May 15, 2006

Middle East Wars on U.S. Campuses

The Muslim Student Union has a full slate of activities planned for this week on the theme of “Holocaust in the Holy Land.” Among today’s events are a rally around the idea of “Hamas: The People’s Choice.” And if you missed the point of the week’s theme of equating Israel to Nazi Germany, there is a lecture/rally on Thursday called “Israel: the Fourth Reich.”

Looking for a job?

See all 158 new postings

Browse all job listings:

Faculty: 3,421
Administrative: 1,395
Executive: 170
FEATURED EMPLOYERS

Not surprisingly, many Jewish students at Irvine are angry. They are not calling for events to be banned, but have asked Irvine’s leaders to condemn the language being used as offensive and as a way to hurt Jewish students, not to engage in debate about Israel’s policies. Irvine officials are refusing to do so — saying that they can’t get into picking which campus events to disagree with or pick sides between the vocal critics and supporters of Israel on the campus.

Irvine in many ways reflects the way debates about diversity and respecting different groups of students are no longer issues of black and white. A majority of undergraduates at Irvine are Asian American — and largely uninvolved in a series of Middle East wars that have taken place at Irvine for years. But campus leaders who have spent their careers focused on how to encourage black and white students to get along (and of course Latino students and at some institutions Native Americans or foreign students) are finding that they may have their biggest challenge with religious differences among groups of American students. (While there are some campuses where strong criticism of Israel comes from students from the Middle East, the students at Irvine and many campuses are American citizens.)

“All of our institutions are just so much more complex than they used to be, and the tensions are very different,” said Robert M. O’Neil, who is leading the Ford Foundation’s “Difficult Dialogues” program to encourage colleges to find ways to debate touchy issues in civil, open-minded ways. “And right now, tensions about the Middle East happen to be most acute.”

Irvine has a history of tense Jewish-Muslim relations. Many other campuses are experiencing sharp debates over the Middle East and these debates frequently also focus on issues of free speech. At Pennsylvania State University last month, the president overturned a decision by the art school director, who had called off a student art exhibit that criticized Palestinian terrorist groups. Brandeis University is under fire, meanwhile, for pulling an art exhibit that shows the violence suffered of late by Palestinians.

The tensions are by no means limited to student activities and art exhibits. A scholarly paper that is highly critical of the Israel lobby set off a furor soon after it appeared on the Web site of the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University. The paper — by professors at Harvard and the University of Chicago — has been called bigoted and inaccurate by some, and praised by others as on target.

Some academic defenders of the article — led by Juan Cole, a professor at the University of Michigan — have started a petition to protest the “character assassination” of the authors of the paper and to call on Jewish leaders to respect academic freedom by not “smearing” such “eminent political scientists” by stating or implying that they are anti-Semitic.

And critics of Cole’s analysis of the Middle East are up in arms over his possible appointment to a professorship at Yale University.

The situation at Irvine is a good illustration of how relations can deteriorate, leaving campuses in messy situations. After years of back-and-forth complaints and accusations, the Zionist Organization of America filed a complaint in 2004 with the U.S. Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights, charging that Jewish students were being harassed and intimidated. The complaint — still under review by the department — cites incidents in which, the organization says, a Jewish student wearing an Israeli flag lapel pin was followed by group of Muslim students who made death threats, and another student wearing a T-shirt that identified him as Jewish had a rock thrown at him. The complaint also noted the frequent use of materials by Muslim students equating Israel with Nazi Germany.

Irvine officials said that they tried to investigate all the allegations, but that most were made well after the incidents are alleged to have taken place, and as a result they could not be verified. Muslim students have also complained about opposition that violates their rights. A year ago, students at Irvine built a wall to symbolize and protest the wall being built by Israel to separate itself from Palestinian territories. Shortly after the wall was set up at Irvine, it was burned to the ground. Police investigated the incident as arson, but never had leads on who set the fire.

Muslim students make no apologies for their use of Holocaust imagery in their programs designed to criticize Israel.

Kareem Elsayed, a student who is a former president of the Muslim Student Union, said in an e-mail interview that “the pro-Zionist media has allowed for the monopolization of the term ‘holocaust’” to refer to what the Nazis did to the Jews. But he said that there have been many holocausts, and that the group looks to link Israel to the Nazis for specific reasons.

“We are using this title to emphasize the fact that the apartheid state of Israel has moved from oppressed to oppressor,” he said. “We refer to the apartheid state as the fourth reich to emphasize the fascist and oppressive policies, and genocidal tendencies, of the apartheid state.” Those who criticize the use of language linking Israel to the Nazis “are using the issue of the name as a cloak to cover their true intentions of silencing anyone that would reveal the realities of the oppression of the indigenous Palestinian people.”

Jeffrey T. Rips, executive director of the Hillel Foundation of Orange County, which includes Irvine, said that the hidden agenda had nothing to do with open debate about the Middle East. “These aren’t lectures or the kinds of events you see on campuses. These are rallies to incite hate,” he said.

Rips said that Jewish students at Irvine have a range of reactions on how to respond to these events. Some think they are best ignored, others say that’s not an option. Jewish groups plan to set up booths on campus, take out ads in the student newspaper, and hand out leaflets offering alternative views about the Middle East. But no attempt will be made to interfere with the events.

“Jews here have no issue with questioning Israel’s policies. “But this is about things that incite hate and that make people feel unsafe.”

Rips said that there is much to be proud of in the Jewish community at Irvine, but that the university is losing prospective Jewish students because of a perception that the entire campus is anti-Semitic (which he doesn’t think is true). “I hear from parents [of prospective students] all the time and that’s what they hear,” Rips said.

Sally Peterson, dean of students at Irvine, has worked at the university since 1974 and she said that she’s seen a gradual shift away from students tensions based on race to the point today where issues of religion, international affairs, or ideology can set off a controversy — and are more likely to do so than issues of race.

