#antisemitism in higher education

[thegayhimbo]

Columbia's never going to live this down (and rightfully so). That was one of the most embarrassing displays of entitlement, privilege, and stupidity that I've ever seen in my life. 😒

The money those students (and their wealthy parents) spent would have been better off being donated to charities/organizations providing actual humanitarian aid for Gazans as opposed to pulling this shit.

Every time I think I've seen it all, the current antisemitic protests against Israel teach me I was wrong. The people at the Columbia University encampment have finally been forced to stop breaking the law, physically blocking, vilifying and attacking Jewish students, but one of the last notes they went out on is worth highlighting IMO (besides committing vandalism instead of accepting the university admin's offer to invest more in Gazans should the illegal encampment dissolve itself peacefully).

As they barricaded themselves inside a building they had no right to take over, causing physical damage in the process, their spokeswoman demanded they be allow food and water inside. Her argument? That they paid for their meal plans. These are the same people who have been denying Jewish students access to their own campuses, libraries, classes, to the very education that these Jewish kids, who have broken no laws, have paid for, not to mention robbing them of their basic human right to safety and dignity as Jews... These same protesters were throwing a hissy fit, demanding humanitarian aid, as if they were disenfranchised people fighting to stay alive in the middle of a disaster beyond their means of dealing with, rather than adults who consciously chose to break the law, despite knowing such actions come with consequences.

How are these America's best and brightest?

(for all of my updates and ask replies regarding Israel, click here)

[commonsensecommentary]

“If you’re not willing to accept the punishment that might come with defending your supposedly deeply held beliefs, it’s not actually political protest—it’s cosplay complete with keffiyehs.”

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

By: Lee Yaron

Published: Jun 16, 2024

Antisemitic comments by professors, harassment of Jewish students – Columbia University's antisemitism task force has heard hundreds of testimonies since its formation in November. Its members tell Haaretz about the mandatory orientation they plan and say they have agreed on an 'educational' definition of antisemitism

NEW YORK – One professor encountering a Jewish-sounding surname while reading names before an exam asked the student to explain their views on the Israeli government's actions in Gaza. Another told their class to avoid reading mainstream media, declaring that "it is owned by Jews." A third revealed a student's complaint about an offensive comment regarding Jews by publicly displaying their email to fellow students.

Several times, professors encouraged students to participate in pro-Palestinian protests or the Gaza Solidarity Encampment for extra credit, or conducted classes at protest sites. Other incidents included students wearing Jewish symbols having them torn from their person. Some were pushed out of student clubs they had been part of because they did not want to participate in group actions and statements against Israel's right to exist.

These are just a few of the hundreds of testimonies the Columbia Task Force on Antisemitism has documented that detail harassment, intimidation, discrimination and exclusion against Jewish students by professors and fellow students at the New York university since the October 7 Hamas massacre and subsequent war in Gaza.

The task force conducted over 20 listening sessions across the university, which found itself at the epicenter of the campus protests that have engulfed America this year, hearing from about 500 students and receiving dozens of written appeals.

Some of these testimonies are set to be published in the coming weeks in a new report focusing on Jewish students' experiences at Columbia.

The task force was formed last November by Columbia University President Minouche Shafik, Barnard College President Laura Ann Rosenbury and Teachers College President Thomas R. Bailey. The aim was to address the "harmful impact of rising antisemitism on Columbia's Jewish community and to ensure that protection, respect, and belonging extends to everyone."

From its inception, the task force faced accusations of being illegitimate from some pro-Palestinian faculty and students. Critics claimed its existence was politically motivated, designed to spread fear by exaggerating antisemitism and perceived dangers to Jews, suppress criticism, and distract from the plight of Palestinians in Gaza and the violent arrests of pro-Palestinian protesters.

Jewish students active in the pro-Palestinian protests and Gaza Solidarity Encampment also criticized the move, saying the task force misrepresented Jewish students who did not feel endangered on campus.

Haaretz has interviewed several members of the task force, who say they have documented hundreds of cases of Jewish students feeling discriminated against. This month, the task force has commissioned a large survey of the entire Columbia student population in order to collect data about different aspects of antisemitism on campus.

The members also discussed Columbia's planned response, including a new antisemitism orientation – mandatory for all new students and faculty – to educate on what Jewish students might find offensive. It will also provide for the first time an educational, not legal, definition of antisemitism.

The new definition is expected to determine that statements calling for the destruction and death of Israel and Zionism can be considered antisemitic, while criticism of the Israeli government cannot.

