EI has the latest on the Martin Kramer debacle at Harvard, the fellow who called for the west to take action to limit the Palestinian birthrate. Harvard offered mixed signals on Kramer, but is sticking by his right to be controversial. I’m all for controversy myself; but I would remind people, Kramer is an extremist fool who calls for racist population measures and he has a platform to be controversial, at Harvard, while the only Palestinians in the mainstream discourse are the most moderate. And (as Ali Gharib notes) Norman Finkelstein is controversial, but he’s sitting in Brooklyn reading Gandhi’s collected works in 52 volumes. Abunimah makes the point below.
In an initial response to an email from EI’s Ali Abunimah, Professor Beth Simmons, the director of WCFIA, wrote, "I agree with your assessment of the appalling nature of these [Kramer’s] statements," but added, "the WCFIA does not have a policy of censoring or censuring our affiliates on the basis of their opinions." Simmons also stated, "I very much hope you bring these [Kramer’s] words to the attention of others affiliated with the WCFIA, Harvard and the broader community, where I hope they will garner their just reaction." She encouraged individuals to make their concerns known to Professor Stephen Rosen, who is in charge of the National Security Studies Program of which Kramer is a fellow.
A short time later, however, a statement jointly signed by Simmons and Professors Jeffry Frieden and James Robinson (who are acting directors while Simmons is on sabbatical) appeared to reverse course.
The statement read: "Over the past several days, we have heard from several members of the public, and of the Harvard community, who object to the statements of Martin Kramer at a recent conference."
The statement continues, "Accusations have been made that Martin Kramer’s statements are genocidal. These accusations are baseless. Kramer’s statements, available at http://www.martinkramer.org/sandbox/2010/02/superfluous-young-men/ express dismay with the policy of agencies that provide aid to Palestinian refugees, and that tie aid entitlements to the size of refugee families. Kramer argues that this policy encourages population growth among refugee communities. While these views may be controversial, there is no way they can be regarded as genocidal."
The statement then goes on to implicitly criticize those who have criticized Kramer: "Those who have called upon the Weatherhead Center to dissociate itself from Kramer’s views, or to end Kramer’s affiliation with the Center, appear not to understand the role of controversy in an academic setting. It would be inappropriate for the Weatherhead Center to pass judgement on the personal political views of any of its affiliates, or to make affiliation contingent upon some political criterion. Exception may be made for statements that go beyond the boundaries of protected speech, but there is no sense in which Kramer’s remarks could be considered to fall into this category."
In his letter to WCFIA director Simmons, Abunimah had asked, "I wonder how long Mr. Kramer’s views would be tolerated if — all other things being equal — he were an Arab scholar who had called for Jews to be placed in a giant, sealed enclosure which virtually no one is allowed to leave and enter, and deprived of food and schooling for their children in order to reduce their birthrate?"
