Israel Apartheid Week
Every now and again, I’m forwarded an opinion piece because, obviously, as a Canadian Jew, I’ll find it interesting and want to sing its praises here on Jewschool. This is seldom the case. Today’s gem came via an email from the Canadian Jewish Congress. They sent out an op-ed written for the Ottawa Citizen by Leonard Stern.
I’m tempted to argue with the whole piece, line by line, but instead, I’m just going to draw out a few problems.
Beginning Monday, university campuses play host to an annual event known as Israeli Apartheid Week, where Israel is assigned the role of Jew among the nations — singled-out, cursed and harassed.
Some Jewish students at Carleton and the University of Ottawa will discreetly choose to stay home, to avoid having to answer for the Jewish state. The whiff of something medieval hangs over this March ritual.
This isn’t about Jews, say the organizers. It’s about Zionists. Problem is, the activist groups behind Israeli Apartheid Week are doing everything to erase the distinction. One of those organizations, the Ottawa Public Interest Research Group, refused in 2008 to promote a lecture on African development because Jewish students happened to be organizing it. The event had zero connection to Israel but OPIRG said it wouldn’t partner with the Jewish students’ union due to the latter’s “relationship to apartheid Israel.”
That’s an ominous introduction to the article. Too bad I need to argue it down. So long as the Canadian Jewish community (like the vocal majority of many countries’ Jewish communities) maintains that Israel and zionism are an integral part of Jewish identity, and are inherently linked, I can’t blame student groups and other organizations for drawing a similar conclusion. So long as Hillels across Canada (and across the US) house Israel advocacy and zionist groups, and many have histories of bashing Muslim, Arab, and Palestinian groups, I see no reason why those groups shouldn’t be able to “retaliate” with Israel Apartheid Week.
This article lacks nuance; there isn’t a uniform left-wing position on all topics. So I’m not surprised when gay rights in Israel are brought up. Just because someone is queer, or represents a student LGBT group on campus, doesn’t mean they have to buy the “gays are ok in Israel and nowhere else in the Middle East therefore gays should support Israel, duh” argument. One can appreciate that while still wanting Israel to go further and eliminate all oppression for all peoples. And, seriously, the amount of time spent in this op-ed claiming how great Israel is for the gays is ridiculous.
Of all the sponsors of Israeli Apartheid Week, the participation of gay and lesbian groups is most disheartening. Harvard University’s Alan Dershowitz tells an anecdote about the time he gave a speech and spotted an anti-Israel sign in the crowd, held aloft by a gay rights group. Dershowitz reminded the protesters that Israel is the one country in the Middle East where they’d be able to hold a gay rights sign in public and not be lynched. …
When Israel last year suffered an isolated act of homophobic violence — a gunman shot up a gay nightclub — Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu publicly expressed his personal horror.
Um, really? People are physically attacked at the gay pride events each year in Israel. I spent six months trying to blackout homophobic graffiti that was scribbled across much of west Jerusalem. Countless others are gay bashed on a daily basis. I’m sure Open House would have something to say about these claims…
He goes on to claim that he’s not trying to shut down Israel Apartheid Week by equating anti-Israel with anti-semitism, but I don’t buy it. The premise here is that students at various Canadian universities don’t have the right to express their views of Israel/Palestine. I understand that many Jews get defensive when it comes to Israel, see her as a “she can do no wrong” entity, and justify her actions by claiming self-defence. But were the tables turned, and a Palestinian was writing this op-ed, denouncing Jewish and “pro-Israel” groups, you can bet that Jewish organisations would be crying foul, claiming anti-semitism, before the newspaper hit the stands.
For that’s what Israeli apartheid week is about. As Michael Ignatieff noted during apartheid week last year, “International law defines ‘Apartheid’ as a crime against humanity. Labelling Israel an ‘Apartheid’ state is a deliberate attempt to undermine the legitimacy of the Jewish state itself.”
Or, it’s using a word to describe a crime against humanity. Having second (and third and…) class citizens (and quasi-citizens) who live in war conditions, who face violence daily, whose lives are constantly being disrupted and challenged by the controlling power, who are treated in ways that clash with internationally-sanctioned definitions for human rights and basic standards of living then… Yeah, I see no problem with people using the word apartheid (even if some may see it as an exaggeration). Just because they recognise injustice, and want to see it changed, does not mean they necessarily want to see a country dismantled.