A real problem

"I'm a social scientist, and I believe exploratory research is important. Therefore, in order to make recommendations for changes on campus, we needed to truly understand student experiences first," says task force co-chair Prof. Ester R. Fuchs, who teaches at Columbia University's School of International and Public Affairs.

"We heard from students who feel their identity, values and very existence on campus have been under attack," adds Fuchs, who has been a public affairs and political science professor at Columbia for 40 years. "My heart was broken listening to these students and what they were being forced to deal with."

Another co-chair, Prof. David M. Schizer, from Columbia Law School, notes: "Only when we talked to the students did we realize how serious the problem is. Unfortunately, there are still many faculty members who do not believe that there is antisemitism on campus, and some claim that antisemitism is being weaponized to protect pro-Israel views. We can put it this way: have there been antisemitic incidents? Yes, absolutely. Are there antisemitic faculty and students? Yes, there are some. Are all of them antisemitic? Absolutely not."

The third co-chair, Prof. Nicholas Lemann, from Columbia Journalism School, highlights the fact that the task force didn't have the authority to investigate specific cases. Instead, it was intended to identify wide patterns and solutions.

"In terms of what we've heard, Jewish and Israeli students are feeling very targeted and ostracized," he says. "The concept of Zionism has become unacceptable in some circles at Columbia. People are asked to promise that they're not Zionist. In the classroom, some feel uncomfortable because of intense criticism of Zionism."

Prof. Gil Zussman, an Israeli electrical engineering professor and member of the task force, is especially concerned by faculty members "who have been creating a discriminatory environment – by, for example, moving their classes and office hours into the encampment where 'Zionists were not welcome.'

"Based on conversations with students, we now know that some faculty members are unfortunately also creating a hostile environment toward Israelis in classrooms and are encouraging rule-breaking by student protesters," Zussman says. "For example, over 10 faculty and staff were standing outside Hamilton Hall when students broke in [on April 29 as part of the pro-Palestinian protest]. If I were a parent of one of these students, I would have major concerns about these faculty."

Schizer, who has worked at Columbia for over 25 years, says he is concerned about the inability of opposing groups on campus to have discussions with each other. "There used to be healthy discussion, including debates about Israeli government policy and the occupation," he says. "However, since October 7 the conversation has changed, with many asserting that Israel itself is illegitimate, and with students who disagree refusing to speak and study with one another.

"Part of what a great university does is introduce us to people with different opinions," he continues. "For a democratic society to flourish, we need shifting coalitions, not warring camps. People can agree about X and disagree on Y. The situation now on campus is not healthy. We're really missing something because we see the world as divided into two opposing camps that have nothing to do with each other."

One of the key points emphasized by task force members is that, unlike past protests at Columbia, which were directed at the establishment and the university itself, this protest has in many ways been aimed at students who lack the tools to cope with the intensity of the anger directed against them.

Student protesters targeting other students "are causing pain and isolation in a way I have never seen before on campus," Schizer says.

Fuchs adds that one of the task force's observations is that "the burden of dealing with these situations of harassment, intimidation, discrimination and exclusion has primarily been on the students. We can't allow it."

Several task force members highlight what they see as the university's double standards in ignoring discrimination against and exclusion of Jewish students.

Zussman elaborates. "If, for example, a student group were to use an abhorrent chant such as 'We don't want BLM supporters here,' there would be immediate consequences. However, chants such as 'We don't want Zionists here' have been normalized and currently have no consequences. These double standards are unacceptable and will eventually fracture the university."

Fuchs concurs, noting that the "standard at the university has always been to listen to those experiencing discrimination or hate. During the Black Lives Matter movement, we recognized the need to understand how certain words and behaviors affected individuals. Now, we need to be consistent and apply the same standard to Jewish students."

Burning questions

Both pro-Palestinian and pro-Israeli groups have demanded that the task force provide a legal definition of antisemitism to address the burning questions: Is anti-Zionism a form of antisemitism? Is challenging the right of the State of Israel to exist antisemitic? Is criticizing the Israeli government antisemitic, as some Israelis believe?

However, the task force members told Haaretz that providing a specific definition in the university's rules would contradict federal law – specifically Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which requires that policy definitions of discriminatory harassment be general and not treat separate groups differently. Title VI stipulates that no person in the United States shall, on the grounds of race, color or national origin, be excluded from participation in, denied the benefits of, or subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance.

"In theory, we could specify what terms like 'discriminatory harassment' and 'hostile learning environment' mean when applied to Jews. But doing so would violate the law," says Schizer, who adds: "We don't need a dedicated definition for Jews."

