Hampshire students take heart. You are part of a movement. 120 members of Columbia faculty have sent this strong letter to Columbia President Lee Bollinger blasting him for his utter silence on the Gaza slaughter and the countless other destructions of freedom in Palestine. Here's the letter in full:
On a number of occasions since becoming president of Columbia University you have expressed your views in public on questions of academic freedom in the Middle East. Yet you have remained silent on the actions by Israel that deny that freedom to Palestinians.
These actions include Israel's continuing blockade of Gaza, the imposing of barriers, checkpoints, and closures around and within the West Bank that make academic life unworkable, the denial of exit visas to Palestinian scholars offered fellowships abroad or invited to international conferences, including scholars invited to Columbia, and the recent three-week war against Gaza that included not only the bombing of Palestinian schools and colleges, with great loss of life, but the widespread destruction of the material and social fabric on which academic life depends.
We, as Columbia and Barnard faculty, ask you now to make public your opposition to these actions and your support for the academic freedom of Palestinians.
There are great people among the signatories.
Elizabeth Povinelli, Alisa Solomon, Saskia Hamiton, Rashid Khalidi, Timothy Mitchell, Mahmood Mamdani, Nadia Abu El Haj, among others. and leading off, at number 1: Lila Abu-Lughod, who said at a Nakba commemoration last spring that she had led a quiet political life till now. Well this is a beautiful letter. Maybe it will lead to further activism? I don't think Bollinger's silence can be understood outside of the tremendous financial pressures on him from the likes of Columbia alum Robert Kraft, especially given Bollinger's dreams of a legacy in building a giant new campus in what it calls Manhattanville, between 125th and 131st Street. How much of Columbia's big gifts come from Jews who think, per Reform head Rabbi Eric Yoffie and other religious "leaders", that what Israel did in Gaza, destroying colleges, was copasetic?
(Phil Weiss)
I would assume the learned president is more concerned with Jews having the freedom to breathe then the Palestinians having the freedom to go to school. Seems one should be a right, the other a priviledge.
And since the political will of the palestinians mean death for Jews, then it stands to reason that the Palestinians find their priviledges restricted.
But to antisemites who whine about the palestinians not being able to get their way, nothing is good enough.
If 75% of American Jews tend to be progressive and support a two state solution, then one would think that 75% of their billionares would also reflect those views. However, it seems that they are all West Bank settlers cheerleaders. What gives?
Chris,
I really feel sorry for you and your unshakable conviction that there are people everywhere who are thinking of nothing but how to kill you. If the people who think like you are in power in Israel and are in charge of nuclear button then God help the world. It has a making of Greek tragedy, this inevitability of self-destruction by uncontrollable persecution mania. Can you see Devil looking through the eyes of Palestinian children? Can you hear whisperings just on the other side of the wall? Are the voices German or Arabic, or does it matter? Do you carry a knife? Are they stealing your air?
Are you aware that people from other countries went through the war and do not suffer like you do? In all seriousness, do you know that there is help available, and it does not include killing children?
Syvanen,
Real estate opportunities in Occupied Territories are tremendous:
Free land, captive labour, prices of build properties similar to mid-America.
Can make up to 750% on the capital in 12 months. What's not to like?
@Syvanen:
The Jewish part of society is just like other parts of society: Those few with real money and power are mostly assholes (Racists and religious/expansionst Zionists in that case), while those who want true justice and are certain that all men are created equal are mostly poor and powerless, as individuals. Now if they would unite, Jew and non-Jew, conservative and liberal, they would almost effortlessly outnumber and outgun the assholes.
berel displays an attribute that I have seen on more than one occassion. It is the conviction that the reason they are disliked/despised is simply because they are Jewish. It has nothing to do with them being hateful, vile, bigoted individuals who if they were not that way would be welcomed as fellow human beings by most (excluding those who share the same characteristics I was describing).
It must be a great psychological comfort, provided by such a strong delusion that shields him from ever facing the actual deficiencies of his own character.