When articles like this are published in major newspapers, forwarded by lobbying groups, and read by Jews from coast to coast to coast (yes, Canada has three coasts), it furthers the notion that there is one singular Jewish stance on Israel. It ignores the complexities of our opinions, politics, and relationships with Israel and Palestine. And it furthers that misconception amongst those groups that we should be trying to work with, to build bridges with, most, like Muslim and Arab students’ groups, PIRGs, and others.
I can’t believe you are defending their hypocracy. Do you know who they invited to “Israel Apartheid Week”? They invited Knesset member an Balad Party chairman, Jamal Zahalka, to speak at their event. He accepted.
How can Israel be “apartheid”, when the very first person who shouldn’t exist if it were, paid for by Israeli taxpayers and elected in the Israeli political system, tours around the world to incite against his country? If that is not a measure of the strength of Israel’s democracy, what is?
Israel Aparatheid Week is a conscience choice to lie and deceit the public. And for what? Justice? You can’t fight for justice with dishonesty.
Israel has problems. The Jewish people have had problems in the past. But to ally oneself with such dishonest people to fix problems among the Jews has only brought disaster to all. Are you willing to bring Rome to Israel and establish Palestine?
I’m not a fan of IAW. I’ll let J Street speak for me: http://www.jstreet.org/blog/?p=872
how can j-street claim to be for peace, when it dismisses the BDS movement out of hand as “dogmatic [and] counterproductive.” this is reflective of the colonial and patronizing mentality that still pervades much of the zionist left when dealing with the palestinians…
the BDS movement is based on the july 2005 call by over 170 palestinian civil society organizations, from the occupied west bank and gaza, but also from within israel and the palestinian diaspora. as such it represents one of the most succinct documents outlining the core demands of palestinians and sets forward a non-violent tactic (BDS) for achieving those aims. the goals of the campaign: (1) an end to the occupation; (2) full equality for palestinian citizens of israel and (3) the right of return are consistent with international law.
israelis who want to deny the validity of these claims can’t pretend they are committed to peace. there is nothing in these demands that invalidates the freedom and security of jewish people living in israel/palestine. in fact, given the failure of the two-state solution, it is clear that new solutions for sharing the land between the river jordan and the mediteranean are in order. the long tradition of jewish advocacy of binationalism, federation, or some other alternative arrangement is worth considering… the Palestinian led BDS campaign, is a non-violent means of beginning a conversation to envision a future without segregation and walls between peoples.
Having second (and third and…) class citizens (and quasi-citizens) who live in war conditions, who face violence daily, whose lives are constantly being disrupted and challenged by the controlling power, who are treated in ways that clash with internationally-sanctioned definitions for human rights and basic standards of living then
Are you referring to the situation in the territories? If that’s your claim of apartheid, then fair enough.
But, if you’re talking about Arabs inside of the Green Line, then where are you getting your information?
When does the Godwin’s Law for calling things “Apartheid” take effect?
the right of return are consistent with international law.
israelis who want to deny the validity of these claims can’t pretend they are committed to peace
Then we shouldn’t be committed to peace.
J1-
is this a principled issue for you? it seems to me the right of return is largely a symbolic gesture as most media that covers it reports that surveyed Palestinians would not actually emigrate into Israel but want an acknowledgment. Kind of like how much of the black community is surveyed as desiring the US government to acknowledge its role in slavery and the slave trade but does not actually expect reparations.
so are you opposed to the concept of right of return or are you responding to the demographic fears of what may happen if many Palestinians actually did take advantage of such a right?
“So long as the Canadian Jewish community (like the vocal majority of many countries’ Jewish communities) maintains that Israel and zionism are an integral part of Jewish identity, and are inherently linked, I can’t blame student groups and other organizations for drawing a similar conclusion.”
Golly, the Jewish country in the Jewish homeland…. Whoda’thunk those are an important part of Jewish identity???
“So long as Hillels across Canada (and across the US) house Israel advocacy and zionist groups, and many have histories of bashing Muslim, Arab, and Palestinian groups”
What are you talking about? Examples???
