Several students write to the Harvard Crimson on the Kramer matter– representing a coalition of 16 student groups. One of the signatories is Abdelnasser Rashid of the Palestinian solidarity group:
Had Mr. Kramer’s comments been directed at any other marginalized or minority groups—leaving aside the enormous challenge faced by Palestinians living in the impoverished enclosure of Gaza—we believe that the Weatherhead Center would not have hesitated to classify them as racist and hateful. It has described Mr. Kramer’s proclamations as “controversial,” an alarming position since less than a century ago similar remarks were made against African Americans and Jews. The characterization of his statements as merely “controversial” is offensive and dismisses their deeply racist nature.
Since the Weatherhead Center provides Mr. Kramer with a legitimizing and prominent public platform, we wonder whether it views any policy call as ethically disgraceful. We are troubled that the center has presented little to no diversity of viewpoints on the Israel-Palestine conflict. The only notable statements on the conflict emerging from the center are Mr. Kramer’s.
I’m very happy to see this letter and hope to see a response from Weatherhead.
I have made exactly this point on this site and elsewhere. Today in the United States, Arabs are uniquely singled out as ‘legitimate’ targets of racism and hatred. It is seen daily in entertainment, news media and especially radio and television talk shows. Many hate-based attacks get media attention that is routinely denied attacks on Arab Americans. The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee and others have documented this. I saw this personally in New York City after 9/11 (though I am not Arab) when I witnessed attacks on Arab New Yorkers — attacks that were never reported in The New York Times or any other New York media outlet.
Imus, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Ann Coulter, Michelle Malkin and on and on would be out in a minute if they made the comments about Jews or Blacks that they frequently make about Arabs and Muslims.
Forty years ago, Harvard discriminated against Jews, African Americans, Native Americans, Hispanics … and progressives. Today, Harvard discriminates (with real, public pride) against Arabs … and progressives.
Yeah, it is really intersting how Limbaugh, Beck, Coulter, Imus, and Malkin do not touch the third rail of Israeli ethnocentrism, paid for with US tax dollars.
Isn’t Malkin married to a Jew? And let’s not forget that she wouldn’t be in the US at all if not for our Jewish-imposed immigration laws.
“Jewish-imposed immigration laws?” Really, America First?
Sigh. Can somebody else handle this guy? I don’t have the patience of the time right now.
Please make the time to read this:
Jewish Involvement in Shaping American Immigration Policy, 1881-1965: A Historical Review
link to csulb.edu
So immigration policy isn’t primarily a function of economics? Jews are responsible for the influx of Mexicans working in agriculture in California and Texas? And Jews are responsible for the influx of South Asians working in the IT sector? And when my father’s family came from Quebec to work in the textile mills of New England in the early 20th century, it was the Jews what did that too?
I’ve dealt with this nitwit attitude while living in Texas and California. Open criticism of the ‘wetbacks’ taking all the great jobs like dishwashing or vegetable picking, but no one complaining about being able to buy lettuce for a $1 a head, or paying $6.99 at the all-you-can-eat buffet due to low produce and service costs.
Pingback: At Harvard, Kramer is merely controversial University Intro
Pingback: Word of Mouth: Does Le Whif Pass the Sniff Test? | Biochemical Engineering Addict
I’m not sure that it’s possible to trace a distinctively Jewish stance on immigration to Western societies, which as marc says, has surely been determined mainly by considerations of available work, wage levels and workforce quality.
In the UK when immigration first became a big issue in the 60s a few right wing politicians were particularly vocal in their opposition to it, and one of the most prominent of these, noted in Michael Dummett’s book on immigration to the UK, was Sir Gerald Nabarro, who was Jewish.
Much more recently Geert Wilders has won big triumphs a week or so ago in the Dutch local elections based on anti-Muslim campaigning. Our ‘UK Independence Party’ pals around with him.
MacDonald’s work is thorough as to the US. Certainly the cheap labor doesn’t help, but if immigration policy were primarily economically motivated it would look very different from what we now have: see Heaven’s Door by Harvard’s George Borjas. I would still oppose it, but it wouldn’t be nearly as bad.
To Marc’s point, I’d happily pay full cost for products made in the US by US citizens. Jewish civil rights lawyers wouldn’t permit any company to give me that option.
Pingback: MONDOWEISS ONLINE NEWSLETTER « Shoah