University presidents have been grovelling to the hyperwealthy Zionist political economic oligarchy for a long time: Boycotts and Principles of Academia.
Bollinger is a putz. Last year, when he gave that that absurd insulting schizophrenic welcome to the president of Iran he embarrassed himself, Columbia and all the alumni of that much diminished institution. If Ahmadinejad's presence at Columbia was to threating to the school's image of itself it should have disinvited him, not lecture him like a schoolboy.
When scholars write about the history of Columbia they won't confuse the Ahmadinejad visit with Columbia's finest hour. They'll rather point to it as the time wealthy alumni used the power of their purse to make the university president look like a Zionist tool.
For those who might have forgotten the dark at the top of Columbia, my alma mater, here are excerpts from a section of Kurdish Life (No. 64, Fall 2007) under the caption, "Columbia University’s Hall of Shame" )
Initially Columbia’s Jewish president, Lee Bollinger, took the high road to defend the invitation as an expression of “Columbia’s long-standing tradition of serving as a major forum for robust debate.” But by the time Ahmadinejad arrived on campus, Bollinger had descended to the lowest of roads. In what might well be the longest and the most inappropriate introduction ever to blight an Ivy League campus, he launched into a vitriolic, venomous diatribe—a classic example of an academic’s proclivity to ‘beg the question,’ i.e., to assume what he should be proving. Here are excerpts of Bollinger’s version of “robust debate” and “extraordinary self-restraint:”
“First, since 2003, the World Leaders Forum has advanced Columbia’s longstanding tradition of serving as a major forum for robust debate, especially on global issues… It should never be thought that merely to listen to ideas we deplore in any way implies our endorsement of those ideas, or the weakness of our resolve to resist those ideas or our naiveté about the very real dangers inherent in such ideas. It is a critical premise of freedom of speech that we do not honor the dishonorable when we open the public forum to their voices. To hold otherwise would make vigorous debate impossible….
Second, to those who believe that this event never should have happened…The scope of free speech and academic freedom should itself always be open to further debate…It is required by existing norms of free speech, the American university, and Columbia itself…to be clear on another matter—this event has nothing whatsoever to do with any ‘rights’ of the speaker but only with our right to listen and speak. We do it for ourselves. We do it in the great tradition of openness that has defined this nation for many decades now. We need to indeed understand the world we live in, neither neglecting its glories nor shrinking from its threats and dangers. It is consistent with the idea that one should know thine enemies, to have the intellectual and emotional courage to confront the mind of evil and to prepare ourselves to act with the right temperament. In the moment, the arguments for free speech will never seem to match the power of the arguments against, but what we must remember is that this is precisely because free speech asks us to exercise extraordinary self-restraint against the very natural but often counter-productive impulses that lead us to retreat from engagement with ideas we dislike and fear. In this lies the genius of the American idea of free speech… Lastly, in universities we have a deep and almost single-minded commitment to pursue the truth. We do not have access to the levers of power. We cannot make war or peace. We can only make minds…”
“Let me now turn to Mr. Ahmadinejad,” said the president, blasting him for “the brutal crackdown on scholars, journalists and human rights advocates… student and academic protestors, women, members of the Baha’I faith, homosexuals and so many of our academic colleagues.” He condemned the “210 executions in Iran in 2007.” And without pausing to give his invited guest a chance to debate his charges, Bollinger declared, “Let’s then, be clear at the beginning. Mr. President, you exhibit all the signs of a petty and cruel dictator.”
The above was followed by reference to issues closest to Bollinger’s heart: Holocaust denial, destruction of Israel and related topics, i.e., funding Hamas and Hezbullah, Iran’s nuclear program, and Tehran’s “proxy war against U.S. troops in Iraq.”