” I see no reason why those groups shouldn’t be able to “retaliate” with Israel Apartheid Week.”
Well then surely you’d agree that if “those groups” launch IAW, Jewish organizations should be able to retaliate by bashing those groups?
“And, seriously, the amount of time spent in this op-ed claiming how great Israel is for the gays is ridiculous.”
Well it’s just a tad funny, don’t you think, for members of Group X to attack the only country that tolerates their presence in a massive region that doesn’t.
@Justin.
I support an end-of-conflict partition treaty between Palestine and Israel. For that reason, I’m opposed to a Palestinian right of return to Israel, even in principle.
Because if an Israeli government signs a treaty allowing even one person into Israel under a Palestinian right of return, or if an Israeli government signs a treaty agreeing–even only in principle–to a Palestinian right of return, then it would open the door to the conflict’s continuation until that legal right (to which an Israeli government had agreed) is fulfilled in fact, meaning the conflict can continue until 4-5 million Palestinians move into Israel.
Under a treaty, there are various proposals to address the Palestinians’ concerns in other manners: broad enough language in the narrative of any treaty; Israel could contriubte to an international fund to rehabilitate Palestinian refugees; etc.
But, everybody is going to have to sacrifice many dreams under partition. ((Maybe that’s the reason it won’t happen.))
Jonathan1 — Any treaty would supercede an extended right of return. The fear of Israel admitting fault or apologizing resulting to unlimited return is unfounded legally.
Any treaty would supercede an extended right of return
You’re telling us that if the Israeli government were to sign a treaty that accepts a Palestinian right of return in principle then that right would be superceded by the treaty itself ???
The fear of Israel admitting fault or apologizing resulting to unlimited return is unfounded legally.
Admitting fault or apologizing–which could be done in the narrative of a treaty–is not the same as agreeing to the principle of a Palestinian right of return.
Look to the People’s Choice for an example: http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Peace/peoplesvoiceplan.html
I think its sad that the ending argument in this piece is that Newspapers shouldn’t be able to publish opinions. You publishing on a Jewish website does what? Represent the entirety of the Jewish people much?
And if there was any chance for Muslim groups and Jewish groups to make inroads, don’t you think it would have happened by now? The majority of Jewish college organizations, or Zionist groups are liberal and apologetic about the conflict, caring more for the Palestinians than any of the apathetic masses, for you to criticize them for having any connection the one land that they can call their own is shameful. I have been a part of and heard countless times of letters, meetings, and missions to promote peace in Israel and on campus.
I love the self – righteous, “I blackout anti-gay bigotry, so I know the real situation of being gay in Israel.” With so much anti-gay fervor in Israel its good to know there aren’t gays anywhere else in the middle east. There are no gays in Iran at least. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_3RUwAJ_MI.
You support Israel Apartheid Week, you support the death of Israel.
Golly, the Jewish country in the Jewish homeland…. Whoda’thunk those are an important part of Jewish identity???
Depends on who you are. It seems to me that what TWJ is saying is that since everyone assumes that Israel is an essential part of every Jew’s identity (which it isn’t), we shouldn’t all act so shocked that people conflate Israel with Jews.
Well it’s just a tad funny, don’t you think, for members of Group X to attack the only country that tolerates their presence in a massive region that doesn’t.
Not if there are other, completely legitimate reasons for them to do so.
>>“Depends on who you are. It seems to me that what TWJ is saying is that since everyone assumes that Israel is an essential part of every Jew’s identity (which it isn’t), we shouldn’t all act so shocked that people conflate Israel with Jews.”
Any individual Jew can choose to include or exclude anything from his/her identity. But it’s absurd to imagine that the Jewish country in the Jewish homeland isn’t an important element of Jewish identity, even if it’s not part of TWJ’s
But if TWJ wants he can initiate a campaign to educate Muslim groups about the importance of differentiating between anti-Israel Jews and other Jews.
>>“Not if there are other, completely legitimate reasons for them to do so.”
Like…. what? Israel’s terrible treatment (according to TWJ) of gays? Er, no — homosexuals can live freely and openly with whomever they choose in Israel, unlike anywhere else from Morocco to Pakistan; which is something that gay Muslims are aware of.