Irvine has so many potentially controversial events that the student affairs staff has a Free Speech Advocacy Team, members of which attend all such meetings or lectures to make sure that university rules are followed and to witness what happens. If, after the fact, there is a dispute, the university doesn’t want to rely on second-hand reports, Peterson said. “We want our eyes there.”

As a public university, Irvine also opens most of its events to the public, and while Peterson said that is appropriate for a state institution, it complicates her job. At controversial events, she said, problems are more likely to be caused by non-students than students. Beyond dealing with controversy, Irvine also tries to promote discussion of issues like the Middle East that involve balanced panels and programs that are not focused on the question of declaring one side or the other to be” right.” Some of these events have been quite successful, she said, drawing large audiences. In contrast, she said, events sponsored by partisans of the Palestinians or Israelis tend to draw people who agree with the program organizers.

Officials at Irvine have been criticized by many Jewish groups for not publicly criticizing the repeated use of Holocaust language and imagery to criticize Israel.

Rips, of Hillel, said that Jewish students accept the idea that “the university has to protect free speech and can’t stop programs.” But he said that the request he and others have made repeatedly of Irvine isn’t that it stop programs. “The university has been consistent in protecting free speech, but the university has its own free speech. They can say that these events are going on but they condemn them.”

Having events semester after semester where Israel is compared to Nazi Germany “gives the perception” that Irvine accepts such a view as legitimate, Rips said. “Silence sometimes makes a statement,” he said.

Peterson said that there is no way Irvine can get in the business of commenting on individual programs or their titles. “If we were to comment on this particular speaker, we’d have groups saying ‘why aren’t you commenting on that speaker?’” she said. “When you are a large university, there are lots of issues that people want us to say something about, and we’re not there to do that.”

Some academic leaders who think university leaders can condemn offensive speech think there is good reason to avoid the Middle East debate. O’Neil, who is running the Difficult Dialogues program, is also director of the Thomas Jefferson Center for the Protection of Free Expression and is a former university president (University of Virginia and University of Wisconsin System). O’Neil is a strong believer that speech must never be limited and that campuses must be open to a full range of ideas — however infuriating or even hurtful they may be to some people.

O’Neil said, however, that colleges need to look at offensive events not just as events, but as opportunities to learn. This is a conviction O’Neil said he has had since he worked as a truck driver at a Jewish summer camp in New Hampshire in 1957. One morning he arrived to start his day, and he found the remains of a burning cross. The camp director wanted the ashes cleaned up right away and O’Neil said that’s what he did, feeling that it would have been presumptuous for him, as one of the few non-Jews working there, to tell the director what to do.

But clearly a professor-in-making even as a truck driver, O’Neil said that the course of action bothered him. “There was a possible lesson here — you could really see something,” he said, about the nature of bigotry, and he wishes that the camp participants had all talked about it.

So when bigoted speakers come to campuses, O’Neil said, you start by defending their right to speak, but you can go beyond that — or at least you do when you can. “In general I tend to be a strong defender of the power of university presidents and chancellors to condemn,” he said. “But in the particular Middle East context, the risk is so high that what may appear to be a neutral, principled condemnation may appear to partisans on both sides to be taking sides in an inappropriate way,” he said. As a result, O’Neil said, a president who might not hesitate to speak out about a racially charged event “might feel constrained.”

O’Neil recalled that in 2002, when the late James O. Freedman, former president of Dartmouth College, prepared an open letter opposing the intimidation of Jewish college students, several hundreds college presidents signed. But hundreds of others declined to sign the statement, which was published in The New York Times, because it didn’t also comment about bias problems faced by Muslim and Arab students.

“There is unique volatility on this particular issue,” he said.

Since this issue shows no sign of going away, O’Neil said that he hopes Ford’s Difficult Dialogues project — through which colleges were selected in December to receive $100,000 grants to promote civil, open discussion on tough topics — has a positive impact. Many of the first 27 grants focused on issues of religion, and a number related specifically to the Middle East. Macalester College, for example, is receiving a grant to promote work on a dig in Israel and planning “peace summits” on the Middle East, to bring together various thinkers at the college’s Minnesota campus.

Caryn McTighe Musil, who leads the Office of Diversity, Equity and Global Initiatives at the Association of American Colleges and Universities, said that promoting tough conversations is essential — and vexing — for colleges. Take the issue of comparing Israel with Nazi Germany. “I don’t think one says to a group that you may never use a word in a certain way because it would offend me,” Musil said.

The job of colleges is to explain why using “holocaust” as Irvine’s Muslim groups does causes offense — and also explaining why they are doing so. “I think colleges should talk about why comparing Israel to the Nazis is not defensible,” Musil said. “But I also think you have to explain why a Palestian might see parallels,” she said. There is not genocide, but there are identification passes, borders changing, and more. “Higher education has to provide a space for this discussion.”

But college leaders shouldn’t expect it to be easy, she said. “There are issues on which there are irreconcilable differences and that really tests the limits of what a campus community is about.”

— Scott Jaschik

Want it on paper? Print this page.
Know someone who’d be interested? Forward this story.
Want to stay informed? Sign up for free daily news e-mail.

Comments

Anti-Zionism Yes, Anti-Semitism, Anti-Islamism, No

Opposition to Zionism is not in the least anti-semitic. On the contrary! Zionism, like anti-semitism, is itself racist.

Zionism is racist because it supports the privileging of a single pseudo-"ethnic” group — “Jews", however defined — over others in Israel.

This is exactly parallel to the privileging of “Aryans” in Nazi Germany; of “whites” in _apartheid_ South Africa and in the Jim Crow South of our own country.

There should be no “Law of Return” for “Jews” to Israel.

