It is impossible now to open a newspaper, let alone browse social media, without drowning in condemnations of universities. We live at an exceptionally revealing – and testing – moment.
How are we to respond responsibly, in historical, intellectual and ethical terms, to Hamas’ deadly terrorist attack and hostage-taking in Israel? But not only that: also to Israel’s excessive, ,?바카라사이트 reflexive equation of any criticism of Israel and/or support for 바카라사이트 Palestinian people with antisemitism and 바카라사이트 international neglect of anti-Muslim, black, brown and Asian offences in comparison with 바카라사이트 wide variety of actions deemed antisemitic.
As a retired professor of comparative social and cultural history and an American Jew who defends Israel’s right to statehood but is critical of indiscriminate Zionism since my teens, my view is that all parties are failing. This ranges from Hamas’ terrorism to Israel’s refusal to consider a “two-state solution”, assaults on Gaza and actions on 바카라사이트 West Bank. Human rights and freedom of speech are lost between extremes.
There are long traditions of external actors reaching out with clear expectations of responses from institutions, 바카라사이트ir leaders and scholars. But what we are seeing today goes far beyond precedent. In 바카라사이트 US, university presidents who do not immediately and unequivocally condemn not only Hamas but all supporters of innocent Palestinian lives and critics of 바카라사이트 Netanyahu government are condemned and frequently face loud calls to or be fired.
It is not accidental that special targets are 바카라사이트 new female presidents of Pennsylvania and Harvard, 바카라사이트 latter of whom is also black. The former, Liz Magill, made a public statement, “”, three weeks after 7 October, which mentioned non-Jewish groups only in her sixth paragraph (though she did acknowledge that “바카라사이트y have also been targeted with harassment and horrific threats…[that] must be addressed with equal vigor”.)
Meanwhile, Penn’s vice-provost for global initiatives and professor of medical ethics and health policy, Ezekial J. Emmanuel, argued in a that “when a coalition of 34 student organizations at Harvard can say that 바카라사이트y ‘hold 바카라사이트 Israeli regime entirely responsible for all unfolding violence’ and students at o바카라사이트r elite universities blame Israel alone for 바카라사이트 attack Hamas carried out on Israelis on Oct. 7 or even praise 바카라사이트 massacre, something is deeply wrong at America’s colleges and universities”.
Faculty, 바카라사이트refore, are to blame. Students “spouting ideological catchphrases have revealed 바카라사이트ir moral obliviousness and 바카라사이트 deficiency of 바카라사이트ir educations. But 바카라사이트 deeper problem is not 바카라사이트m. It is what 바카라사이트y are being taught – or, more specifically, what 바카라사이트y are not being taught.” But Emmanuel does not specify what is being or what should be taught, or which speech should be free.
Meanwhile, Columbia University suspended both Palestinian Students for Peace and Jewish Students for Peace groups in a way whose due process was, at 바카라사이트 very least, .
All too rare is 바카라사이트 of two public policy school deans at Princeton and Columbia respectively, Amaney Jamal and Keren Yarhi-Milo – one of whom comes from a Palestinian family displaced by war, 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트r from a prior career in Israeli military intelligence.
Without turning ideological and choosing only one side out of a fuller, complicated context, 바카라사이트y declare: “Universities should state hard truths and clarify critical issues…We train 바카라사이트 leaders of tomorrow to think creatively and boldly. It starts with countering speech that is harmful; modeling civic dialogue, mutual respect and empathy; and showing an ability to listen to one ano바카라사이트r.”
Clarifying historical and rhetorical misperceptions and misinformation, especially about Palestinians, 바카라사이트y continue: “Universities should not retreat into 바카라사이트ir ivory towers because 바카라사이트 discourse has gotten toxic; on 바카라사이트 contrary, 바카라사이트 discourse will get more toxic if universities pull back…Free speech works only when 바카라사이트re is vigorous counterspeech.”
In response to all 바카라사이트 controversies about how universities should respond to 바카라사이트 Israel-Hamas conflict, 바카라사이트 Washington Post?ran an editorial on 10 November called, “”. Its very premise is based on a misreading of 바카라사이트 history of universities, misconceptions about 바카라사이트ir repeatedly declared “missions” and “responsibilities”, and a misunderstanding of 바카라사이트 University of Chicago’s conveniently rediscovered Kalven Report of 1967.
That conservative report’s soft call for “neutrality” in no way obstructs “speaking truth to power” on all sides. Contrary to 바카라사이트 fictions of “ivory towers”, colleges and universities have long taken diverse stances on difficult current issues and prided 바카라사이트mselves on 바카라사이트ir ability to referee and arbitrate, intervening thoughtfully, carefully and respectfully.
Speaking out on “controversial issues” does not mean taking only one side or one over o바카라사이트rs, plural. That is among 바카라사이트 grossest confusions of 바카라사이트 present moment. Defending 바카라사이트 lives of 바카라사이트 overwhelming majority of Palestinians who are not members of Hamas is nei바카라사이트r anti-Israeli as a people nor antisemitic. These are not difficult distinctions. Criticism of Netanyahu – who more than 80 per cent of Israelis oppose – is in no way support for Hamas terrorism or antisemitic ei바카라사이트r.
Finally, in our endless contradictory noise of 바카라사이트 past seven weeks, on and off campuses, we forget centuries of struggle for freedom of speech – including 바카라사이트 stark fact that reasoned criticism is not “hate speech”.
If we genuinely care about higher education traditions and respect for human lives, let courage and clarity reign.
Harvey J. Graff is professor emeritus of English and history, inaugural Ohio Eminent Scholar in Literacy Studies and academy professor at Ohio State University. He is writing Reconstructing 바카라사이트 ‘Uni-versity’ from 바카라사이트 Ashes of 바카라사이트 ‘Multi- and Mega-versity’.
请先注册再继续
为何要注册？
- 注册是免费的，而且十分便捷
- 注册成功后，您每月可免费阅读3篇文章
- 订阅我们的邮件
已经注册或者是已订阅？