Israel’s human rights record is superior to that of every surrounding country and of every Western country in similar circumstances. The question remains: in that context why would gay activists, citing their identity as gays, campaign specifically against Israel?
@The Wandering Jew:
So long as Hillels across Canada (and across the US) house Israel advocacy and zionist groups, and many have histories of bashing Muslim, Arab, and Palestinian groups, I see no reason why those groups shouldn’t be able to “retaliate” with Israel Apartheid Week.
This is a real lame argument.
I happen to have gone to college on one of the most anti-Israel campuses in the world (and worked on several others), so I may be biased, but I can say quite confidently that the efforts made by the pro-Israel side seldom — if ever — approach the venom from the anti-Israel side.
I have yet to see an *annual* *week-long* series of events put on by pro-Israel groups aimed at denying the existence of the Palestinians or the legitimacy of their national movement. To further the comparison/metaphor, this hypothetical Anti-Arab Week would have to prominently feature known anti-Arab racists (http://bit.ly/atXXgb) and would feature open support for anti-Arab terrorist groups.
You can argue “anti-Israel groups are no worse than pro-Israel groups!” all you want but you can’t square that circle. It just doesn’t comport with reality. Sorry buddy.
I agree that the article you try to rip to shreds here is one-sided and clumsy, but I still don’t think Israel is an apartheid state, and I will never support IAW. I’m a Jew who goes to University of Toronto, the home of IAW- the first one was on the campus from which I write this comment. I stand firmly with the Israeli- and Palestinian- people. This doesn’t mean I necessarily support any governing body there.
I also see no problem with Hillels across Canada housing pro-Israel groups. You can choose to support or not to support a given group. The MSA on the U of T St. George campus (the one which I attend) partners with CAIA. Are you going to denounce them?
You know, people treat the adjective “Apartheid” not as an abberation on the current state of Israel that needs to be fixed, but somehow as if it was attacking the very existence of the country and the people living in it. What kind of mental leap does one have to make to draw that conclusion?
Israel simply needs to shed its apartheid characteristics (i.e. favoring rights of one people over another) and it can still be Israel at its core.
The “everyone sucks” argument will not work here, particularly when Israel constantly presents itself as a beacon of morality.
Nor will the “Israel gets singled out” trope be acceptable. Israel doesn’t get even half the flack that the U.S., China, or even the U.N. as a body does around the world.
@B.BarNavi –
re: your last comment, call me when your local college campus hosts a week-long anti-China week, anti-Zimbabwe week, anti-Sudan week, anti-N Korea week (in addition to having year-round student groups focused solely on these issues, and near-weekly lectures, workshops, tabling, etc.)….you get the picture. What you said is quite frankly nonsense. There is a focus on Israel-as-extreme-human-rights-violator (in the media, the UN but especially on campus) that can only be described as obsessive.
“Nor will the “Israel gets singled out” trope be acceptable. Israel doesn’t get even half the flack that the U.S., China, or even the U.N. as a body does around the world.”
?!?!?!?!?!
You’re kidding, right?
Give us a call next time you hear about “Boycott America Week” or “Divest from Belarus Week”.
I believe that the students want their universities to divest from companies that profit off of the occupation. I think that most of the identified corporations are headquartered in countries other than Israel.
It is a mistake to refer to this as “boycotting Israel.”
Maybe not “boycott America week”, but surely you have never heard the phrase “margh bar Amrikaa”? And what of the screams against the meddling Yanqui/Gringo in South America? Let’s not forget that in the 2002 protests in anticipation of the Iraq war, the main target was NOT Israel.
And surely, a hop over to East Asia will show you that with bigger fish to fry, Israel and the Jews are the LEAST of their concerns. Unless you’ve seen a Falun Gong protest pointing out nefarious Hebraic human rights violations.
I believe you’re just looking at it from a paranoid Jewish “kol ha`olam kenegdenu” perspective.
Besides, I never heard much bad news that warranted a boycott from Belarus.
@r –
maybe you shouldn’t breeze into an ongoing conversation without doing at least some preliminary research on the topic. have you even looked at the http://apartheidweek.org/ page? it’s replete with talk of boycotting Israel. there’s campuses throughout the world hosting workshops on the Israel boycott this week.