That any “Jew", anywhere in the world, has the right to immigrate to Israel and gain citizenship, while Arabs who were born there have no such right and, in fact, are dispossessed, is racist, as were the similar policies of _apartheid_ South Africa or Nazi German.

The term “Law of Return” is Orwellian doublethink! The vast majority of Jewish immigrants are not “returning” there — neither they nor their ancestor have ever been there!

Meanwhile those who ARE native to the area — Palestinian Arabs — are expelled, oppressed, killed, dispossessed, in the most horrific, racist manner imaginable!

Anti-semitism is a vicious, dangerous form of racism which should be condemned.

So is anti-Islamism, rife on Zionist and right-wing Republican websites like Horowitz’s and Daniel Pipes’. Where’s the condemnation of THAT?

There should be no Zionist state, whether called “Israel” or anything else. Just as there should be no white supremacist state.

A secular state in which all citizens have the same rights — like the USA, for example — could scarcely be called “Israel,” a name denoting only one religious heritage.

As for terrorism: it is always wrong — whether that of oppressed Palestinians, or the much greater terrorism carried out by the Israeli government and racist “settlers.” For a bit more on this, see my 1988 essay “Israeli Rule over Palestinians is Fascist", at http://chss.montclair.edu/english/furr/israel88.html )

IHE should stop referring to those who object to anti-Zionist activities as “Jews.” Many, many Jews, religious and not, ALSO oppose Zionism! Those who support Israel should be called “Zionist", whatever their religious or ethnic commitments.

Grover Furr, Associate Professor of English and Comp. Lit. at Montclair State Universtiy, at 8:50 am EDT on May 15, 2006

Uncle Joe would be so proud

So, the unreconstructed Stalin apologist takes his Soviet idol’s position on Israel — a situation most U.S. citizens had no role in, at the start.

Be careful, sir — Hamas may determine you are more of a detriment than benefit. Hamas may do to you, what your ol’ Uncle Joe did with his complainers.

L.L., at 10:15 am EDT on May 15, 2006

To Grover Furr The only racism here is your own. When you grant nationalism to every group in the world besides Jews, or when you grant nationalism to a specific group in a dispute between two parties and deny it to the other, you are the one engaging in racism. When you ignore the hate speech of one group (Hamas), the long standing apartheid policies of other states in the region (Saudia Arabai, Jordan), and repeat the tropes of anti-Zionism long equated with racism — acting as if you are not — you are the racist. When you reduce complex regional conflict to simplistic formulas of “it’s the Jews’ fault” you are the racist. Heaven forbid you should learn about how many countries have participated in the plight of the Palestinian people, including many Arab nations who continue to keep the conflict alive for their own interests. You say there should be no Zionist state? Then there should be no Islamic state? Of course not. But only for a racist is it acceptable to get rid of the Jewish state while allowing every other ethnic group to maintain a state of their own. I could go on. But what’s the point? People like you cling to your racisms and lack of knowledge of the other despite any evidence put in font of you. You’ve memorized your agenda and nothing will knock you off your pedestal of hatred. Seen your kind many times in the academy.

Jeff Rice, at 10:15 am EDT on May 15, 2006

Ignorance at Montclair State

If Grover is this ignorant about Middle Eastern history and politics, what else is he ignorant about? Does he have topic mastery to effectively teach his subject matter? Is his research even credible? Based on the above comments and from the linked web site, Grover’s scholarship is nonexistent and, thus, your conclusions are wrong. Seriously, you need to hire a fact checker and do some reading.

You do not know about the Diaspora, you do not know how other countries treated ships crammed with Jews during the Holocaust, and you do not know the history of modern state of Israel. In short, Grover, you do not know.

Your entire argument is wrong at best and banal at worse. Grover, your bigotry, ignorance, and hatred blinds you to 5000 years of facts.

michael, at 10:20 am EDT on May 15, 2006

Bravo, those students at Irvine who are voicing their opposition to the grotesquely racist policies of the Israeli state! It’s about time students woke up to the fact that silence on the issue of Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians is scarcely any different from the cowardice (or genocidal racism) of all those who knew about, but never opposed, the Nazis’ treatment of the Jews during Hitler’s day. And thank you Grover Furr for pointing out what ought to be obvious by now to anyone smart enough to get into college: Opposition to Zionism and to Israel’s oppression of the Palestinian people is not anti-Semitic, but is the very opposite. We repeat: Zionism is racist.

Robert Lang, Associate Professor of Cinema at University of Hartford, at 10:20 am EDT on May 15, 2006

I think that most debates over Israel are silly, because they are not really debate. They are usually thinly-veiled diatribes regrading whose bloodline is the best. So, I ignore them.

But, three points:

First: So what if Zionism is racist? Does that make it any more or less privileged than any other belief? People can denounce Islam or Christianity if they want, it is all fair game! In my country (the USA) it is acceptable to think and say whatever you want, even if it is racist or stupid.

Second: Mr. Furr, I should probably note that in many countries, principle ethnicity is the criteria for citizenship. Countries like the US, with its long history of citizenship without regard to ethnicity are the exception. (Likewise, countries with long colonial legacies often have citizens of different ethnicities.) But, if you are going to declare that there should be no “Zionist” state, you might as well condemn countries like Japan which has an extreme aversion to granting citizenship to people without certain racial characteristics.

Third: It probably is a better policy to teach people how to convince people of the merits of their position than to teach them to march around with banners. But, this is hard, so most schools don’t bother.

Larry, at 11:25 am EDT on May 15, 2006

Shoah, Apartheid, and Occupation

Of course, the invocation of Hitler has become a shopworn part of American political rhetoric, so it’s surprising that Scott Jaschik’s piece doesn’t pause to consider the way that BOTH sides misuse this analogy, on-campus and off.

