Some certainly do, but many more attend schools in Berkeley, Albany, Piedmont, and elsewhere in the area.
The vast majority of kids in Oakland schools are definitely NOT children of UC Berkeley faculty members. However, Oakland is very politically progressive and has a long history of social justice activism - it is, after all, the birth place of the Black Panthers. So it is not surprising that this would be front and center there right now.
But with any other group of people, if one were to comment on two warring parties on another continent (and their horrendous actions against each otherās civilians), one would not implicitly be labeled anti-whatever, or whatever-phobe, and be suspected of wanting to harass fellow citizens here?
So in the context of universities, some are very quick to declare people they never met or spoke to āmustā be pro-Hamas, or āmustā be intending the genocide of people - and thus ought to be stifled. There are a lot of nuances, some highly inconvenient and subject to debate (not suitable for this thread), that canāt be summed up in a single sentence ā or a quick personal judgement over a young person.
Well, it did happen, albeit on a smaller scale with the Ukraine war. I have certainly been accused of being a brainwashed Russophobe and have even been called a Nazi, Nazi-sympathizer, etc. for supporting Ukraine (because of the Russian justification of de-nazification of Ukraine). The irony is that this was largely by the same people now being called antisemitic for their unconditional support of Palestine. I personally think it is disturbing how quick we are to use inflammatory labels - whether Nazi, antisemite, etc. Yes, in some cases they are appropriate and well-deserved, but I think weāve become too loose and easy in throwing around these terms where often they are not warranted. They are just a way to insult and once you have this label attached to you, there is little way you can justify your position, even if the label is not truly accurate. You have lost before you have even opened your mouth. That is the power of these terms. And, as I said, this has certainly been seen with the other major war currently taking place.
I donāt have a subscription to WSJ, but someone posted a picture of this article/opinion piece that I think was in yesterdayās paper. I thought it was interesting, and I think it is relevant to this discussion.
This. When those terms are thrown around those insulted merely walk away; it isnāt worth it to bother engaging. A tremendous loss to those in the echo chamber, who deprive themselves of contrary opinions/ arguments and then are shocked and unprepared for reactions on campus and elsewhere. Regardless of how much one disagrees with an opinion, it is always worthwhile to hear the arguments, if for no other reason than to prepare. That doesnāt seem to be happening in many places any more.
Highly so - because itās entirely fair (and in most cases likely objectively correct) to call people ignorant of crucial facts, itās another to insist that surely they must be calling for genocide and hence shouldnāt be permitted to get a college education or obtain a job.
(Although, I do admit that when hiring, for the jobs I fill, I will consider someoneās tendency to opine loudly on matters they are uninformed about.)
Harvard Prez adds to her remarks:
Let me be clear: Calls for violence or genocide against the Jewish community, or any religious or ethnic group are vile, they have no place at Harvard, and those who threaten our Jewish students will be held to account.
The Caribbean???
I do not know who approves or votes on the policies, but they are typically found in codes of conduct for faculty, staff and students.
Here is a quote from Pennās Code of Student Conduct:
āThe University condemns hate speech, epithets, and racial, ethnic, sexual and religious slurs. However, the content of student speech or expression is not by itself a basis for disciplinary action. Student speech may be subject to discipline when it violates applicable laws or University regulations or policies.ā
That code also includes this language as an āobligationā:
āTo respect the health and safety of others. This precludes acts or threats of physical violence against another person (including sexual violence) and disorderly conduct.ā
In addition, most universities have time, place and manner restrictions on events and demonstrations. Iām linking Pennās below.
The current climate at these schools might accelerate this decline.
A lot has changed in 60 years. The country has changed greatly demographically.
In most cases, no. Berkeley is a separate city with its own school district. Of course some faculty members live in other Bay Area cities but probably most live in Berkeley.
Also, Iām not sure what controversy you are referring to, but the controversy that Iām aware of in Oakland public schools is related to the Palestine curriculum that Oakland teachers have designed for K-12. Here is a link to a google doc with the curriculum so you can see the content for yourself. Oakland Teach-In Curricular Resources - Google Docs
Regardless of what the proposed curriculum is, I do not approve of teachers straying from the state approved lesson plans on their own; I was curious about Oakland because it seems such an odd thing to do in a public K12 system. Maybe not there, though.
Please stay on topic. Users can start a new thread about curriculum in school districts. Further off topic posts will be deleted.
According to the article, itās not a decision against certain colleges, but rather that more young Jews now feel welcome at many hundreds of colleges ā so a positive sign.
It would only be a concern if it was less than 3%
I agree and itās a positive development. However, the article was written before Oct 7th, before this current wave of rampant antisemitism. I can see even fewer Jewish students choosing to apply/attend Ivies like Harvard, Columbia and Penn in the future.
Given that 95% of such applicants will be disappointed anyway, that may just mean fewer unsuccessful applicants. It is good news that students feel comfortable at many colleges and apply widely
Applicants who view the fact that some fellow students might be supportive of Palestian people, or be openly critical of Israel government policies, as ārampant antisemitismā certainly can make their college (and other life choices) based on that.
I feel genuinely bad, and completely understand that/why Muslim, Arabic and Jewish students feel anxious these days, ultimately triggered by current events a continent away. Reality on the ground is, that with the exception of a few sick minds (which you find associated with most causes), none of their fellow students, faculty, or other staff will have ill feelings about any students, regardless of their race or religion ā no matter how they assess the parties in the Middle-East.
I wish for this to be true, but donāt think it is so. Meaning, I think there are people (students/faculty/staff) not of āsick mindsā who have āill feelingsā about those of different races or religions.
