the status quo is unjust, their behavior, by definition, cannot be. All that matters is that their actions are directionally correct.

To the extent progressives feel any discomfort with the goals or methods of protesters, they tend to rationalize them by invoking noble protests from past eras.

But the leaders of these specific protests, as Chait documents, have made their actual beliefs quite explicit, and one “common thread” is an “unbounded eagerness to shed Israeli blood.”

We can recognize this sentiment in communications from USC administrators. For example, the back-to-school letter discussed below says, “While many in our community were not directly involved in the protests, we recognize the genuine pain and frustration driving them.” This statement—if it is even sincere—is self-deception. There is no “genuine pain” driving the protestors, but there is certainly genuine Jew hatred driving some of them.

The full article is published in New York Magazine (requires subscription).

Safety Measures on the USC Campus

As per an August 8 communication by the Office of the Senior Vice President for Administration, campus access remains restricted to USC students, faculty, and stuff (valid USC ID is required to enter) and registered guests:

Security on campus remains our top priority, even more so as we still face safety concerns in our world today. We will remain vigilant and do our best to provide a secure campus that is also as open and accessible as possible. The operational plans we are sharing with you today will remain in place for the foreseeable future.

We’ve long operated with open access during weekday business hours, and limited access after-hours and on weekends. Last spring, we moved to a 24/7 secured perimeter. 

No one likes to go through the hassle of waiting in line at the gate and having their ID checked, but that’s what you get when radical elements abound. In Israel, to enter any campus you need to pass through a security checkpoint and a metal detector—this is what living with terrorists look like. Until measures against terror-adjacent organizations are taken, the current secured perimeter at least provides some protection against disruption, vandalism, and violence.

What About the Bigger Picture?

As was extensively documented in the “Report on Campus Climate and Call for Action” and in testimonials by faculty and parents, antisemitism and anti-Zionism on the USC campus are persistent and pervasive. The reasons why we ended up in this situation are complex, however, one issue is crystal clear: consistent inaction by the administration is one of the contributing factors. This must change. But to precipitate the change, the university must abandon their go-to strategy of performative responses to difficult challenges—hiding behind task-forces and committees staffed by administrators and yes-men. The university must openly acknowledge the existence of antisemitism and anti-Zionism on campus, engage faculty and students who are committed to fighting it, and commit to real action.

To the best of our knowledge, no one from our group of nearly 200 faculty, who openly and consistently spoke against antisemitism and anti-Zionism—see here for the signatories of Open Letters issued by our group—have been invited by the President to serve on the Jewish Life Committee. The Committee, which is chaired by an administrator, has been lifeless:

• It was conspicuously silent following the October 7 massacre;

• It did not speak up on Valedictoriangate;

• It did not offer public support to Professor Strauss;

• It did not condemn the vitriolic antisemitic protests that paralyzed our campus this spring;

• It did not implement the recommendations of the report prepared by the USC Advisory Committee on Jewish Life, which were published in August 2022 and approved by the President.

Our report recommended a significant restructuring of the Committee:

A new and reorganized permanent Committee on Jewish Life should be formed with a focus on the participation of students and USC faculty committed to fighting antisemitism and anti-Zionism. The committee should provide progress reports to the President and Provost. [Bolding ours.]

“Welcome Back” Letter from the President and Provost

In a letter addressed to the campus community (August 20, 2024), President Folt, Provost Guzman, and Senior Vice President for Health Affairs Shapiro addressed some of the outstanding issues related to campus operations:

Over the summer we tightened and expanded our rules and processes designed to ensure our campus is safe and welcoming for everyone. A list of links to this critical information is included below. One thing you’ll notice immediately is the improved process of accessing campus. We hope the new system will make it faster and easier. 

Last Spring's Challenges: The events of last spring were particularly challenging for campuses nationwide. USC has seen peaceful protests, vigils, and marches for years, including more than 130 last year alone. However, the spring semester brought incidents that tested our values, disregarded our policies, sparked fears, and required unprecedented safety measures. 

While many in our community were not directly involved in the protests, we recognize the genuine pain and frustration driving them. This suffering and passion did not disappear over the summer. We hope by making our policies, guidelines, and rules clearer, we can make USC welcoming and safe for all, no matter what issues or conflicts arise. 

Free Expression and Academic Freedom: The ability to express oneself, to assert beliefs, and to dissent is fundamental to our university and our democracy. We each share a responsibility to foster an environment where divergent ideas can be discussed, examined, and challenged without infringing on others’ rights and safety. As we transition to the fall semester, we remain committed to ensuring your rights to free speech, academic freedom, and peaceful protest in accordance with state and federal law. We expect you to follow the university’s rules and policies designed to support your rights and prevent disruption of university functions. We also are required by law to maintain a safe and bias-free environment in our classrooms, hospitals, events, and campuses. These values are essential to the Trojan community and do not conflict with free speech or academic freedom. The links below explain free expression and academic freedom, along with legal responsibilities and limitations.

