It is truly sad that scores of on-line "trainings" are now required for what even a high school drop out would have considered common sense and ordinary politeness when I was an undergraduate in the 1980's. The fact that so many students, AND FACULTY, appear not have this background suggest that the admission and hiring processes are both flawed and should be retooled to emphasize basic protocol BEFORE a person becomes affiliated with the college.
As to how the university's should respond to the protests, the experiences of the University of New Hampshire in the 1990's might offer some insights. UNH at that time had about 17000 students in a town of only 5000 permanent residents. The presence of the university and town resident paranoia about the students conduct caused the community to have the highest police:student ratio of any school of this size. This resulted in a police force with so little to do that harassing students for truly minor issues like jaywalking or riding a bicycle the wrong way on a 100 foot long alley. Student:police relations got so bad that any sporting event on a rain free weekend would lead to disturbances in the town adjacent to campus. The police were very heavy handed in these instances often giving contradictory orders to large numbers of freshman and then blaming the students for doing what they were told to do. The president of the university actually entered one of the riots and only avoided injury because a group of fraternity brothers personally intervened to protect her and get her out of the fray. By the third such disturbance, the students were so angry and riled up about how the police were acting that they even staged old couches and other "fuel" for their response to the next event. The university realized that the situation had become untenable and issued a warning to the campus community. For all future disturbances the Dean of Students and relevant staff would be set up at the police station to expel and remove for trespass any student brought in for rioting. There would be no due process and no discussion on the subject.
Fortunately some of us graduate students in leadership positions were able to get the ear of the president and help her to see the cause of the disturbances was as much how the police were interacting with the students and not ill intent. Discussions between university administration and the police resulted in a change in approach. The next time a "disturbance" arose, the police exhibited restraint allowing the students to express themselves with only minor blocking of traffic and the like. The response from the students was so grateful to be treated with respect that they were literally thanking the police as they departed the "riot". The campus had no further such issues as long as that administration remained in place.
I share this story to make 2 fundamental points.
1. Attendance of a university is a privilege, not a right. Engaging in inappropriate conduct that harms others including the reputation of the university and its ability to function in the community is grounds for that privilege to be revoked. It is not a subject for debate.
2. There is a vast difference between those engaging in protest who are acting out of good will and a desire to address a problem in the community in a positive fashion and those acting to disrupt, bully and engage in hate regardless of hiding behind the word "resistance". The conduct of the antisemitic protesters is clearly meant to aid and abet designated terrorist group. That is not a legitimate protest and should be treated with the same dispatch as a race riot by the KKK or Hitler Youth would be.
A school like USC that is already very poor on its FIRE rating could easily implement these recommendations without affecting its reputation for free speech and academic freedom. Doing so would actually improve both!
There is another tactic that universities should consider in response to these protests. Many of the protesters demand BDS boycotts and divestment from companies/organizations seen to be aiding Israel. A proper response from the administration to such demands when the protests become disruptive is not only to refuse but to publicly and proudly INCREASE the investment in those companies by divesting funds from organizations based in the Islamic world that are favorable to the Palestinians.
One man’s good will is another man’s toilet droppings. That’s one thought.
Tens of thousands are protesting Israeli government activities in the streets of Tel Aviv. Should Americans on campuses have the same rights of protest where Israel is concerned as Israeli Jews have?
Violence is never acceptable, no matter which of the two tribes you favor.
You seem to forget that we are talking about universities. Whether public or private they are organizations with a distinct mission and LEGAL obligations that govern the freedoms they are permitted to exercise. Universities have obligations to ALL their students, faculty and staff that, by definition impose limits to "free" speech. Hate speech, for example, may be protected in the wider society to some degree, but when it interferes with the ability of the university to fulfill its obligations to ALL its students, the university has not only the right but the legal obligation to shut it down. Failure to do so is a violation of the universities legal obligations to its community, opening it up to litigation as well as governmental action. Universities that create a hostile work or learning environment based on race, religion etc. can claim free speech all they like, but the federal and state governments can respond by removing their access to federal and state funds, including financial aid to their students and research grants, strip them of their tax exempt status...and in the case of land grant universities, evict them from their campuses if they fail to fulfill their obligations. Hamas and many other of the Palestinian groups supported by the protesters are designated terrorist organizations. Providing such organizations material support, which is what the protesters are doing, is just as illegal as a KKK group barring black children from entering a public elementary school. The southern states tested this in the 1950's and quickly learned how far their freedom to "protest" did not extend. Frankly, if the universities don't put a stop to the antisemitic incitement, the federal and state governments should send in the national guard to these campuses and remove permanently by arrest all students, faculty and staff that are preventing the university from functioning as it should. If necessary, recalcitrant institution should be closed.