For instance, American Zionists regularly attempt to silence anti-Occupation speech by mischaracterizing it as “anti-Israel” or even “anti-Semitic.” The hysterical comparison (by Alan Dershowitz, among many others) of Mearsheimer and Walt’s essay to the Protocols of the Elders of Zion is a recent example of this desperate rhetoric. Even more recent is Jeff Rice’s attempt on this page to distort as “racist” Grover Furr’s laudable call for an anti-racist state of Jews and Arab Palestinians. The Occupation is so indefensible that it has to be transformed, somehow, into the Warsaw Ghetto Rising, though as the Annexation Wall continues to be built, the question of “where’s the ghetto, again?” begins to assert itself.

In fact, there are some ways in which the Zionist occupation of Palestine resembles the EARLY phases of the Nazi holocaust against the Jews—namely, the expropriation of property, the racist laws differentiating ethnic groups, the attempt to define a state as the nation of a particular ethno-religious group rather than the nation of its citizens, the language of transfer and ethnic cleansing.

In its early years, before settling on the exterminationist policy at the Wansee Conference, the Nazis proposed transferring German Jews to Madagascar or to Central Asia. Similarly, as Palestinian and Israeli historians have definitively shown, the idea of transfer has always been a crucial part of Zionist colonialism and racism, extending from David Ben-Gurion’s statements of the thirties, to the ethnic cleansing of 700,000 Palestinian Arabs in 1948, to the recent statements of the fascist MK, Avigdor Liberman, who has called for denaturalizing and expelling Israeli Arabs. But of course, there has not yet been anything remotely approaching the Shoah.

There’s no reason why we should go on with these unhelpful comparisons. Is it only possible to focus a teen-aged Palestinian boy whose head has been blown off by an IDF sniper, if we compare him to a Polish Jew in Auschwitz or an ANC martyr in Soweto? The main point in 2006 is not that Zionists are acting like Nazis or Boers, but that they are acting like Zionists. 58 years of racist occupation and state terrorism constitutes quite a track record—one considerably longer than that of the 12-year Reich.

Surely the great moral lesson of the Shoah is not that Zionists should get a free pass on any barbarism that stops short of Auschwitz. Last week, the Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz told a small-scale horror story: Israel’s effort to destroy the democratically-elected Palestinian government by stealing Palestinian tax revenues and locking down the borders has led Palestinian hospitals to cut dialysis treatments back from three a week to two. Last month, four patients in Gaza’s Shifa Hospital died because of this.

I can only guess that the sloppy language comparing the Occupation to the Holocaust is born of a despair at the continuing US support for the Israeli regime and its illegal Occupation. The best way to put an end to this language is not by enacting oppressive speech codes, but by putting an end to the Occupation itself. And the best way for campuses to pursue this is by divesting from companies participating in the Occupation—not because the Occupation is Apartheid, but because it’s the Occupation.

James Holstun, Professor of English at The University at Buffalo, at 11:25 am EDT on May 15, 2006

Sublimate hatred

As a Jew, I find victim one-upmanship unseemly. On the other hand, as a Zionist, I find being called a Nazi worse than offensive. What is a Jewish Zionist to do about the present-day wave of anti-Semitism on college campuses? Given the history of anti-Semitism, having faith in the palliative potential of free speech is not sufficient. Given continuing genocides across the world—from Europe to Africa—proclaiming Jews to be the ultimate victims of hatred is also a poor defense. Perhaps we should simply try for a change in the culture of hatred. Perhaps we should do what highly polite societies do: Sublimate the hatred into extreme forms of politeness. By all means argue your beliefs—but do it without name-calling and by pretending that your opponents are fellow human beings.

MGK, at 12:25 pm EDT on May 15, 2006

Bravo, Jeff. I agree; the discourse on both sides, or even of ’sides,’ masks what is happening on the ground. It is important to criticize governments and their policies (both those of Labor/Likud/Kadima and Fatah/Hamas), because it is the ordinary people who suffer the effects of such misguided and racist state decisions. I especially disagree with calling the Occupation a holocaust; it is destructive precisely because it is the Occupation.

Andrea, at 12:25 pm EDT on May 15, 2006

I think it’s idiotic to compare the Israelis to Nazis. If the Israelis really were like the Nazis, there wouldn’t be a Palestinian problem, they would have been killed off en masse by now. Even if they were like say, the Serbs, they would have all been kicked out into the vast Arab countries by now, who could easily absorb them if they felt like it.

Also, the “oppressed” Palestinian people, recently voted for a regime that advocates the destruction of Israel, a process which if they were able to put in effect would be far more Nazi-like than anything Israel or any other current non-Islamic regime is willing to do. If you look at religion-based Islamic regimes and their level of oppression and intolerance, they are more Nazi-like than virtually all other countries on earth. The only reason the Palestinians are “victims” now is because they are in a position of weakness. They don’t even hide what they would do if they had a chance, so whose fault is it really when the Israelis end out killing a 3-year old Palestinian girl? Israel, or the mentality of the Palestinians?

Michael, at 12:25 pm EDT on May 15, 2006

Oops, sorry, I meant James, not Jeff!

Andrea, at 1:10 pm EDT on May 15, 2006

hard issue indeed

This is such a hard issue, and we are feeling the effects of it all over higher education today. The academic community needs to do more to give students ALL the information; many youth, both Jewish and Muslim, live and form opinions in America based on media perceptions and their communities’ traditions. Cross cultural experience is VITAL to forming the empathy needed to begin and develop DISCUSSIONS and academic learning regarding this issues. Send Americans of all faiths, Jews and Muslims included, to Israel, to Gaza, let them learn and grow through their experiences, and do it together and develop a constant, empathetic dialogue.Many Jews in America today have HUGE problems with the way Israel is run, goverened, and portrayed in the media. And because so much of America is isolated from anything but media portrayal of the situation (and of these 2 religions and cultures) Jews in America are often percieved as being Zionist, and Muslims in America often percieved as radical. Only when we can escape our American Media bubble, and take a moment to GENUINELY look at each other, walk in someone elses shoes, are we going to be able to move beyond hurtful slogans and blame, and grow to achieve a peaceful process to understand each other.