Time, Place, and Manner Rules for Free Expression at USC: USC has long-standing rules, guided by federal and state law, to ensure that everyone can participate fully in a bias-free, free speech academic and on-campus residential environment. These “time, place, and manner” limitations balance your right to express yourselves with the university’s responsibility to ensure the rights of all. These include long-standing rules banning encampments, damaging property, blocking access to campus and classrooms, doxing, harassment, and bullying (online or in person), as well as clear guidelines for protests of all sorts.

Over the summer, we reviewed and clarified these policies. You should become familiar with this material, and the Student Commitment which all students were required to read and acknowledge before enrolling. The university will continue to enforce these rules fairly, consistently, and expeditiously, acting quickly to protect campus health and safety. 

It always has been a Trojan Family value to be patient and respectful even in heated debates. By adhering to our highest standards, we will continue to maintain a culture of respect and dignity toward others.

University Statements, Communication, and Accountability: Universities and their leaders often are asked to take sides on political, social, and moral issues. Yet, such statements can silence people, be seen as speaking for everyone, and lead to unintended consequences and seeming orthodoxies that stifle people’s rights of free speech.

This runs counter to our responsibility to support viewpoint diversity, open and impartial debate, free speech, and safety in all aspects of university life. This understanding drove the Unifying Values written and adopted by the USC community in 2020, which include “fostering a community in which we solicit, embrace, and share diverse viewpoints.”

In line with these ideas, going forward as individual leaders or on behalf of the university, we will not post statements or take sides in political or social debates unless it pertains directly to our institutional mission and operations. This posture, sometimes referred to as “institutional restraint or neutrality,” has been widely adopted by both public and private universities across America.

We strongly agree with the points about Time, Place, and Manner and University Statements. In fact (unless USC intends to explicitly adopt the gold standard of institutional neutrality, that is, the Kalven report) they reiterate existing policy. Indeed, the main recommendation of the “Report on Campus Climate and Call for Action” was that the University enforce those existing policies in a consistent and content-neutral way. What is missing in the President’s letter, however, are the details—in particular, how these rules will be enforced and what the consequences for violators will be.

What Other Campuses Are Doing

Below we share a few (mostly) laudable examples from other campuses.

University of California Bans Encampments, Intimidation Tactics

The University of California directed the chancellors of all 10 of its campuses, including UC Berkeley and UCLA, to strictly enforce new rules banning encampments, wearing masks (for non-medical reasons), and blocking paths on campus. “We want our community members to understand what’s expected of them, including a clear understanding of the principles, policies and laws that govern our behavior on campus,” said University of California President Michael V. Drake. The background for this development is described in our “We Bear Witness: Episode 5.”

We would welcome a similarly unambiguous policy at USC.

George Washington University Suspends Anti-Israel Groups 

George Washington University has suspended two anti-Israel student groups, Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) and Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP), through the fall semester for violating university policies. Under the suspension, “SJP and JVP will not be recognized as registered campus organizations, are prohibited from hosting on-campus events and [will] lose all university funding.”

We would like USC to make a clear statement that it will not tolerate these organizations on our campus and will not negotiate with them.

New York University Updates Code of Conduct to Address Antisemitism Disguised as Anti-Zionism

According to “NYU Updates Anti-Harassment Policy to Include ‘Code Words’ for Jews Like ‘Zionist’” (National Review, Zach Kessel):

New York University updated the nondiscrimination and anti-harassment policy in its code of conduct to note that substituting the word “Zionist” in the place of the word “Jew” does not automatically prevent a student from violating university rules, NYU announced to students on Thursday. NYU offered examples of when the use of a code word for Jews like “Zionists” would violate the university’s policies. “Excluding Zionists from an open event, calling for the death of Zionists, applying a ‘no Zionist’ litmus test for participation in any NYU activity,” and other uses would constitute behavior prohibited by the university.

Vanderbilt University Introduces Trainings for Incoming Students

We firmly oppose mandatory trainings of any type; however, some way to communciate to incoming students about basic campus rules and consequences of their violation might be useful. Writing for the New York Times, Alan Blinder describes how Vanderbuilt University is doing that (“New Training and Tougher Rules: How Colleges Are Trying to Tame Gaza Protests,” August 24, 2024):

Daniel Diermeier, Vanderbilt University’s chancellor, told hundreds of new students that the school would not tolerate threats, harassment or protests “disrupting the learning environment.” There is no guarantee that the pre-emptive, plain-spoken meetings will work. Many student activists and professors at Vanderbilt have condemned the university’s rules as suppressing their speech, and even universities with histories of hard-nosed tactics have struggled with demonstrations. But university officials nationwide are grasping for new approaches as they brace for renewed protests over the Israel-Hamas war, along with a bitterly contested presidential election.