As for the protesters in the streets of Tel Aviv...Israel has the same right to limit time, manner and place of protests as the officials in the US do. The protesters in Israel are aiding and abetting an enemy of the state of Israel in a time of war. I suspect that is treason even under Israeli law.
For the record I do NOT agree with the Netanyahu government's approach to the Palestinians and believe that the best solution, the one that will save the most lives on both sides is to acknowledge that the Palestinians simply refuse to accept the 2 state solution or to live in peace alongside Israel. As such, the two populations need to be physically separated to prevent further conflict. In this case, that means making the land from the River to the Sea Palestinian free. Actions have consequences and such solutions to intractable conflicts between peoples have been employed successfully throughout history.
The “healthcare professional “ who refused to treat the Israeli student needs to be identified, summarily dismissed, and reported to the state board of medicine to have his or her license revoked
I'm glad you talked about how silly it is to have the kind of on-line training for behavior that universities have, not only now for free speech, but for sexual harassment and various DEI topics. Universities ignore the large cost-- when you multiply by 1,000's of people-- of the time and energy lost. Their only purpose is performative, so the university, and in particular the bureaucrat in charge, can claim an accomplishment, and get some possible protection in a lawsuit (where it is unlikely to help anyway).
It would be better to at least require students to read an inspirational article on the value of freedom of speech. What would people suggest?
It is good to know that protests against invited speakers, whether coming from very conservative or very liberal ends of the political spectrum will no longer be tolerated in any way unless those occur in well-established and defined protest zones. This in long overdue.
It is also good to know that pro-Palestinian or pro-Israeli protests will also never be tolerated unless they occur within established zones, because those protests otherwise might make Arabs or Jews feel threatened and unsafe.
I suppose the next step is to ban the wearing of both Palestinian keffiyehs and Jewish yarmulkes on campuses since this could cause Jews and Arabs to feel threatened and unsafe. I recently heard about a student wearing an IDF uniform field jacket on an American campus. That obviously must be banned since it would terrify any and all Palestinians, especially those struggling with PTSD after witnessing the deaths of mothers, fathers, siblings, etc.
Tone policing Jewish organizations for speaking their views on Israel is a manifestation of a gross pattern I’ve seen emerge (corollary: don’t use spicy language when discussing fellow Jews’s right-wing politics, but right wing Jews can be disgusting as they want to their fellow Jews). So, I’ll just assume that was a poorly-considered photo choice.
It is truly sad that scores of on-line "trainings" are now required for what even a high school drop out would have considered common sense and ordinary politeness when I was an undergraduate in the 1980's. The fact that so many students, AND FACULTY, appear not have this background suggest that the admission and hiring processes are both flawed and should be retooled to emphasize basic protocol BEFORE a person becomes affiliated with the college.
As to how the university's should respond to the protests, the experiences of the University of New Hampshire in the 1990's might offer some insights. UNH at that time had about 17000 students in a town of only 5000 permanent residents. The presence of the university and town resident paranoia about the students conduct caused the community to have the highest police:student ratio of any school of this size. This resulted in a police force with so little to do that harassing students for truly minor issues like jaywalking or riding a bicycle the wrong way on a 100 foot long alley. Student:police relations got so bad that any sporting event on a rain free weekend would lead to disturbances in the town adjacent to campus. The police were very heavy handed in these instances often giving contradictory orders to large numbers of freshman and then blaming the students for doing what they were told to do. The president of the university actually entered one of the riots and only avoided injury because a group of fraternity brothers personally intervened to protect her and get her out of the fray. By the third such disturbance, the students were so angry and riled up about how the police were acting that they even staged old couches and other "fuel" for their response to the next event. The university realized that the situation had become untenable and issued a warning to the campus community. For all future disturbances the Dean of Students and relevant staff would be set up at the police station to expel and remove for trespass any student brought in for rioting. There would be no due process and no discussion on the subject.
Fortunately some of us graduate students in leadership positions were able to get the ear of the president and help her to see the cause of the disturbances was as much how the police were interacting with the students and not ill intent. Discussions between university administration and the police resulted in a change in approach. The next time a "disturbance" arose, the police exhibited restraint allowing the students to express themselves with only minor blocking of traffic and the like. The response from the students was so grateful to be treated with respect that they were literally thanking the police as they departed the "riot". The campus had no further such issues as long as that administration remained in place.
I share this story to make 2 fundamental points.
1. Attendance of a university is a privilege, not a right. Engaging in inappropriate conduct that harms others including the reputation of the university and its ability to function in the community is grounds for that privilege to be revoked. It is not a subject for debate.
2. There is a vast difference between those engaging in protest who are acting out of good will and a desire to address a problem in the community in a positive fashion and those acting to disrupt, bully and engage in hate regardless of hiding behind the word "resistance". The conduct of the antisemitic protesters is clearly meant to aid and abet designated terrorist group. That is not a legitimate protest and should be treated with the same dispatch as a race riot by the KKK or Hitler Youth would be.