RC… China has been the #1 target on my old campus. Other targets include Burma, the Saudis, Mexico (see Chiapas)… And let’s not forget a little place called the School of the Americas. We’re a lefty campus with a bit too much time on our hands (at least that was the case when I was a freshman – now they’re all just drunk party freaks). Yes, we had a Palestine Week. Out of the whole year, one week. It was condensed with the whole mishmosh of issues that the campus activists dealt with.
Maybe the Israel BDS movement resonates with you more, so it only FEELS like it’s singling you out. But please, dispense with the “everyone is against us” trope – it really blocks you from seeing the Big Picture.
@B.BarNavi –
I can’t believe you’re persisting in this nonsense about Israel not being singled out. Srsly. Is this a pride thing? Like you can’t admit when you’ve said something absurd?
I have never seen campus protests directed at non-Israel countries that even approach the frequency and magnitude of those directed at Israel. Never.
And your examples have me scratching my head. So you mean the US invasion of Iraq engendered protests directed mainly at…the US? *GASP* Gee that’s amazing. THAT’S your proof that Israel is not singled out? lol. Let’s see…I attended an anti-global-warming rally recently where Israel wasn’t singled out either. uh…what was your point again?
You had a dedicated anti-Burmese-junta/-Saudi Arabia/-Mexico club at your college? Really? And was it a group that did regular programs? How big was it? Did they have a dedicated week of events every single year? Regular Op-Eds in the school paper? Did the anti-Burma/-Saudi/-Mexico agitation persist for years on end? Did the organization consist mostly of Burmese/Saudi/Mexican expats/dissidents, or did it co-opt students from nearly every single other liberal and ethnically-identified student group? Did it field its own candidates in school gov’t? And did those candidates, once in office, push for anti-Burmese-junta/-Saudi/-Mexico legislation? Did it rally students to disrupt campus lectures? Did it push the university to divestment from Burmese/Saudi/Mexican companies? Did it urge the student body to boycott products originating in Burma/Saudi Arabia/Mexico? Did students create student-led courses aimed at defaming Burma/Saudi Arabia/Mexico?
Just curious.
RC. Excuse me for breezing in. But this link is all about Carleton University students’ divestment campaign.
http://www.muzzlewatch.com/2010/01/29/canadas-carleton-university-launches-new-divestment-campaign/
If some people use the talk of boycotting Israel (regardless of if they are for the divestment campaign or not) they are mistaken in their language. The goal of the campaign is divestment from companies, most of which are headquartered in the U.S., that profit from the occupation. It is not about boycotting Israel.
I can say having graduated from an overtly radical, over-politicized, activist-centered college where intense involvement was the norm and casual involvement was viewed as apathy, we had a whole slew of clubs and groups dedicated to global conflicts and issues of injustice. in terms of graffiti and posters and events, much of the protest around the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was focused on US involvement and relationship and the college’s relationship. The Pro-Palestinian group was 75% Jewish and co-founded by a Palestinian man and a Jewish woman. Having been active in both the Jewish Student Union and Student Alliance for Israel, I think we were much more active in terms of our own group, but then again, we were on the defense as the tone of any Lefty casually Marxist academic institution would naturally have it. We protested there events, they protested ours. But we could work together on other issues (before and after the second Intifada, but not during the height of it). But Israel/Palestine was one of many issues students engaged in. Like BBN mentioned, Burma was HUGE, Chiapas was HUGE, Pakistan was HUGE (all bigger than Palestine/Israel) During the School of America protests, every year, and during major anti-Globalization demonstrations (IMF, World Bank, WTO) a good percentage of the school was at the demonstration, I would imagine a large enough portion of us that the absence was noticed on campus.
You are correct, rc, that never did anybody ever interrupt a speech or event by a speaker from Tibet or a survivor of rape from Pakistan or an activist from Chiapas. But, that being said, there was no groups actively supporting rape in Pakistan or oppression of farmers and workers in Chiapas. We invited a rep of the Navy to come to speak with us about Vieques but they declined, but I guarantee you that speech would have been interrupted (by me if by no one else). I think that part of the reason we see such eruption around this issue is that there is on most campuses competing groups which operate in reflection of one another who both have valid claims and questionable narratives.