A second reason the task force did not define antisemitism straight away was their belief that the university's definition should emerge from the experiences of the people themselves.

"If we were to define antisemitism for the students in advance, then we are narrowing the possibilities and precluding their experiences," says Fuchs. "In fact, other task forces at Columbia – such as those focused on gender and race following the George Floyd [murder in 2020] – did not start with a definition."

But after hearing from hundreds of students, the task force has decided to establish and publish a definition of antisemitism based on the students' experiences – an educational one, that is, not a legal one. This definition is designed to inform faculty and students about what can offend Jewish people and which types of statements can cause pain and discomfort.

An educational definition will not infringe upon freedom of speech on campus or prohibit potentially antisemitic phrases. It will simply inform community members of the harm their words might cause. This approach is not the decisive action some Jewish groups on campus were seeking.

"We are not trying to draw a very thick boundary around what is antisemitic and say everything outside that boundary is fine," Lemann explains. "However, certain kinds of statements can make a lot of Jewish and Israeli students at Columbia feel intensely uncomfortable. This does not necessarily mean that you will be forbidden to say those things – but you should understand how they are received."

The task force members confirmed to Haaretz that their definition of antisemitism will likely include chants calling for the annihilation of the Jewish state as being offensive to many Jews on campus. Chants criticizing the Israeli government will not be considered antisemitism in any way.

Antisemitism knowledge gap

One of the key innovations the team is working on is a new antisemitism orientation and training program, which will be mandatory for all new students and faculty.

"Columbia is a highly international community, and we recognized a significant gap in people's understanding of what can constitute an offensive statement for Jewish and Israeli students," Fuchs relays. "The training and orientation are designed to provide everyone beginning their time at the university with initial knowledge of what is acceptable and unacceptable in our community – similar to programs on sexual harassment and other issues. We aim for consistency: a consistent set of rules that are consistently enforced, ensuring everyone feels they are being treated fairly within the system."

Since the protests began, the university has initiated disciplinary proceedings against numerous students who allegedly broke Columbia's rules. This included suspending students and initiating other disciplinary actions, including putting them on disciplinary probation, restricting attendance at future events, and being required to attend educational meetings about their behavior and conduct.

Until this April, the initiated actions were published transparently on the Columbia website, but these have been deleted in recent weeks. The university also brought outside law enforcement onto campus to empty the pro-Palestinian encampment. More than 100 students were arrested, which resulted in harsh criticism of the university and widespread pro-Palestinian protests on campuses across the United States and Europe.

The first release to emerge from the task force was a report on protests, demonstrations and free speech, published in March. The next report will include a series of recommendations expected to go into effect before the next semester begins in September.

The task force has also highlighted the urgent need for better management of antisemitism complaints. The task force uncovered deficiencies in the complaint-processing systems across the university's various schools, with some complaints lost in bureaucratic procedures without any response. Many students are unaware of the appropriate channels for reporting issues, while many staff members are unsure how to handle such complaints. Additionally, there is a lack of transparency in the complaint-handling process and its outcomes.

"Different complaints go to different offices and you almost need a law degree just to understand the process," according to Schizer. "It's not enough to have good rules on paper: they must be enforced. Jewish and Israeli students currently experience unequal treatment, and I don't want them to get different treatment – and the law entitles them to the same protection as other groups. The key issue for the coming year is whether Columbia will enforce its rules equally."

In response to this story, a Columbia University spokesperson said: "We are committed to combating antisemitism and taking sustained, concrete action to ensure Columbia is a campus where Jewish students and everyone in our community feels safe, valued and able to thrive."

[ Via: https://archive.is/Yypaw ]

==

These are the antics of religious zealots rather than professional academics.

[thegayhimbo]

Or the ones who are shrieking for October 7th to happen every day. 😒

also like i think calling the nypd on the columbia protesters was absolutely the wrong call for a multitude of reasons and i’m sure some of the protesters there are reasonable but you can’t deny that the ones chanting “go back to poland” may have made some jews feel unsafe.

[circleandsquarecomic]

Circle is an Honest Anti-Racist

[angrybell]

Just because she’s gone, doesn’t mean Harvard suddenly going to be a place that is welcoming to Jews. This is probably going to be a repeat of the battles fought before when the Ivy Leagues didn’t want Jews. Back then it was because we weren’t “white” like their preferred WASPs from Choate and Exeter. Now because apparently we are suddenly “white”. I bet the rest of Ivy’s do the same.