Blinder ends up with the observation:

But as the chancellor answered questions, he faced more sleeping students (a handful, including one in the front row) than vocal protesters (none).

This is exactly right—compulsory trainings are not going to change radicals and are an annoyance to everyone else. We need to learn how to cultivate a culture of free speech and constructive disagreement, not hide behing trainings and compliance.

Where Antisemitic Indoctrination Starts

The problems on university campuses do not originate there. Postmodern Marxist indoctrination and antisemitic propaganda begin in K–12. In California, this indoctrination is incorporated in the curricula under the umbrella of “ethnic studies.” To get the idea, we recommend watching the documentary Killing America, reviewed for the Jewish Journal by Ayala Or-El. The result of this is many students arriving on university campuses already indoctrinated if not radicalized. The following publications document this phenomenon in more detail and highlight the role the teachers unions play.

“Teachers Unions Are Fueling Anti-Israelism. Here's How” Mika Hackner for the Times of Israel (August 19, 2024).

A casual observer might be surprised to learn that both the National Education Association (NEA) and the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) had the Israel-Hamas war front and center during their conventions this year. And they might be surprised that a concerted effort by activists has introduced radical, anti-Israel and antisemitic curricula and teacher training in K-12 schools across the country.

Where does all this hostility toward Israel come from? There has been for decades a concerted effort to establish a radical progressive agenda within teachers unions and associations that has conditioned teachers to be advocates for a simplistic oppressed-oppressor binary. Teachers unions such as the NEA and AFT have jumped on the “anti-racism” bandwagon. The NEA adopted Tema Okun’s White Supremacy Culture framework, which holds that “white supremacy culture” upholds “negative” values of “objectivity,” “worship of the written word”, “perfectionism” and “either/or thinking.”

More exhibits of the role of the unions in promoting antisemitic propaganda in schools can be found in a report by the Jewish Institute for Liberal Values titled “JILV Backgrounder. How Teachers Unions and Associations Are Being Radicalized” (the report was reviewed in Jewish Insider and the Jewish Journal):

The California Teachers Association was a proud co-sponsor of the legislation that made ethnic studies a required course for High School graduation in California—even while issues with the inflammatory curriculum persisted. The curriculum used Rethinking Schools and the Zinn Education Project as resources.

Both Rethinking Schools and the Zinn Education Project have published explicitly anti-Israel material including an article titled “Israel’s War on Gaza Is Also a War on History, Education, and Children” which claims a connection between Israel’s “settler-colonial” policies and the United States. The article calls to “free Palestine and free Palestine Pedagogy.”

Indeed, Rethinking Schools’ Spring 2024 magazine is dedicated to “teaching Palestine”—it includes such articles as “No, anti-Zionism is not antisemitism” and “What we learned from our Oakland to Gaza K12 Teach-in” (that last piece was written by members of the Oakland Education Association for Palestine Group—an activist group within the OEA).

What is to be done?

We got here by ignoring the signs of creeping radicalization. We get out by recognizing these signs and fighting back. Put simply, activist teachers are made that way through the ideological monoliths of Colleges of Education and ongoing reinforcement in teacher professional development training and a school culture that rewards and often insists on ideological compliance. Activist teachers disproportionately get involved in their teachers associations. Using ties to groups like Rethinking Schools and Teaching for Change (themselves connected to far left activist groups working to influence education by working with school districts, teachers associations and teachers), these teachers influence the policy, activities and resources of their teachers associations.

We need to understand that labor unions are agents of Critical Social Justice and its intrinsic antisemitism. The unionization of students and postdocs is thus an additional potential vulnarability to distruptions by outside agitators entering the campus as union representatives.

“Eighteen Warning Signs Jewish Parents Should Look Out For This School Year” (Mika Hackner for the Jewish Journal, August 20, 2024) :

This article is written with K–12 in mind, but it should also help parents of college students as well as faculty to recognize signs that signal the spread of woke ideology. Here, we list three of the 18 signs, which are clearly present at USC:

7. Diversity, Equity and Inclusion—Focuses on ethnic/racial diversity and equal outcomes. DEI often is used to advance and institutionalize the oppressed/oppressor binary.

8. Equitable Grading or “Grading for Equity”—Equitable grading negates traditional standards of grading in favor of “motivation” (grades should be awarded to motivate students to do their work) and “bias-resistance.” Under such a system, participation in class and submitting work on time is not taken into account when grading.

10. Land Acknowledgements—Statements that acknowledge “indigenous rights to territory seized by colonial powers.”