A school like USC that is already very poor on its FIRE rating could easily implement these recommendations without affecting its reputation for free speech and academic freedom. Doing so would actually improve both!
There is another tactic that universities should consider in response to these protests. Many of the protesters demand BDS boycotts and divestment from companies/organizations seen to be aiding Israel. A proper response from the administration to such demands when the protests become disruptive is not only to refuse but to publicly and proudly INCREASE the investment in those companies by divesting funds from organizations based in the Islamic world that are favorable to the Palestinians.
Thoughts?
Absolutely. These maniacs are no more the “resistance” than were the Nazi Brownshirts in the 1930s. What they truly resist is the Enlightenment.
Cannot agree more.
Dean, this is an illuminating story!
One man’s good will is another man’s toilet droppings. That’s one thought.
Tens of thousands are protesting Israeli government activities in the streets of Tel Aviv. Should Americans on campuses have the same rights of protest where Israel is concerned as Israeli Jews have?
Violence is never acceptable, no matter which of the two tribes you favor.
You seem to forget that we are talking about universities. Whether public or private they are organizations with a distinct mission and LEGAL obligations that govern the freedoms they are permitted to exercise. Universities have obligations to ALL their students, faculty and staff that, by definition impose limits to "free" speech. Hate speech, for example, may be protected in the wider society to some degree, but when it interferes with the ability of the university to fulfill its obligations to ALL its students, the university has not only the right but the legal obligation to shut it down. Failure to do so is a violation of the universities legal obligations to its community, opening it up to litigation as well as governmental action. Universities that create a hostile work or learning environment based on race, religion etc. can claim free speech all they like, but the federal and state governments can respond by removing their access to federal and state funds, including financial aid to their students and research grants, strip them of their tax exempt status...and in the case of land grant universities, evict them from their campuses if they fail to fulfill their obligations. Hamas and many other of the Palestinian groups supported by the protesters are designated terrorist organizations. Providing such organizations material support, which is what the protesters are doing, is just as illegal as a KKK group barring black children from entering a public elementary school. The southern states tested this in the 1950's and quickly learned how far their freedom to "protest" did not extend. Frankly, if the universities don't put a stop to the antisemitic incitement, the federal and state governments should send in the national guard to these campuses and remove permanently by arrest all students, faculty and staff that are preventing the university from functioning as it should. If necessary, recalcitrant institution should be closed.
As for the protesters in the streets of Tel Aviv...Israel has the same right to limit time, manner and place of protests as the officials in the US do. The protesters in Israel are aiding and abetting an enemy of the state of Israel in a time of war. I suspect that is treason even under Israeli law.
For the record I do NOT agree with the Netanyahu government's approach to the Palestinians and believe that the best solution, the one that will save the most lives on both sides is to acknowledge that the Palestinians simply refuse to accept the 2 state solution or to live in peace alongside Israel. As such, the two populations need to be physically separated to prevent further conflict. In this case, that means making the land from the River to the Sea Palestinian free. Actions have consequences and such solutions to intractable conflicts between peoples have been employed successfully throughout history.
The “healthcare professional “ who refused to treat the Israeli student needs to be identified, summarily dismissed, and reported to the state board of medicine to have his or her license revoked
I’m sure if the story is true they will be.
I'm glad you talked about how silly it is to have the kind of on-line training for behavior that universities have, not only now for free speech, but for sexual harassment and various DEI topics. Universities ignore the large cost-- when you multiply by 1,000's of people-- of the time and energy lost. Their only purpose is performative, so the university, and in particular the bureaucrat in charge, can claim an accomplishment, and get some possible protection in a lawsuit (where it is unlikely to help anyway).
It would be better to at least require students to read an inspirational article on the value of freedom of speech. What would people suggest?
It is good to know that protests against invited speakers, whether coming from very conservative or very liberal ends of the political spectrum will no longer be tolerated in any way unless those occur in well-established and defined protest zones. This in long overdue.
It is also good to know that pro-Palestinian or pro-Israeli protests will also never be tolerated unless they occur within established zones, because those protests otherwise might make Arabs or Jews feel threatened and unsafe.
I suppose the next step is to ban the wearing of both Palestinian keffiyehs and Jewish yarmulkes on campuses since this could cause Jews and Arabs to feel threatened and unsafe. I recently heard about a student wearing an IDF uniform field jacket on an American campus. That obviously must be banned since it would terrify any and all Palestinians, especially those struggling with PTSD after witnessing the deaths of mothers, fathers, siblings, etc.
Tone policing Jewish organizations for speaking their views on Israel is a manifestation of a gross pattern I’ve seen emerge (corollary: don’t use spicy language when discussing fellow Jews’s right-wing politics, but right wing Jews can be disgusting as they want to their fellow Jews). So, I’ll just assume that was a poorly-considered photo choice.