Excellent information here. I do have a question and suggestion for universities to consider. Given that many of these protesters and those organizing them are NOT American citizens but foreign students, why are these universities allowing students from societies steeped in antisemitism to attend the university at all? I would propose these institutions demonstrate their commitment to combatting antisemitism by refusing to admit or employ students/faculty/staff who are citizens of countries that do not permit Jews to live as equal members of the society from which they come. This would mean any country that practices Sharia law such as Gaza run by Hamas would have its citizens ineligible to be a student at participating American universities. This new rule could be imposed effective immediately preventing new students/employees from such societies to attend and put existing students/employees from those societies on notice that any antisemitic action they commit will result in expulsion/termination. American institutions have no obligation to work with citizens of antisemitic societies and the residents of those societies would thus be incentivized to address the bigotry in their own homelands. Thoughts?
Dean, I understand your concern, but we should not treat individuals as representatives of their identity group. A student from a country practicing Sharia law can be a dissident fighting against it. Just think about all Iranian women rebels. But we can state clearly that our universities are committed to the values of Western civilization (humanism, democracy, enlightenment, etc), so when students join the university they understand that they are expected to respect our values while on our campuses. Makes sense?
Yes, your comment makes sense, but is not necessarily good policy. Given the blatant antisemitism that is being foisted on our campuses from Middle Eastern sources often with funds from those governments, our institutions have not only the right but the obligation to put a stop the ability of those sources from having this influence. The rights of American students/faculty/staff not to be attacked by antisemitism foisted on their communities supercedes the rights of students from such societies to have the privilege of studying/working on an American campus. Middle Eastern countries and societies will not reform if they can get the benefits of participation in the "free" world without demonstrating similar norms. If Iranians find themselves excluded from participation in the West because of the antisemitism of their government (and let's be honest culture), they will have more incentive to reform their society.
Allow me to offer an historical comparison. After the US Confederate states rebelled and lost the Civil War, their states and citizens lost many of their constitutional rights during the period of Reconstruction. This occurred for ALL the citizens of those states, even those who had opposed cessation and supported the Union. This was necessary as there was no practical way to distinguish who was pro-cessation and pro-Union in most cases. Indeed, some have argued that had the political will remained to continue Reconstruction longer than it did, that much of the Jim Crow discrimination of the late 19th and early 20th centuries might have been ameliorated.
Moreover, a more immediate comparison, the October 7 invasion of Israel acted out of Gaza but Israel has also barred workers from the West Bank from entering Israel out of the need to maintain security. Many innocent Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza are impacted by these actions, but they are warranted and necessary to protect Israeli citizens from malevolent Palestinian actors. While each person should be judged as an individual, membership in a group is sometimes a necessary proxy for protection of innocents when a particular group has been found to harbor widespread intent to commit harm. Sadly, students from societies steeped in antisemitism have demonstrated that they meet this threshold. Petitions for individuals whose conduct can be judged AS individuals should be allowed so long as the blanket policy is NO to admission.
Excellent information here. I do have a question and suggestion for universities to consider. Given that many of these protesters and those organizing them are NOT American citizens but foreign students, why are these universities allowing students from societies steeped in antisemitism to attend the university at all? I would propose these institutions demonstrate their commitment to combatting antisemitism by refusing to admit or employ students/faculty/staff who are citizens of countries that do not permit Jews to live as equal members of the society from which they come. This would mean any country that practices Sharia law such as Gaza run by Hamas would have its citizens ineligible to be a student at participating American universities. This new rule could be imposed effective immediately preventing new students/employees from such societies to attend and put existing students/employees from those societies on notice that any antisemitic action they commit will result in expulsion/termination. American institutions have no obligation to work with citizens of antisemitic societies and the residents of those societies would thus be incentivized to address the bigotry in their own homelands. Thoughts?
Dean, I understand your concern, but we should not treat individuals as representatives of their identity group. A student from a country practicing Sharia law can be a dissident fighting against it. Just think about all Iranian women rebels. But we can state clearly that our universities are committed to the values of Western civilization (humanism, democracy, enlightenment, etc), so when students join the university they understand that they are expected to respect our values while on our campuses. Makes sense?
Anna.
Hi Anna,
Yes, your comment makes sense, but is not necessarily good policy. Given the blatant antisemitism that is being foisted on our campuses from Middle Eastern sources often with funds from those governments, our institutions have not only the right but the obligation to put a stop the ability of those sources from having this influence. The rights of American students/faculty/staff not to be attacked by antisemitism foisted on their communities supercedes the rights of students from such societies to have the privilege of studying/working on an American campus. Middle Eastern countries and societies will not reform if they can get the benefits of participation in the "free" world without demonstrating similar norms. If Iranians find themselves excluded from participation in the West because of the antisemitism of their government (and let's be honest culture), they will have more incentive to reform their society.
Allow me to offer an historical comparison. After the US Confederate states rebelled and lost the Civil War, their states and citizens lost many of their constitutional rights during the period of Reconstruction. This occurred for ALL the citizens of those states, even those who had opposed cessation and supported the Union. This was necessary as there was no practical way to distinguish who was pro-cessation and pro-Union in most cases. Indeed, some have argued that had the political will remained to continue Reconstruction longer than it did, that much of the Jim Crow discrimination of the late 19th and early 20th centuries might have been ameliorated.
Moreover, a more immediate comparison, the October 7 invasion of Israel acted out of Gaza but Israel has also barred workers from the West Bank from entering Israel out of the need to maintain security. Many innocent Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza are impacted by these actions, but they are warranted and necessary to protect Israeli citizens from malevolent Palestinian actors. While each person should be judged as an individual, membership in a group is sometimes a necessary proxy for protection of innocents when a particular group has been found to harbor widespread intent to commit harm. Sadly, students from societies steeped in antisemitism have demonstrated that they meet this threshold. Petitions for individuals whose conduct can be judged AS individuals should be allowed so long as the blanket policy is NO to admission.
Hope this makes sense!