Sarah S, former student of the middle east, at 1:45 pm EDT on May 15, 2006

While James Holstun’s response is correct on some levels (there is no genocide), he repeats the very problems that continue to keep the conflict alive. Notably, incorrect historical readings and inability to contextualize the parties involved in regional conflict. He is also quick to apologize for those who repeat the racist tropes historically used for nefarious purposes (Furr’s response). Revisionist historical readings have become very popular in order to re-enforce a reading which places the regional conflict squarely on one country. As if all conflict was so simple! But black and white readings are easiest. Those who earnestly desire to see an end to regional violence should be more critical about the causes of this conflict and the NUMEROUS parties that played — and play — a role. So, if Holstun wants to discuss illegal occupation he should first remember the two illegal occupations which began the conflict after 1948: Egypt’s annexation of Gaza and Jordan’s of the West Bank.

But that too is too easy! Instead of apologizing for acts which keep war alive and well and do nothing for peaceful solution (declarations to destroy Israel by Hamas, continued suicide bombings, rocket launches into Israel from Gaza, support for all of this from various Islamic regimes), critics like Holstun should place their attention and pressure on those who have kept the Palestinians from having a state: their fundamentalist leaders, their corrupt leaders, and their Islamic neighbors who work the hardest to keep the state from becoming reality.

Jeff Rice, Assistant Professor of English at Wayne State University, at 1:45 pm EDT on May 15, 2006

Anti-Zionism

I suppose I should take some comfort from the fact that professors above who are venting their Jew-hatred are all from third or fourth tier colleges. Unfortunately, such sentiments have penetrated widely in American academia.

Now I know that the learned professors will insist that they don’t hate Jews, just those Jews who insist on the right of Jews to exist as Jews in the national Jewish homeland, but I have found over the years that the easiest way to identify anti-Semites is to see if they are applying double standards, holding Jews to one standard and everyone else, including but not limited to the Arabs, to another. That the learned professors are doing so is self-evident.

It also appears that the learned professors don’t understand what the meaning of the Holocaust is for Jews today. Jews don’t say, because of the Holocaust we deserve to prevail over the Arabs in the struggle over Israel. No, what we say is, never again: we learned that the world only loves dead Jews, weak Jews who don’t resist, Jews who are willing victims, and we learned our lesson; this time, we will fight, we will not let the Palestinian Arabs chase us into the Mediterranean Sea, we will not fulfill the victim fantasies of the multiculturalists.

If the learned professors really cared about peace in the middle east, they would be helping the Palestinian Arabs to figure out a way to take Gaza and the West Bank and do something peaceful and productive with them. Palestinian Arabs have, in other parts of the world, shown themselves to be resourceful entrepreneurs and capitalists. They need to get rid of the “refugee camps,” give up their revanchist dreams, and try to build something.

The Israelis would like nothing more than to have peaceful relations with the Arabs, including the Palestinian Arabs, like those between the United States and Canada — with open borders and free trade. Where are the Arab leaders who talk about that future?

DBL, at 2:55 pm EDT on May 15, 2006

Debate

Hmmm... Its ok to be anti-Jewish, but not anti-muslim. Its ok to hate white people, asian people and of course “the Jews” whose vast unproven conspiracy will continue to be blamed for all sorts of proported problems. God forbid, though, that anyone should voice a dislike of, say, the lack of religious freedom, racial integration or women’s rights in any of the arab nations, lest they be accused of hate speech.

Israel is a model western democracy. Its critics show their anti-semetic bigotry by singling “the Jews” and their policies out for criticism while utterly ignoring far worse abuses in the arab world.

Kevin, Undergraduate, at 4:00 pm EDT on May 15, 2006

Mac Heidegger

Well it seems that the readers of _Inside Higher Ed_ are doubly blessed, both with the excellent journalism of the publication itself, and with the penetrating insight of a gaggle of self-appointed Middle Eastern experts.

Grover Furr, whose studies in English and Comparative Literature apparently qualify him as an authority on the Arab-Israeli conflict, is especially enlightening. In one breath he overturns two millennia of documented (but clearly inaccurate) history and informs us, the benighted reader, that Jews have no ancestral connection to the Land of Israel. “Neither they [Jewish immigrants to Israel] nor their ancestors have ever been there!”

One might be tempted to ask, from whence came the Western Wall, the Tomb of the Patriarchs, or the Dead Sea Scrolls? These were once thought to be Jewish spiritual artifacts thousands of years old. Thanks, however, to the Associate Professor Furr and his ground-breaking research, we now know to steer clear of such Zionist propaganda.

One might also think that, having clearly done so much hard work and original research on ancient “Israel", Furr would lack the time for more modern readers. But fear not, tender reader! Mr. Furr’s talents know no such limitations.

Indeed, for those of you following the “mainstream media” (really, just a front for the Evangelical-Zionist corporate propaganda ministry) might have been conned into thinking that Israel felt threatened by the Islamic Republic of Iran, its holocaust-denying and former hostage-taking President, and its nuclear enrichment/ballistic missile program, Furr has a welcome corrective.

Pace the master, “Today [sic] Israel is the major arms supplier to Khomeini’s Iran!” Indeed, Zionist perfidy is truly shameless, for, in addition to arming the Mullahs sworn to the extermination of the Jewish state, they also trained “the fascist Shah in torture techniques.” While a lesser mind might see a contradiction in feverishly supporting both the Shah and the Mullahs who despised and overthrew him, especially in the face of the latter’s regular shipments of arms and money to Hamas, Hizbullah and Islamic Jihad, Furr’s intellect rises above such mediocrity.