[thegayhimbo]

It's stunning how much Leftists are so far up their own asses in antisemitism that they don't realize they're creating a self-fulfilling prophecy: They want to eradicate Israel so badly that they are bullying/harassing diaspora Jews, and then wonder why those Jews start seeing Israel as a safe haven when the rest of the world has repeatedly treated them like shit and rejected them.

And let's say for the sake of argument that Israel is completely dissolved and no longer exists when this conflict is over:

Are Leftists/Westerners that stupid in believing antisemitism will magically go away once Israel is gone?

Is anyone gullible enough to believe that Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis will automatically become peace-loving hippies who hold hands with Jews as they frolic in the meadow?

Is the rest of the world suddenly going to treat Jews better?

Are Leftists/Westerners going to take ANY responsibility for the antisemitism they've perpetrated against the Jewish community for the past 5 months, and well beyond that?

Cause based on what I'm seeing right now, as well as the centuries worth of historical antisemitism, I'm gonna say no.

And this is coming from someone who is NOT Jewish, and is beyond disgusted with how vile and hypocritical the Left has become.

When people ask me what the origin point is—when I knew I would leave—it’s not one particular moment, but a collection. Among them:

The drunk girl at my alma mater, George Washington, caught on video in November 2019, saying, “We’re going to bomb Israel, you Jewish pieces of shit.”

The Hillel that was spray-painted with “Free Palestine” in July 2020, at the University of Wisconsin.

The Chabad House set on fire in August 2020, at the University of Delaware.

The Jewish vice president of student government at USC who resigned in August 2020, after getting barraged with antisemitic hate.

The University of Chicago students who, in January 2022, called on their fellow students not to take “sh*tty Zionist classes” taught by Israelis or Jews.

The Jewish fraternity at Rutgers that got egged in April 2022—during a Holocaust Remembrance Day commemoration.

The Chabad menorah that was vandalized for the fourth time in two years, in May 2022, at the University of Cincinnati.

The protester who hurled rocks at Jewish students in June 2022, at the University of Illinois.

The swastikas that turned up in July and August 2022, at Brown.

The Hillel that was vandalized in August 2022, at USC.

The innumerable, antisemitic incidents at San Francisco State University, which the Lawfare Project, a Jewish nonprofit, has called “the most anti-Semitic college campus in the country.”

The two girls recently kicked out of a group that combats sexual assault, at SUNY New Paltz, because they had the temerity to post something positive about Israel.

The universities, which bend over backward to create safe spaces for most students, increasingly making room for antisemites in lecture halls and at graduation ceremonies (see, for example, Duke, Indiana University, the University of Denver, Arizona State University and CUNY).

The proliferation of statements and articles and open letters proclaiming support for the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement—a political movement that has as its stated goal the dismantling of the Jewish state—from Harvard to Pomona to Berkeley to the University of Illinois, along with the conviction, widespread on many campuses, that Jewish students should be barred from conversations about BDS, because, well, they’re Jewish.

In college, for the first time, I began to feel the way Jews have often felt in other times and places: like The Other.

At first, I felt deeply alone in this feeling. I wondered if I was paranoid or hysterical.

But I discovered I’m not the only one. There are many other twenty-something Jews who, like me, had never felt this kind of isolation—until suddenly we did.

[ethicopoliticolit]

Just learned that Claudine Gay was forced to resign at Harvard after initially weathering the backlash to her Congressional testimony last month. I’m stunned, because I thought if any institution in this country I call the Union States of America could withstand the new McCarthyism masquerading as anti-anti-Semitism, it’d be Harvard. (And please note I’m inaugurating a new era for this Tumblr, making my own statements after collecting all the others—that is, others’.)

And while it’s highly ironic that a Black woman such as Gay should be charged with “inadequate citation,” it’s also unfortunate that she apparently did indeed omit some quotation marks in her early work. I’m no Gay, of course, but that’s why I was fanatical about zero-error attribution in my own scholarship and teaching. I guess this is because I was a journalist prior to entering academia, and specifically a factchecker at the beginning of my editorial career; I knew writers and publications could get sued for such mistakes (and were).

Anyway, speaking about lawsuits: the recent DEI SCOTUS case that Harvard had a role in was also at play here, per Nia T. Evans at Mother Jones.

[justinspoliticalcorner]

GIDEON TAAFFE, EMMA MAE WEBER & CHLOE SIMON at MMFA:

Former Harvard President Claudine Gay resigned this week following an intense right-wing campaign to oust the leaders of several prominent universities following their testimony at a congressional hearing on antisemitism in December. Gay’s resignation comes amid a clearly stated strategy on the right to target higher education and root out supposedly “woke” ideology and also includes a prolonged assault on diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives. 