Here’s a particularly telling example: “Twelve days ago, you said that the state of Israel ‘cannot continue its life.’ This echoes a number of inflammatory statements you have delivered in the last two years, including in October 2006 when you said that Israel should be ‘wiped off the map.’ Columbia has over 800 alumni currently living in Israel. As an institution we have deep ties with our colleagues there. I personally have spoken out in most forceful terms against proposals to boycott Israeli scholars and universities, saying that such boycotts might as well include Columbia. More than 400 college and university presidents in this country have joined in that statement. My question then is, Do you plan on wiping us off the map, too?”
Over more than half an hour the charges kept piling up. Ahmadinejad had yet to be given a single moment to respond. But the university president wasn’t finished. “Let me close with this comment,” Bollinger continued. “Frankly and in all candor, Mr. President, I doubt that you will have the intellectual courage to answer these questions. But your avoiding them will in itself be meaningful to us. I do expect you to exhibit the fanatical mindset that characterizes so much of what you say and do…A year ago, I am reliably told, your preposterous and belligerent statements…so embarrassed sensible Iranian citizens that this led to your party’s defeat in the December mayoral elections. May this do that and more…I am only a professor, who is also a university president, and today I feel all the weight of the modern civilized world yearning to express the revulsion at what you stand for. I only wish I could do better.” (SIPA World Leaders Forum 9.24.07)
Even Haaretz was taken aback and reported: “Bollinger was strongly criticized for inviting Ahmadinejad to Columbia, and had promised tough questions. But the strident and personal nature of his attack was startling.."
Chris Berel, you are truly a piece of work! Both you and all Israelis know very well how to get the breathing room you profess to crave–namely, end the occupation. But you are enjoying the notion of Israeli victimhood, and that enjoyment is threatened by the possibility of an end to the occupation, so it's out of the question. Well, enjoy it while you may because it's not gonna last forever.
I must thank you for providing so many teachable moments for my students. You are doing an excellent job of turning them into anti-Zionist activists. Thanks again!
An important letter–no one cares much what university presidents say, but a good strong letter from this many faculty is excellent. Bollinger I believe is not Jewish, and not being an especially courageous man, may feel somewhat compelled to avoid controversy on this issue. So I applaud the letter without necessarily denouncing Bollinger.
Bollinger is not Jewish. See Ahmadinejad, Columbia Faculty Politics, Martin Peretz, Islamic Fascism.
Delia, your antisemitism is showing. Not breathing room, merely the right to draw breath while standing on what was once considered holy Islamic territory.
If you are a teacher, you do the field a diservice. But then there are many shitty teachers, like you, in the world. Check out what is taught in most arabic schools in the region. Hardly math and science. Unless it is how to count the number of sticks of dynamite and how to place them in a belt.
Thank you again, Chris. I will be sure to direct the class to this comment this afternoon.
Why don't they just hire the SJP to write a false press release stating that Columbia has divested?
This pro-Palestinian wildfire across campuses doesn't seem to be catching. It looks more like a few faculty, a student group here and there…and that's about it. Seems to be mostly bystanders looking uneasily from the sidelines.
Considering it's been an issue for over 40 years, it had plenty of time to turn into a bigger Vietnam movement. For obvious reasons, however, that's not likely to happen.
@ Chris Berel
"I would assume the learned president is more concerned with Jews having the freedom to breathe then the Palestinians having the freedom to go to school. Seems one should be a right, the other a priviledge.
And since the political will of the palestinians mean death for Jews, then it stands to reason that the Palestinians find their priviledges restricted.
But to antisemites who whine about the palestinians not being able to get their way, nothing is good enough."
Why assume such when the facts on the ground, for so long, but most recently made vivid in the
massacre of Gaza, clearly indicate the political will of the Israelis means death to the Palestinian arabs and Christians? It stands to reason from such reality, rather than fantasy, that Israel needs restriction badly for being a rogue state. But to Likud-style zionists who whine about others not recognizing
their claim to a special relationship with God, the real estate agent, nothing is good enough.
Who has more freedom to breathe, a typical Gazan, or a typical Israeli? Chris Berel is a mental case, considering what he say versus what's happening in the real world of the Middle East under Israeli
control–funded by ignorant Americans, who are intentionally kept so.