Underlying Kurr’s heartbreaking work of, let me tell you, _truly_ staggering genius, is a thoroughly Marxist strain of thought — atheist 19th century German malcontents having, of course, no shortage of wisdom to offer on Middle Eastern current events.

Zionist, in fact, is merely a conspiracy of “Israeli bosses” keen to use nationalism “to keep Jewish and non-Jewish workers from allying with one another. . . [for] Israel’s economy depends heavily upon the exploitation of very cheap Palestinian labor” Never mind the fact that Palestinian labor has been embargoed for the last five years, and that it is Olmert’s declared aim to wean Israel off it permanently. Zionist propaganda! Never mind too, the intensely religious charter, rhetoric, aims, leadership, and school system of Hamas is clearly a façade for some sort of conspiracy between the Hamas leadership and the “Israeli bosses” (the details aren’t in on this yet, but with Furr on the case, it must only be a matter of time). Never mind an Amman-based 2005 poll which showed that 60% of Palestinians, Jordanians, and Egyptians favor implementation of the shari’a. Clearly a sign of false consciousness, induced by brutal Israeli oppression.

I would make note of only one reservation, Mr. Furr’s rather bizarre claim that Saudi Arabia is somehow the only “major Arab state. . . along with several minor ones on the peninsula.” I say bizarre, because one would think that a self-proclaimed authority on topics as varied as biblical Palestine, modern Israel, and all things Iran would have mastered the difference between the words “Arab” (an ethno-linguistic term embracing 22 states and some 200 million people) and “Arabian” (a virtually unused geographical description). I guess the distinction must not have been included in Kurr’s crib notes version of _Orientalism_.

Constraints of time and space prevent me from extolling Furr’s other gems – for example, that the Zionists were in fact complicit in the Holocaust, a claim corroborated by such disinterested scholars as David Duke and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. In fact, since Furr’s greatness can really only be understood alongside intellects such as these, I suggest it might be best for him to join them outright, instead of merely shilling for them on the sidelines.

Michael Nahum, Brandeis University, at 4:00 pm EDT on May 15, 2006

Genocides aren’t just religious wars

Special interest, wealth and the great land grab are motivating factors for organized genocide. How many countries can say they don’t have a history of a holocaust. Even in Canada, we have the Beothuks of Newfoundland. Yes, one of our darkest secrets that you don’t find in history books. Beothuks were starved, hunted down, and persecuted. Who are they? Of course you haven’t heard of them, they’ve been totally wiped out of existence by Englsih settlers and other native group over a period of 200 years, from 1613 to 1823. Even the Mi’kmaq had a part in it.

We should learn from our historical mistakes, not repeat them over and over again. You can all feel sorry for yourselves or you make changes. Think about it, long and hard.

Therese Tseng, at 5:20 pm EDT on May 15, 2006

I’m just an observer here ... just a parent. Which really means I’m one of the helpless fools who only knows how to hold the purse strings of the “academy.” All I find here is hot gas and pompous bombast.

HELLO! Irvine — there are children present! My advice for the academy is to get the politics off of the campus. Collectively, you are pricing yourselves out of your market. There isn’t an inexhaustible supply of parents who want to pay for the privilege of exposing their children to the politics of hate and religious zealotry. Like it or not, you are a proxy for us parents. If you can’t do the job the way we want it done, the $$$$$$$ will go elsewhere — fast. Once the process starts it will be irreversible. It will be motivated by yet another aspect of religion — the collective parental loss of faith in the ethereal aspirations of the “higher” education establishment. It is laundry day ladies and gentlemen — clean up your act.

Bruce Harvey, at 9:45 pm EDT on May 15, 2006

The level of mythical thinking here from some of those who signed “professor", namely Furr, Lang and Holstun, is astounding. To present one’s deep seated prejudices, animosities and superstitions as historical and objective fact is the practice of mythical thinking, but that is precisely what so many in the professorate have a bad habit of doing, using the classroom to promote one’s own political slander and inuendo. Go and re-read what you’ve written as well as the “Holocaust in the Holy Land” event that Scott describes. The myth that Zionism is equivalent to Nazism, is what you are saying, are alluding to and purport to believe. To reiterate, the Nazi Holocaust, was the systematic mass murder of millions of Jews, Roma, Slavs, Homosexuals, handicapped throughout Germany and Europe. They attempted to totally anihilate European Jewery utilizing concentration camps, gas chambers and ovens for an efficient, methodical process of extermination. To compare this with the efforts of the Israeli gov’t and military to thwart daily suicide bombing attacks against Israeli citizens, by such means as check points, security fences, retaliation against bomb-making factories and reprisals against Hamas and terrorist leaders is not a valid comparison. In fact these measures have had a high degree of sucess in reducing terrorist attacks against Israeli citizens. It is time to hold these ideologue professor’s feet to the fire, and make them accountable for the dangerous myths and conspiracy theroies that they present in the name of objective fact.

Phil Orenstein, Mythical thinking, at 10:05 pm EDT on May 15, 2006

Since the Muslim Students Association has decided to demonstrate similarity between modern Israel and Nazi Germany, it seems fair to examine whether there might be any connection between Nazi Germany and today’s Arab/Muslim states.

First, we should note that if either the Nazis or Muslims had/have legitimate grievances with Jewish organizations or the state of Israel, neither has hesitated to purposely mass murder Jewish civilians regardless of age or sex. Put another way, it’s hard to justify blowing up moms and toddlers in pizza restaurants as “self-defense.”

Second, it should be remembered that the Mufti of Jerusalem spent much of WW II in Berlin.