In terms of your boycott question, our campus was the very first to disengage from South Africa in 1982, we had boycotts against all sweat shop countries specifically focused on Burma. Our student body made official statements and press releases on private prisons, on the issue in Chiapas, on Vieques, and NOT on Israel. The college is, to this day, still not willing to engage in full divestment, but has opted for as a matter of policy, responsible investment. They are not invested in Catepillar or the company that builds parts of helicopters United something, I forget right now, but for example, the college would (but is not) invested in the aspect of the corporation that makes air conditioners in Israel.
So I think it is safe to say that in certain circumstances, there are campuses where Israel/Palestine is one of many issues on campus. All that being said, there are campuses where you are correct and Israel is singled out in an exaggerated and unique manner. Yet, I also want to say that Israel is just as deserving of protest as every nation you mentioned. And, also I want to say, that overwhelmingly on the campus i went to school at the issues that were most pervasive were domestic ones. ESPECIALLY when GWB began to run for President. The biggest culprit, the most demonized nation, the only country it was truly dangerous (so to say) to support was the United States. If you were homosexual, queer, gay bi, trans, curious, or of color, or international, white, brown, black or blue, you were fine and accepted… if you were a “student of faith” or a “patriot” then you were in trouble. but again, this is all for a strange, bizarre, unique little college in the woods of western massachusetts.
This link has more information about the Carleton University campaign.
http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article11047.shtml
The goals are:
1. The Carleton University Board of Governors, via the Pension Fund Committee, immediately divest of its stock in BAE Systems, L-3 Communications, Motorola, Northrop Grumman and Tesco
2. Carleton University refrain from investing in other companies involved in violations of international law (for recommended guidelines see Conclusions/Recommendations section of the divestment report)
3. Carleton University work with the entire university community to develop, adopt and implement a broader policy of Socially Responsible Investment (SRI) for its Pension Fund and other investments, through a transparent and effective process.
As you can see, although the occupation remains an inspiration for the campaign, the goal is a socially responsible investment strategy that goes far beyond the occupation. In fact, if the students succeed in getting their university to divest from theses companies, it will probably be because the students do the work to show that these companies are involved in many violations of international law around the world. For a company like L3, that will probably not be too hard to show.
rootless: How old are you? Meaning, when were last involved in student life on campus? I think this has bearing on your authority to speak on this issue. Last time for me: I graduated nearly 5 years ago. Although I ran a student magazine for 2 years immediately following graduation, so I was still on campuses a lot.
Looks like the mayor of Malmö, Sweden shares TWJ’s views on the value of Jews distancing themselves from Israel:
“Faced with these attacks on the city’s Jewish population, Malmö’s mayor, Ilmar Reepalu, seems curiously unperturbed by, if not sympathetic to, the attackers. Asked to condemn anti-Semitism in his city, the Social Democrat suggested…that it’s partly the Jews’ own fault. Their crime? They didn’t “distance” themselves from Israel and the Gaza war. “The community chose to hold a pro-Israel demonstration,” Mr. Reepalu said, a move that “may convey the wrong message.”
But some of his co-ideologues haven’t been very attentive to the distinctions:
“Wherever Israel is delegitimized as a pariah state, local Jews are inevitably condemned to pariah status as well. In the streets of Malmö, one can hear “Kill the Jews,” while at “peace” rallies in Amsterdam and Berlin, the chanted instructions are somewhat more specific: “Hamas, Hamas, Jews into the Gas.””
Maybe TWJ can draw up some educational materials encouraging the demonstrators to be more specific in their policy prescriptions, so as to avoid unfairly including Jews who are anti-Israel.
@r- I’m not sure why you’ve decided to separate out Carleton (maybe you go there), a school who’s internal anti-Israel leadership has apparently decided not to emphasize outright boycott. But the fact remains that Carleton is taking part in a worldwide event (http://apartheidweek.org/) that stresses boycott all over their website. And the editorial that forms the basis for this blog post is about the movement generally.
@KFJ- I still work on campuses to this day (mainly Cal and SF State, but to a lesser extent all 9 major Bay Area college campuses).
I am heartened to hear that not every college has the Israel obsession. Still, I am not encouraged when people on here make remarks such as “Israel is just as deserving of protest as every nation you mentioned.”
