The Brandies study has already been questioned because of the student group which dominates the sample size. Take it with a grain of salt.
** At all schools, more students were concerned about antisemitism related to criticism of Israel than they were about antisemitism related to traditional anti-Jewish stereotypes. Concern about antisemitism related to criticism of Israel was not limited to those who, in the context of the war, had favorable views of the Israel government: Even among those who had unfavorable views of the Israeli government (44% of all respondents), nearly half (45%) were very concerned about antisemitism related to criticism of Israel.*
Personally, I would not eliminate individual colleges based on the Brandeis study alone, for a couple of reasons.
-
Not many colleges were included in the study.
-
There wasnât much practical difference in the level of anti-Israel and antisemitic hostility experienced by students attending colleges in the âhighestâ and âabove averageâ categories in the study; see screenshots below. Even at colleges in the âbelow averageâ and âlowestâ category groups, students reported experiencing a significant amount of hostility.
This study was not designed to help families choose or eliminate colleges from a list. It was designed to get a better understanding of what students are facing at colleges.
3 Likes
3 Likes
So, Columbiaâs big efforts to combat antisemitism amount to âI know it when I see it, but Iâm not gonna tell you what it is because then I wonât be able to arbitrarily change the rules when I feel like itâ
Once again, Columbia showcasing the fact that if they canât at the very least protect some of their students, theyâd rather just screw them all with wishy-washy task forces.
ETA: if the pro-Palestine groups and Shai Davidai are BOTH mad at you, I think itâs time to realize youâre doing something wrong.
1 Like
not to worry as,
âThe task force is now hiring a research director to develop a study on antisemitism at Columbia and recommend training materials for the university.â
2 Likes
Not placating either extreme might be evidence Columbia is doing something right
2 Likes
The vast majority of Jewish students at Columbia are not extreme.
2 Likes
Or, doing nothing. 
(But then Iâm the biggest cynic on ccâŠ)
2 Likes
Filmmaker James Schamus is a Columbia faculty member and was asked to participate in one of the listening sessions for the antisemitism task force. His written exchange with one of its three members is illuminating (and funny). As he points out, the group is called âthe Task Force on Antisemitismâ and not the âTask Force on, like, Campus Vibes.â
For this task force to operate without a working definition of antisemitism is a huge insult to the entire Columbia community.
@ameridad I would agree with that statement, and would add that a meaningful number of Columbiaâs Jewish students are critical of Zionism and have been participating in protests and using the very chants and slogans that seem to be at the center of the task forceâs inquiry.
1 Like
@bluebayou Iâll one up you on the cynicism and say that the task force is merely a smoke screen for the other more concrete measures theyâre taking at Columbia.
https://www.columbiaspectator.com/news/2024/03/21/columbia-recommends-heightened-surveillance-measures-to-minimize-potential-disruptions-ahead-of-admitted-student-programming/
âconcrete measuresâ are the opposite of my do-nothing cynicism!
2 Likes
âThe email came almost two hours after Shafik released a statement following âreports that a disruption at a recent Columbia Law School admitted student event left many Jewish attendees feeling uncomfortable and unwelcome.ââ
DS24 is headed on MIT campus in a few weeks for their Campus Preview Weekend.
I sincerely hope Pres. Kornbluth has a solid plan in place to prevent her institution making the wrong kind of headlines again.
2 Likes
This may be true of the students, but the backlash against these universities isnât being driven by students.
Oh?
ââŠFor the many fleeing antisemitism abroad, late 20th century MIT seemed like a dream come true: a place where academic freedom, honest intellectual pursuit, and student equality â regardless of nationality, race, or religion â was respected and achieved. As evidenced by recent events on the MIT campus, however, it is unfortunate but clear that for the Jewish community, this atmosphere of safety, inclusion, and peaceful scientific study has ended. Jewish students currently enrolled at MIT now face bullying and hateful antisemitic rhetoric. Some, fearing for their own physical safety, feel they must hide their Judaism and themselves. It is now common on campus to hear calls for antisemitic violence and the spread of bigoted anti-Jewish misinformation and slander against the Jewish communityâboth in person and in writingâis everywhere, including the pages of this newspaper.â
Doesnât the student paper run opinion pieces from all sorts of perspectives on these issues? They usually do. I expect the next op-ed will focus on this issue from a different perspective.
1 Like
Yes.
The point is that the concerns about the atmosphere on MIT campus are not some astroturfing campaign by âright-wing culture warriors that only care about free speech when they like what is being saidâ, as a poster above asserted before editing out that part of their message.
In fact, the opposite is true. It is the same universities that were notorious for giving in to the mob and cancelling speakers for wrongthink suddenly care about free speech (as well they should!)
But weâve been through this several times already in this thread.
1 Like
None the authors of the editorial you link are students. The most recent was a Ph.D. student over 20 years ago.
Surely some segment of students support these middle-aged activists, but the backlash isnât being driven by students, even when some students are propped up as spokespersons.
As for the content of the editorial, as I understand your position, everything to which these activists object should be allowed provided it complies with time place manner restrictions? Correct?
Seriously?
âEverythingâ?
Howâs this, for example?
âCAA members stormed offices of the MIT International Science and Technology Initiatives (MISTI), harassed and intimidated the staff, and later protested outside the office of the MISTI faculty director, accusing him personally of genocide. This faculty member felt so personally threatened, that for weeks after this incident he did not feel safe returning to campus.â
(My oldest is a proud and successful participant of this wonderful program, and his brother hopes to be as well.)
There are many other examples they give of clear policy violations that arenât merely âproceduralâ, and frankly just abhorrent and unbecoming.
Yes, the authors of this most recent piece are alums. There are others written by current students.
You are asking what I think should be allowed. Free speech should be allowed - but no one should ever be forced to listen to you âspeakâ.
Policy violations should be dealt with crushingly, because honestly? If I wanted to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to have my kidsâ learning disrupted by SJWs, Iâd send them to Berkeley.
Also, while I am at it, I sincerely hope that in their âholistic reviewâ future yearsâ adcoms will carefully think about this question before making a decision:
âOn a scale of one to ten, how likely is this applicant to disrupt our learning environment in support of whatever cause they feel extremely passionate about and land us on the front page of every paper or, worse, in court or on the Congress floor?â
It ainât 2020 anymore.
The pendulum is swinging.
4 Likes