Third, the most anti-Semitic propaganda is regular fare in the media, schools, and mosques of several Muslim countries. We are so caught in the grips of multiculturalism that we tolerate the intolerance of cultures deemed to be the victims of “colonialism.” Were Jews to express the racist sentiments that are so normal and accepted in places such as Saudi Arabia (the last country on earth to outlaw slavery), they would be denounced from all directions.

The question we should be asking is this: why are Muslims so obsessed with destroying Israel? Is this a legitimate cause for a student group on an American college campus to champion? If the answer is “yes,” then shouldn’t we also tolerate the formation of Al Qaeda Student Associations on campus? After all, many Muslims and even American Leftists believe the World Trade Center massacre was a just response to America’s “crimes.”

ibrodsky, at 11:30 pm EDT on May 15, 2006

Don’t get so upset about Mr. Furr. He is a well kow apologist for Joseph Stalin, a man who killed 30 million people.

Dave, at 4:35 am EDT on May 16, 2006

Odd that only English profs seems worked up by this article. There is a distinct bias in their comments, less Rice.

I have no issue with someone favoring one side or another in a dispute. That is just normal. The Israel-Arab problem boils down to two peoples fighting over the division of a small piece of land. However, much like the Mearshimer & Walt, they display a noticeable lack of introspection when it comes to the Arab side as if they are blameless and all fault lies with the Jews.

I fault no one for criticizing Israel as no country is perfect and Israel’s own press and citizenry have no compunction in disputing government policy. Where anti-Zionist rhetoric crosses into anti-semitism arises when Israel is singled out for criticism when others engage in the same activities.

How can Israel’s critics demand the end of “apartheid” of Palestinians/Arabs (who comprise 20% of Israel’s citizens) but do not make similar demands on Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries who deny all Jews the right to citizenship let alone the right to live in their nations.

How come, as mentioned earlier, Jews have to concede their nationalist desire and disband their country while other nationalist movements are applauded and encouraged.

Where are these Israeli critics on China’s permanent occupation of Tibet since 1959?

Why does Israel receive huge criticism for alleged expropriation of lands and forcing Palestinian from their land yet nary a peep of same or worse post-1948 treatment of Jews in most Arab countries?

No the exclusive demands on Israel without uttering a peep about other regimes and countries is tantamount to anti-semitism.

Lastly, from a practical standpoint, the only resolution of Palestinian issue will be a nation on the West Bank and Gaza with some territorial swaps, a division of Jerusalem, and compensation for Palestinians if shown to be forced from their properties. It would be nice if Jewish Israeli citizens get similar treatment from their forced departures but I won’t hold my breath. These anti-Zionists would do well to support a negotiated settlement rather than encourage the wholesale dismantlement of Israel. Israelis won’t willingly give up their rights to maintain their nation, so why encourage an extreme position guaranteed to continue misery and bloodshed.

Jay, at 6:00 am EDT on May 16, 2006

Desperate to be relevant

“Odd that only English profs seems worked up by this article.”

Nothing odd about it: They suffer from a recognizable need to be relevant to matters about which they understand precisely nothing. Mr. Furr’s uninformed efforts to rewrite Soviet history dramatize this psychological dilemma quite nicely. And they wonder why no one takes them seriously.

JBM, at 8:35 am EDT on May 16, 2006

The pro-zionist lobby is so strong in the USA that every voice diverting the attention to the atrocities of Israel towards the Palestinians is to be considered as heroic. The USA:s blind support of Israel is not in the interest of the American people. The USA should encourage and pursue a peaceful solution of the Arab-Israeli conflict based on mutual understanding of both people �s interest and not side with only one party. Conditions are put only on the Palestinians to fullfil certain conditions and when such conditions are fullfiled, then new conditions are dictated. No conditions are asked from Israel which is really occupying another country and killing its people at will. Where is the sense for justice?

Samir Younes, at 9:10 am EDT on May 16, 2006

Grover Furr and anti-Semitism

While I disagree with just about every word in Grover Furr’s comment, including “the” and “and", having known him some years ago when I was an undergraduate, I can affirm that he has not got a racist or anti-Semitic bone in his body.

I never took Professor Furr’s classes, mostly because he and I were at loggerheads politically twenty years ago, too. But I never, ever felt any form of hatred from him.

And believe me when I tell you that I have experienced anti-Semitism, and know it when it happens.

Say what you will about his policies (and Grover, you’re dead wrong), but Professor Furr is not an anti-Semite.

Meryl Yourish, Montclair State University, at 10:15 am EDT on May 16, 2006

anti-Zionist vs antisemetic

I support the Jewish people as I support all people. I hold a vision, perhaps against all odds, that all the rich diversity of culture and ethnicity, religion and heritage can some day be affirmed. The historical atrocities and present day realities of anti-Semitism can never be lost sight of in this discussion and effect the passion on both sides of the debate.

I do not see the strife between the Palestinians and the Israelis as primarily a religious difference. Judaism is a beautiful religion, Islam is a peaceful religion, and there are Christian Palestinians (who would Jesus bomb?) Nationalism, fanaticism, narcissism, greed, fear and other human failings fuel violence, even violence that is said to be done in the name of religion.

I am not anti-Semitic. I am anti-Zionist. And I am deeply aggrieved at having the two become synonymous. I also think it is dangerous for the Jewish people for the two to become synonymous. As Dr. Furr pointed out, there are certainly Jewish people who oppose the actions of the Israeli government.

Jay asks where anti-Zionists are on other issues, such as China’s occupation of Tibet. I have contributed to a “Free Tibet” organization for the same reasons I am anti-Zionist. I also am against all policies in Arab countries that deny Jews equal rights of citizenship, I also participated in the boycotts of South Africa during their apartheid and the list goes on. Why does he assume that anyone opposed to what Israel is doing would be ideologically inconsistent and single out Israel while supporting other instances of oppression and genocide?