The idea that Israel warrants the “same” levels of outrage as North Korea (where literally millions are starving or in gulags), Zimbabwe (where home demolitions left 800,000 homeless and where some 12 million live under dictatorship), Burma (where a military regime with none of the democratic checks present in Israel oppresses 50,000,000 people) or the UNITED STATES for chrissakes is suspect in my opinion.
It is certainly valid to protest Israel’s actions, as Israel is undoubtedly a human rights violator. But how we feel about the policies of a nation-state — and the energies we decide to devote to combatting those policies — are (or should be) the product of many factors.
Which brings me to another point raised in here, the idea that anti-Israel activity is greater on college campuses because of the presence of a well-organized “opposing side” in the form of Hillel and various dedicated pro-Israel groups. Anti-Israel groups are so active because they are fighting against an opposition which is also active. I think there may be something to this idea.
But can we step back and consider for a second *WHY* there exists this pro-Israel presence to begin with? I would argue that one of the main reasons there exist such strong pro-Israel voices on campus is the same reason that Israel’s actions are not on par with those of Mugabe or the Burma junta or a sweatshop operator. In other words, there exists a pro-Israel campus presence because many students actually *defend* Israel’s actions. Not unconditionally of course, and not all to the same degree (there’s left-leaning Israel groups, more Likud-orientated groups, etc.). But the fact remains that many students, Jewish and non-Jewish alike, consider justice to be on Israel’s side.
So, yeah, maybe the anti-Burma activity would be more prominent if they were up against a pro-Burma group, or the anti-sweatshop folks would have a more sustained presence if they were up against a pro-sweatshop group….but really, who wants to defend the actions of sweatshop operators or the Burma junta or the Mexican army in Chiapas? Nobody I know. And that’s because they’re largely indefensible.
I would argue that Israel is a different case. If it weren’t people wouldn’t argue about it so much.
I wasn’t saying that groups related to the Israel/Palestine conflict are more active, per se, in my experience, just louder and more apparent because of the nature of there being the debate (which, like I said, each side has equally valid claims and equally questionable narratives), whereas as you say, the actions in many of these conflicts are deemed indefensible. and the pro-palestinian groups i encountered felt the same of Israel, so we defended it. i was not trying to say pro-palestine groups exist because pro-israel groups exist, all i was saying is what you said, that this is an issue with two vocal, valid sides.
Count me among those who feel that deliberately provocative protests on college campuses do more harm than good in this particular situation.
When I went to college, I was very sympathetic to the far-left groups and pro-Palestinian groups. My parents are anti-Zionists, very critical of the American Jewish community. I was raised to believe the Left was completely good and just. I always went out of my way to avoid or loudly denounce the “Zionist” Jews, and I never went to Hillel.
Some time around my 3rd year, my perspective changed. I think the change was caused by a number of events: I had a sudden feeling/realization that a close non-Jewish, Lefty activist friend believed some anti-Semitic stereotypes. I encountered holocaust denial by a Muslim student activist. I overheard Muslim students making fun of their professor for being Jewish. I saw overtly anti-Semitic graffiti on a bathroom wall, which had been cast in rhetoric from the “anti-racist” Left rather than from the Nazi Right. And the extremely provocative graffiti that I saw every day (“Israel = White Supremacist”, etc) and frequent protests started to seem very sinister. When I see that kind of graffiti now, I feel absolutely certain that there is some anti-Semitism underlying it. I don’t know if it’s a lot or a little, and if I were a better person I could rise above it (as it is though, I haven’t been able to). The Left was supposed to be everything good and just, but it turned out to be completely hypocritical. Racism turned out to be (kind of) acceptable when directed at the right people.
I’m in graduate school now. When I see the protesters, I seethe with anger and walk with my head down. And, I know how terribly selfish this is, but I have a hard time getting past this barrier of anger to care about Gaza.
I think that some Jewish people (including some young American ones) are damaged, in the same way that people who have been the victims of racism can sometimes be “paranoid”/”more sensitive” about it. I feel that if this is acknowledged, these campaigns could do things differently and more effectively, but also I am cynical, because I think a lot of the people involved prefer things that are simple and provocative, and don’t actually care that much about the result.