@ chris berel
"If you are a teacher, you do the field a diservice. But then there are many shitty teachers, like you, in the world. Check out what is taught in most arabic schools in the region."
And while you are at it read the recent article in Haaretz, talked about on this blog, directed to the subject
of Israeli high school students all in favor of the far right wing candidate. There it is described how those
students were taught so in High School that they are not even aware there were considerably less non-Jews on their land after 1948 when compared to the number of non-jewish residents there in 1947.
@ Suzanne
"Considering it's been an issue for over 40 years, it had plenty of time to turn into a bigger Vietnam movement. For obvious reasons, however, that's not likely to happen.
Posted by: Suzanne"
For extensive discussion of the "obvious reasons" pick up W & M The Israel Lobby for starters.
Bollinger could simply have said by way of introduction: "The First Amendment protects free speech. We would not need that Amendment if everybody agreed on important issues…"
Instead, he went on and on loading the dice for over a half hour, directly castigating and humiliating the waiting speaker, who held a high position in a foreign land. A Nazi kangaroo court would have done the same. Where's the vaunted "free flow of ideas" in the ivory towers, the public debate required for anything resembling an informed citizenry all concede is the basis for a real democracy run for the people and by the people?
Seems his rant was his form of providing "context."
Antisemitism is not a joke, and it's not an accusation to be made casually either – Chris convinces nobody. But we should take it seriously. Delia, if you think that ending the occupation will dissipate the antisemitic aspects of the political Islam waxing across the Muslim world, then you are wrong. Don't ignore Hamas' very transparent aims for the region. And Lancethruster, you know it's funny what you say about psychological defences – you surely realise that calling Jews who worry about antisemitism paranoid is a classic defence of antisemites. And if you think that antisemitism is no threat to Jews elsewhere in the world, you are also wrong. Here in the UK, Jews are emigrating in fear of the future. From South Africa, too. And from other places. Where do you think a lot of them are going? And how do you think they feel? And how do you think it influences their politics?
It is reasonable for Jews to have serious worries about their place in the world, no? If these worries are so unfounded, then argue that – or you will only add to the worries. And if you forget this, as you did when you piled into Chris Berel, then your attitude will bring about the belief in some of those exposed to your censurious forgetfulness that Zionism is their best chance of survival. You will help the thing you (seem to) hate.
When somebody calls you 'antisemite' – or any kind of bigot – you don't have to accept it, but you should take it seriously. When you argue and work for the end of the occupation, keep this in mind. And keep in mind the peace activists on the ground in Israel and Palestine who have convince their respective populations that they can live side by side. Don't feed the divisions between Jews and Arabs by scoffing at the fears of Jews.
One for the road.
Mira–you are the voice of reason.
Also, some of the language here (i.e., Jews are historically responsible for oppressing gentiles etc) makes it clear that those seeking to end Israeli occupation of Gaza and West Bank need to disassociate themselves from hatemongers.
Otherwise it's a stalemate where Israel will forever have the upper hand. Get rid of the haters and come to the table with pure intentions.
Mira, now you need to scold the likes of Chris Berel and SOG, and Suzanne (less directly) . for calling people the racist names they do , on this blog. And for the same reasons. What's good for the goose, is good for the gander, right? It is reasonable for Americans and Palestinians, and Arabs generally, to have serious worries about their place in the world, no? Should Americans ignore how their government has enabled Israel's conduct toward the native Palestinians all these years, and in every way possible except sending GIs to attack and police the occupied land side by side with the IDF? American ideals call for
criticism of Israel's policies, both domestically and in the occupied lands. Any American imbued with those values (e.g., equal rights, equal opportunity, separation of religion and state, etc) and being a taxpayer (huge doles, without strings, made only to Israel, and to Egypt and Jordan for going along with Israeli
activity, makes it the responsibility of responsible American citizens to object, and to contact their
Congress and the White House accordingly. Agree?