Not sure I am see students rejecting the idea of associating with open anti-semites as “siloing themselves off”. It seems to be more using judgement about who you want to be associated with and what views you tacitly or openly support.
3 Likes
Well, some have taken the approach of more engagement in an effort to improve communication and understanding between groups, but that is up to each person. As I said, pros and cons to each approach.
Corporate handbooks and rules are not the focus of this thread. Please focus on colleges
1 Like
It may not be up to each person so much as it is up to the overall atmosphere and at least as much up to the people holding opposing views. And, when it comes to dealing with extremists, it would be odd to ask, for example, a Jew to hear out a neo-Nazi openly praising Hitler. There are cases where engaging is not only pointless, but dangerous. In which case the marginalized side is not under any obligation or expectation to engage with the other.
When both sides are somewhat reasonable, open-minded, thoughtful, and respectful, sure. But that’s the problem now, right? We seem to be seeing less and less of that.
Engagement is ideal. But sometimes (often?) not realistic anymore, unfortunately.
1 Like
I am not asking for anyone to engage, just pointing out that on some campuses students/faculty/clergy are engaging with those holding opposite views and that they state they have found it beneficial.
It may not be suitable for some students in some situations not to engage, and in any event, there is surely more work and more risk in doing so, so I would expect most do not undertake it in this charged environment. Why risk being called a bigot by either side?
The opposing side must be open to that, however. Within the current climate, we don’t seem to be seeing much of that. I wish we were. I wish more people could find a common ground where, for example, they agree to condemn terrorism while supporting civilians. That should be easy enough to agree on. And many can’t even get that far, so where is the opportunity to engage? Honestly, you have to look no further than the thread on the politics forum to see evidence of that. And if intelligent, educated adults - as I generally consider us all to be - have trouble navigating this buffer zone of engagement and positive regard (which I think must underpin any sincere engagement), how can we expect college kids with fewer years of wisdom and experience to better navigate?
I don’t know. I’m just thinking out loud here. But I am feeling utterly pessimistic about, well, just about everything right now. So I am going back to my Facts of Life reruns on Tubi TV and wishing Mrs. Garrett were around to give us some of her homespun advice on how to better get along with one another.
1 Like
It does seem that colleges which adopted and adhered to the Chicago principles just had fewer problems/inconsistencies overall, with the exception of Columbia and GWU. Given where those 2 schools are located, maybe controversy was inevitable there.
1 Like
I think Harvard makes a significant distinction between admitted students who haven’t already matriculated and students who have.
The Kyle Kashuv incident wasn’t the first instance of Harvard revoking school admission after new information came to light and before the applicant was officially a Harvard student. There was that infamous admitted students chat group that was sharing openly racist, anti-semitic and anti-Syrian refugee memes and ‘jokes’ that led to several students having their admission revoked.
There’s a long thread on CC about those recissions I think around 2017?
1 Like
What about the other two. Scholars (not sure if these are teaching students or professors) disciplined for political blogs? And the disinvited speaker? There was another incident in another article that mentioned administrative leave for a professor who said there are two genders (admittedly I don’t know all the details).
MIT 2019 disinvited Subramanian Swamy due to student protests of racism
MIT 2022 disinvited Dorian Abbett due to diversity equity inclusion views.
There seem to be lots of examples of inconsistency in academic freedom and discourse.
I was specifically talking about the Harvard issue, I don’t know enough about MIT incidents to opine.
1 Like
This was one of the more disturbing exchanges.
These women come off as smug and completely uninterested in the widespread claims of anti-semitism infecting their campuses.
https://x.com/RepStefanik/status/1732138663608271149?s=20
Presidents of @Harvard, @MIT and @Penn REFUSE to say whether “calling for the genocide of Jews” is bullying and harassment according to their codes of conduct.
2 Likes
Congressional hearings are pure political drama with politicians playing to different audiences. I would not take anything that happens there too seriously; the Columbia president chose not to participate at all. I am sure they all care about their campuses but may not feel a hearing is the appropriate venue.
1 Like
I can see why Columbia’s president didn’t bother. All talk and little to no action by Columbia’s administration. After the congressional hearing I wouldn’t expect much to change at any of these universities.
In 2019, an executive order was signed to expand the interpretation of Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act to include “discrimination rooted in anti-Semitism” as a form of discrimination based on race, color and national origin — prohibited behavior for programs that get federal funding.
Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act does not include the word “religion” as a subject of discrimination. Because the law does not list religious characteristics, legal experts say, federal officials have gradually expanded interpretations to include ethnoreligious groups.
Federal agencies were told “to consider” using the Sweden-based International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s definition of antisemitism, which includes “holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel” and “drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.”
The [alliance] promotes Holocaust education and research, and has come under [criticism] by both Jewish and non-Jewish groups for suggesting that broad criticism of Israel can be construed as antisemitic.
2 Likes
The controversy seems to have spread to Oakland public schools-is that where Berkeley faculty children would attend?
Some random musings-
If we are referring to undergraduates, they are young adults, and I emphasize the young. They’ve been in a university for four months to 3.5 years. They spent the previous 18 years being raised by peers of the people on this forum. They spent 13 years in a K-12 system where only 14% scored proficient or advanced in history. They grew up in an era where more people get their information from social media and headlines than from articles and books, and many lived in a cable news echo chamber. They have only experienced a sharply divided, partisan government. There is a national mentality of two sides: one good and one bad. There is no room for compromise or nuance. Maybe there are unrealistic expectations that university leadership can fix everything for us.
I live on the doorstep of a major university with nearly 40k students. I walk through the center of campus almost every day. I haven’t seen a protest. I know there was one in mid-October that had around 100 pro-Palestinian protesters. I haven’t heard of any others, but I may have missed it. I’ve seen some speakers that gather a few passersby. I’ve seen lots of sidewalk chalk messages, mostly of the “Free Palestine” variety or reference to military funding. I haven’t seen anything I would consider anti-Semitic. There are noticeably fewer of these chalk statements as students have moved into the dead week and finals preparation and after our first big snow. There’s a huge banner inviting everyone to a menorah lighting ceremony, which is an annual campus event. All in all, the campus climate seems calm and pretty normal. There’s a real disconnect between reading this thread and spending time on campus. I acknowledge there are legitimate concerns expressed in this thread, but is it really the norm and widespread? I don’t know.
I will attend the menorah lighting ceremony for the first time to support our Jewish students. I know anti-semitism exists and is increasing, and I want them to feel the support of their larger community. I think I’m like many others who support the Jewish people without supporting Israel’s right-wing government, who support the Palestinian people without supporting Hamas.
I believe it is our political leaders who have failed us, not the leadership of our colleges and universities. I’m also pretty impressed by the students I meet.
5 Likes
This was the exact same clip already shared and then discussed above. From the prior comments, its clear not everyone interprets it the same, though it doesn’t seem constructive to re-litigate what was already discussed above.
And yet she is vilified by the other side of the conflict as well for being one-sided in favor of supporters of Israel since the only groups she suspended from campus were the Arab and Jewish groups that were Pro-Palestine (which is an “action”). What’s the expression about if you make both sides mad you must be doing something right?
1 Like
Perhaps some but Berkeley has its own (generally better rated) school district, plus there’s a bunch of other desirable communities within commuting distance of the campus.
1 Like