On Wednesday, November 29, two academic discussions were held at the University of Massachusetts on the topics of anti-Semitism and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The events happened at the same time, 7 p.m., in different buildings, a physical separation representative of the ideological divide between the discussions. At one event, two UMass professors, Sut Jhally and Joseph Levine, joined forces with Vijay Prashad, a professor at Trinity College, to discuss the exploitation of the label âanti-Semitismâ to suppress criticism of Israelâs actions toward Palestinians. Their event was sparked by a Daily Collegian columnistâs unfair representation of Thomas Suarez as an anti-Semite after he gave a talk criticizing Israel at UMass in September. On the other side, the Department of Judaic and Near Eastern Studies held a symposium on the general topic of âAntisemitism and Islamophobia: Historic Perspectives and Civic Engagement Against Hate in 2017.â
It was not a coincidence that these events occurred on the same day, at the same time, and in different buildings. Within only a few weeks, members of the Judaic and Near Eastern Studies Department organized their panel in an effort to compete with and discourage students from attending the âExploiting Antisemitismâ event, which had been planned for over a month. Leaders of the âAntisemitism and Islamophobiaâ event even admitted to such. Jonathan Skolnik, one of the event organizers, said, “I felt something had to be done to shift a negative discussion to a positive one…I felt it was best to take a cue from Michelle Obama (âWhen they go low, we go highâ) and do what university departments can do best: organize a thoughtful, intellectual panel with expert scholars and accomplished activists with diverse perspectivesâŚfor the education of students and the community.â
The Department of Judaic and Near Eastern Studies definitely did not turn a negative discussion into a positive one, and they most certainly did not take the high road. Their actions were disappointing and petty. I can only compare the situation to a spoiled child taking their ball and going home when they donât like the score of a game. In their attempt to stifle academic discussion, they did a great disservice to UMass students and the University as a whole.
As an intellectually curious college freshman, I was torn as to which event to attend, as I would have appreciated hearing perspectives from both sides of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and Iâm sure many of my fellow students felt the same way. In the end, I chose to attend the âExploiting Anti-Semitismâ panel because I committed to going long before I even knew about the âAntisemitism and Islamophobiaâ symposium. That being said, I will not be commenting on the events of âAntisemitism and Islamophobia,â nor will I share my largely naive opinion on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. What I will say is that I learned a lot from my attendance of âExploiting Anti-Semitism,â and I gained a new perspective on an issue that I have had little exposure to.
In no way did I find the event to be negative or harmful. Anyone who makes the charge that the talk was anti-Semitic clearly was either not in attendance or has very biased and selective hearing. Did I agree with everything that was said? Absolutely not, but that is the point of having these discussions on campus. I was able to listen to experienced intellectuals present the facts, as they know them, and I learned a lot from what they presented. I believe that the professors who organized the âAntisemitism and Islamophobiaâ event could have benefitted in the same way as I did. It is deeply disturbing to me that certain high level academics at UMass arenât tolerant of opposing viewpoints being voiced, to the extent that they feel the need to host counter-events at the exact same time. If our professors are really not open to hearing a different opinion to their own, maybe they should rethink their career paths and maybe we should reconsider who is teaching our classes.
Regardless of the Judaic and Near Eastern Studies departmentâs intentions, their actions only hurt their cause. Students like myself who would have loved to attend their panel and would have learned a lot from their opinions are now worse off because we werenât able to hear their side of the argument. If their event had been held on another day or even another time, more people would have been able to hear their message and be better educated.
Politically Iâm very moderate, and by no means am I a free speech absolutist or raving conservative, but it saddens me that respected members of my University have employed the largely leftist tactic of attempting to silence voices they donât agree with. I trust that the majority of the student body would agree that UMass should be a University where a difference of opinion and debate are encouraged. I signed up to attend a large, public University, not an ideological safe space.
Aidan Byrne is a Collegian columnist and can be reached at [email protected].
NITZAKHON • Dec 18, 2017 at 8:42 am
@Arafat: Have you read Evan Sayet’s “Regurgitating the Apple”? An excellent read.
http://www.heritage.org/political-process/report/regurgitating-the-apple-how-modern-liberals-think
And here’s a video speech by him on the same topic. Skip to about 3:00 to get over the milquetoast introduction.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xkyn3JaLrcw
Arafat • Dec 11, 2017 at 11:40 pm
“Politically Iâm very moderate, and by no means am I a free speech absolutist or raving conservative, but it saddens me that respected members of my University have employed the largely leftist tactic of attempting to silence voices they donât agree with.”
Amen. The Left, under the guise of civility, are proponents of silencing those with opposing views. In doing so they are today’s fascists.
Of course this is nothing new. The Left has always been in the forefront of supporting Marxists, socialists, communists and now Islamists and Palestinians. The Left: Always on the wrong side of freedom and always delusional about being so.
NITZAKHON • Dec 11, 2017 at 8:44 am
Or Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch, or Pamela Geller.
NITZAKHON • Dec 11, 2017 at 8:43 am
Oh, a follow-up. You’re interested in being tolerant of other viewpoints?
Let’s have David Horowitz come to speak. Or Milo. Or Ann Coulter. How about Rush Limbaugh as the commencement speaker. Or any pro-life person giving a talk.
NITZAKHON • Dec 11, 2017 at 5:52 am
Hamas’ charter is simple: Dead Jews and a destroyed Israel.
Fatah’s charter is simple: Ditto. Just couched in slightly more polite-sounding language.
Against a group that says “We want you dead to the last man, woman, and child” just what is there to negotiate?
And here’s a question for you… is it the prerogative of a black person to say, with “absolute moral authority” what is racist? Ditto for other minorities? Ditto for gay people and homophobia? Ditto for women and sexism? I’m openly asking.