Several high-profile academics have been the victims of a targeted right-wing harassment campaign

Gay, alongside newly resigned University of Pennsylvania President Liz Magill and current MIT President Sally Kornbluth, was accused of not protecting Jewish students on campus during pro-Palestinian protests over the ongoing Israel-Hamas war. Magill resigned after intense backlash from conservatives and donors over her testimony. [The Associated Press, 12/12/23; The New York Times, 12/10/23]

After the early December congressional hearing, right-wing activists pivoted to continuously charging Gay with allegations of plagiarism until her resignation on January 2. Without defending Gay, President Irene Mulvey of the American Association of University Professors said that plagiarism accusations could be “weaponized” to have a chilling effect on educators, explaining: “There is a right-wing political attack on higher education right now, which feels like an existential threat to the academic freedom that has made American higher education the envy of the world.” [ABC News, 1/2/24; The Associated Press, 1/3/24]

The ouster of Claudine Gay from Harvard was driven by right-wing media's assault on higher education and DEI, led by Christopher Rufo.

See Also:

Vox: The culture war came for Claudine Gay — and isn’t done yet

[headlinehorizon]

University of Pennsylvania President Resigns Amidst Antisemitism Controversy

https://headlinehorizon.com/Politics/House/1583

University of Pennsylvania President Liz Magill has resigned following criticism for her statements on antisemitism. Find out more about this latest news and its impact on higher education.

[moonwaif]

Most recently, some Jewish organizations are demanding universities discipline student groups, calls that are likely to be augmented by donor pressure . . . With Jewish donors, including Marc Rowan, Les Wexner, Ronald Lauder, Leon Cooperman, and several other well-known names on the front lines of this recent donor revolt, it is safe to assume that some critics will draw on a deep well of antisemitic tropes linking Jews to perfidious uses of power. The situational reality, that Jewish donors are among a class of megadonors to higher education and that the war in Israel and Gaza has struck a chord of fear among many American Jews, should not be overdetermined into an abstract rule that connects Jews to abuses of power. And yet if history is any indication, we should be vigilant of just that.

-Corwin Berman, L., & Soskis, B. (2023). "The Dangers of Donor Revolt."

(I appreciated seeing this because I'm already noticing antisemitic rhetoric become normalized.)

[commonsensecommentary]

“For a second, imagine that black students at Columbia were taunted: Go back to Africa,” [Bari Weiss] wrote Sunday. “Or imagine that a gay student was [sic] surrounded by homophobic protesters and hit with a stick at Yale University. Or imagine if a campus imam told Muslim students that they ought to head home for Ramadan because campus public safety could not guarantee their security.”

Weiss accurately added: “There would be relentless fury from our media and condemnation from our politicians.”

But since the targets of this growing mayhem are mere Jews, the responses are crickets, handwringing, and “context.”

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-adults-are-still-in-charge-at-the-university-of-florida-israel-protests-tents-sasse-eca6389b

The Adults Are Still in Charge at the University of Florida

By: Ben Sasse

Published: May 3, 2024

Higher education isn’t daycare. Here are the rules we follow on free speech and public protests.

Gainesville, Fla.

Higher education has for years faced a slow-burning crisis of public trust. Mob rule at some of America’s most prestigious universities in recent weeks has thrown gasoline on the fire. Pro-Hamas agitators have fought police, barricaded themselves in university buildings, shut down classes, forced commencement cancellations, and physically impeded Jewish students from attending lectures.

Parents are rightly furious at the asinine entitlement of these activists and the embarrassing timidity of many college administrators. One parent put it bluntly: “Why the hell should anybody spend their money to send their kid to college?” Employers watching this fiasco are asking the same question.

At the University of Florida, we tell parents and future employers: We’re not perfect, but the adults are still in charge. Our response to threats to build encampments is driven by three basic truths.

First, universities must distinguish between speech and action. Speech is central to education. We’re in the business of discovering knowledge and then passing it, both newly learned and time-tested, to the next generation. To do that, we need to foster an environment of free thought in which ideas can be picked apart and put back together, again and again. The heckler gets no veto. The best arguments deserve the best counterarguments.

To cherish the First Amendment rights of speech and assembly, we draw a hard line at unlawful action. Speech isn’t violence. Silence isn’t violence. Violence is violence. Just as we have an obligation to protect speech, we have an obligation to keep our students safe. Throwing fists, storming buildings, vandalizing property, spitting on cops and hijacking a university aren’t speech.