And to characterize the Israeli government (not the Jewish people, but the Israeli government — there is a difference everyone) as the oppressor in this situation is not some quirk of anti-Semitic bias — it refers to the reality of an organized occupying force and its actions on an indigenous people.

This is not to say that there is not violence on both sides and that terrorism and violence on both sides is tragically wrong. But the Palestinians have not had the resources to impose a systematic means of oppression, to dispose of homes, farms, groves and wells, take possession or destroy the resources necessary to continue life in a particular town or region, to create a Diaspora and vast refugee camps and so forth. So many seem to speak of the situation as a tit for a tat — Israeli soldiers kill Palestinians, but Palestinians kill Israelis... as if it is two bickering tribes going back and forth. That’s just not the reality. It seems to me there is an oppressor and an oppressed here whatever your particular views, values or religion.

I want to fight that and I’d like Jews, Christians, Muslims, Hindus and everyone else by my side doing it.

Catherine Brougham LMHP

Catherine Brougham, at 11:30 am EDT on May 16, 2006

Ignorance, seek thy career in the Ivory Tower!

Well, Yourish, I appreciate your insights. Regardless of his intent, Grover Furr is a fool shilling for evil. He’s shilling for Islamists who dream of killing all the Jews, as they have since the 40’s. He shills for Stalin who killed millions in his search for his drema of utopia.

http://www.chss.montclair.edu/english/furr/

Michael Nahum, you thoroughly amused me with your utterly merciless fisking of Furr’s inanity.

The ability of our “educators” to ignore the hypocrisy of Islamic states preventing the emigration of Jews and Christians, the flat out oppression of Jews and Christians still living in their lands, while preventing them from practicing their faith or preaching it, while castigating the Jews who allow Arabs the right to practice and vote, and even emigrate to Israel, is staggering.

“Now I know that the learned professors will insist that they don’t hate Jews, just those Jews who insist on the right of Jews to exist as Jews in the national Jewish homeland, but I have found over the years that the easiest way to identify anti-Semites is to see if they are applying double standards, holding Jews to one standard and everyone else, including but not limited to the Arabs, to another. That the learned professors are doing so is self-evident.”

DB, that bears repeating.

MB, at 12:15 pm EDT on May 16, 2006

To Ms. Brougham

If one accepts that other peoples are entitled to their national homelands but deny the same right to Jews, one can be said to be anti-Jewish.

As to your occupier comment, many of us believe that Israel is NOT an occupier. It is a state created in the historical homeland of the Jewish people — we were there millennia before Islam and Arabs even existed. Also, there were no Arab “Palestinians” at the time of Israel’s founding in 1948 — there were only Egyptians and Jordanians.

Now, I am not one of the people who believe that Israel should hold onto all of Greater Israel. Israel has shown itself willing to make great sacrifices for peace. See the peace agreement with Egypt, see Barak’s amazing offer at Camp David and Taba. (Unfortunately, the Palestinians haven’t.) My point is that many of us do not view Israel as some alien presence in the Middle East that doesn’t belong there.

Martin, at 1:35 pm EDT on May 16, 2006

Meyrl-

I love your blog, but when a person treats Jews differently than other people- when a different standard is applied to Jews than the rest of world’s other peoples- that is anti-Semitism.

That Israel has done wrong cannot be denied- and is not denied by anyone. Driven by fears for its security, it has engaged in a policy of “collective guilt” that has been tragically “heavy handed.” Many Jews within Israel see this problem. Indeed, there is more debate about the morality and wisdom of Israel’s policies in Israel than in the USA.

However, can anyone honestly contend that the USA, the UK, China, France, virtually every Arab state, virtually every African state- indeed, virtually every other country- while facing threats much less serious than those faced by Israel daily for the last 58 years have not acted significantly worse?

Professor Furr’s selective moral vision, and his protestations of his innocence (“m’ think he doth that too much”), lead me to prayer:

May the Lord bless and keep Professor Furr- FAR AWAY FROM ME.

David Korman, University of Pittsburgh, at 11:15 am EDT on May 30, 2006

Jobs Related to Middle East Wars on U.S. Campuses

or search for jobs directly.

Assistant Professor, Mathematics
Yale University

Assistant Professors Tenure-track The Mathematics Department at Yale University intends to make one or more tenure-track ... see job

Clinical Instructor, Dermatology
University of California, Irvine

School of Medicine Department of Dermatology Position: Health Sciences Clinical Instructor Department of Dermatology The ... see job

Art Museum Security Officer re-Posted 1-7-09
Princeton University

Position Summary: Art Museum Security Officer Work Schedule 20 hours per week: Wednesday — Saturday, 12pm — ... see job

Assistant Professor in History (Latin American)
University of Texas, Brownsville

Position Number: FY 09-49 Reports to: Chair of History Department Scope: The Department of History at the University of Texas ... see job

Assistant/Associate/Professor, Piano and Collaborative Performance, Coordinator of Keyboard Program
DePaul University

DePaul University School of Music NOTICE OF FACULTY VACANCY Position: Instructor in Piano and Collaborative Performance, ... see job

Tenured Law Faculty
University of Minnesota, Twin Cities

The University of Minnesota is a premier employer and a talent magnet attracting leading faculty and staff from around the ... see job

Coordinator of Music Industry
Eastern Kentucky University

Eastern Kentucky University, located in Richmond, Madison County, Kentucky near the Heart of the Bluegrass, is a ... see job

Assistant Professor of English
James Madison University

Join one of the finest regional universities in the nation. James Madison University, home to 18,000 + students, welcomes you ... see job

Assistant/Associate Professor of Engineering
James Madison University

Join one of the finest regional universities in the nation. James Madison University, home to 18,000 + students, welcomes you ... see job

Assistant/Associate Professor
Ithaca College

Job Description: The Roy H. Park School of Communications Department of Journalism at Ithaca College is ... see job