The Presidents of Harvard, MIT, Penn, Columbia should be forced to resign

Palestinians always go after the gays

 

I can’t tell what’s going on
It looks like BLM protestors trying to loot TJ Maxx
@Salvy
@ROXRAN

 

Since you apparently didn’t read it the first time, I’ll just repeat what I already wrote in which I called stuff like this “objectionable and reprehensible”:

“Are some of these protesters calling for or cheering on violence against Israel? Yes, certainly. And it is fine to criticize that — particularly when that violence would be directed against civilians. But even in that case, there is a legal difference between chanting support for terrorist actions in the context of military conflict (as objectionable and reprehensible as that is) and “literal” hate speech in which one is calling for members of a particular racial, ethnic, or sex group to be killed.”

Any protesters who are verbally accosting Jews on campus, simply for being Jewish, should face punishment. Any of them specifically targeting Jews as not being permitted in a space should face punishment. None of that rises to the level of saying “kill the Jews”, but if there was anyone saying that then they should of course face severe consequences, including criminal prosecution.

All that said, people who make up stories that mobs of protesters are saying “kill the Jews” are needlessly whipping up fear amongst Jews on campus (for political reasons, looks like) and that does bother me.

 

I have a question. Are the Jewish students who are protesting Israeli policies antisemitic? what about those in Israel who have protested?

 

I wish Death to pro Hamas supporters !

 

Columbia University receives funding from the federal gov, both directly and indirectly. One direct avenue is through research grants from federal agencies, while another is the federal financial aid received by students. The university also faces pressure from donors. Another significant pressure comes from its reputation. A campus perceived as opposing academic freedom, being anti-student, or going against other core principles risks losing professors and students. Columbia has experienced this before during the Vietnam War protests, when its harsh crackdown on protestors severely damaged its reputation, taking years to rebuild. Their perceived inability to protect students against threats would also be very harmful to their reputation.

The university president has done a poor job handling this situation. As mentioned, appeasing Congressional grandstanding by abandoning principles appears more harmful than standing firm (who knew principles garner stronger backing). Even after completely disavowing the principles mentioned during live Congressional testimony, the very people that pressured her are now calling for her resignation. Universities should learn from this to stand their ground on core principles but do so diplomatically and intelligently. Allow peaceful protests while protecting against harm to students. Calling for any group (Jews in this case) to be harmed should not be acceptable. As non-public institutions, they do have more leeway to act as they deem appropriate.

And yes, she should resign for abandoning academic principles and failing to maintain support for peaceful protests while cracking down on violence - it's not an easy job, but it's her job.

 

the answer was already given - ATW: antiZionist Jewish students are antisemitic

 

A lot of private property receive public funding. For example the Mall of America got significant public financing and still gets public aid. A landmark case in 1999 determined that the mall is private property and doesn’t have to follow the First Amendment.

Yes reputation is a big thing for universities and these universities are struggling with those. They are losing donations and getting criticism not just from politicians but also from alumni.

Im not as critical though on the Univetsity presidents. We both agree that they would like to respect free speech out of academic ideals, if not because the legally have to. We also agree that they have a duty create a safe and peaceful environment for their students. This whole situation though is impossible to please everyone.

Free speech would mean that you can chant “From the River to the Sea!” And even could waive Hamas flags. On the other side there are Jewish students who feel such chants and symbols are threatening. I don’t see anyway of balancing those.

 

Mostly agree. "From the river to the sea" means different things to different people, so that's fine with me. Hamas flags depend on the context. I do believe students openly supporting Hamas and calling for harm to Jewish students (directly or through symbols) is a pretty clear grounds for suspension. If I were running the university, I wouldn't stand for that, while requesting the university to divest from the gaza war is perfectly fine (the stated goal of the protest).

Talking about the Hamas flag, in one of the exchanges with the grandest of grandstanding, Stefanik demanded the president of Columbia to commit to firing a professor under investigation for showing a Hamas flag (I'm not even sure what the context was; maybe it was for educational purposes, maybe it was a show of support for Hamas. That's the point, right - you need an investigation). She clearly didn't want to, but she relented and said yes, she commits, when she could have easily said, 'We are committed to the principle of investigating first before making a determination, and if indeed the professor blah blah blah, he would be fired.'

 

(I suspect I will be repeating the bold often)

This isn't about me. You clearly disagree with my point that "from the river to the sea" means different things to different people. Go tackle the point, not me.

 

Ok.

What do you think of a professor showing the Hamas flag as part of teaching about Hamas?