Second, universities must say what they mean and then do what they say. Empty threats make everything worse. Any parent who has endured a 2-year-old’s tantrum gets this. You can’t say, “Don’t make me come up there” if you aren’t willing to walk up the stairs and enforce the rules. You don’t make a threat until you’ve decided to follow through if necessary. In the same way, universities make things worse with halfhearted appeals to abide by existing policies and then immediately negotiating with 20-year-old toddlers.

Appeasing mobs emboldens agitators elsewhere. Moving classes online is a retreat that penalizes students and rewards protesters. Participating in live-streamed struggle sessions doesn’t promote honest, good-faith discussion. Universities need to be strong defenders of the entire community, including students in the library on the eve of an exam, and stewards of our fundamental educational mission.

Actions have consequences. At the University of Florida, we have repeatedly, patiently explained two things to protesters: We will always defend your rights to free speech and free assembly—but if you cross the line on clearly prohibited activities, you will be thrown off campus and suspended. In Gainesville, that means a three-year prohibition from campus. That’s serious. We said it. We meant it. We enforced it. We wish we didn’t have to, but the students weighed the costs, made their decisions, and will own the consequences as adults. We’re a university, not a daycare. We don’t coddle emotions, we wrestle with ideas.

Third, universities need to recommit themselves to real education. Rather than engage a wide range of ideas with curiosity and intellectual humility, many academic disciplines have capitulated to a dogmatic view of identity politics. Students are taught to divide the world into immutable categories of oppressors and oppressed, and to make sweeping judgements accordingly. With little regard for historical complexity, personal agency or individual dignity, much of what passes for sophisticated thought is quasireligious fanaticism.

The results are now on full display. Students steeped in this dogma chant violent slogans like “by any means necessary.” Any? Paraglider memes have replaced Che Guevara T-shirts. But which paragliders—the savages who raped teenage girls at a concert? “From the river to the sea.” Which river? Which sea?

Young men and women with little grasp of geography or history—even recent events like the Palestinians’ rejection of President Clinton’s offer of a two-state solution—wade into geopolitics with bumper-sticker slogans they don’t understand. For a lonely subset of the anxious generation, these protest camps can become a place to find a rare taste of community. This is their stage to role-play revolution. Posting about your “allergen-free” tent on the quad is a lot easier than doing real work to uplift the downtrodden.

Universities have an obligation to combat this ignorance with rigorous teaching. Life-changing education explores alternatives, teaches the messiness of history, and questions every truth claim. Knowledge depends on healthy self-doubt and a humble willingness to question self-certainties. This is a complicated world because fallen humans are complicated. Universities must prepare their students for the reality beyond campus, where 330 million of their fellow citizens will disagree over important and divisive subjects.

The insurrectionists who storm administration buildings, the antisemites who punch Jews, and the entitled activists who seek attention aren’t persuading anyone. Nor are they appealing to anyone’s better angels. Their tactics are naked threats to the mission of higher education.

Teachers ought to be ushering students into the world of argument and persuasion. Minds are changed by reason, not force. Progress depends on those who do the soulful, patient work of inspiring intellects. Martin Luther King Jr., America’s greatest philosopher, countered the nation’s original sin of racism by sharpening the best arguments across millennia. To win hearts, he offered hope that love could overcome injustice.

King’s approach couldn’t be more different from the abhorrent violence and destruction on display across the country’s campuses. He showed us a way protest can persuade rather than intimidate. We ought to model that for our students. We do that by recommitting to the fundamentals of free speech, consequences and genuine education. Americans get this. We want to believe in the power of education as a way to elevate human dignity. It’s time for universities to do their jobs again.

Mr. Sasse is president of the University of Florida.

==

This is the way.

Never forget that the "speech is violence" people have spent the last few weeks trying to gaslight everyone that their violence is just protected speech.

[salonnierealexis]

The debate has hinged on competing understandings of identity and victimhood, but also on something more amorphous than Israel and Palestine: that generational division between a new guard that sees resistance to reform as born of structural, and often unconscious, bigotry and an old guard fighting what it sees as a radical activist vanguard. Sheehi disputes aspects of this framing. “There’s a way in which this generational argument is made as an escape hatch, and a rallying cry. If you say to people, in a profession that feels it’s dying, that new folks are trying to come in and

tearing psychoanalysis apart: 'The most hatred I’ve ever witnessed'