i don’t believe it would be “immediately shut down”
I think it would be treated similarly to the pro Palestinian activities. I think
the universities would try to keep that stuff outdoors and in confined areas
the universities would try to engage the groups, tell them that what they are saying is racist bullshit, and urge them to stick with positive statements rather than hateful ones, such as “free Palestine” or “we stand with Israel”.
i think there’d be a lot of non-official backlash, and students would be targeted by other students and by off-campus groups, which might threaten overt violence. That’s what happened to a lot of those Palestinian students
It literally says protests and civil disobedience right there in the opening paragraph. My statement is not revisionist history and terrorism erasure. Its literally right there in your cite.
And here’s an example of things Palestinians resist.
Well, agree to disagree I suppose. I suspect that a slogan like “Give Gush Katif an Ocean View” would be shut down immediately, but since Ben Gvir and his ilk don’t exactly enjoy much support in American universities, I’m not sure if that’s something we will see tested.
If universities tolerated a slogan like that in the same way as “from the river to the sea” then I would withdraw my accusations of hypocrisy for that slogan, although I would oppose them allowing either one.
Something like “Globalize the Intifada” on the other hand I would consider a direct threat to myself if I was attending University.
Semi off topic rant spoilered:
And by the way, this is probably best for a different thread, but when I was at school I was approached repeatedly by a proselytizing group called Campus Crusade, which I also found incredibly distasteful. Not only were they shoving their religion in my face; they named their group after a series of events in which thugs from Christian nations slaughtered their way across Europe and the Middle East, killing Muslim, Jewish, and Pagan civilians by the tens of thousands before accomplishing very little of practical values.
If a Muslim student group called themselves “Campus Jihad”, I don’t think the argument of “well Jihad can also mean a personal struggle” would protect them from criticism; and that’s an argument you can actually make regarding Jihad, unlike Crusade. It’s half a step up from The Campus Inquisition.
Which sounds like a great SNL skit. Campus Inqusition knocking on dorm room doors trying to convert people
I wrote to President Gay, after her testimony and before she stepped down, and told her that as both a Jew and an alum, i thought, “globalize the intifada” was a direct threat to Harvard students, and should be treated as such. I didn’t get a reply. Off-topic rant: i have a lot of friends who are MIT alums. MIT has been MUCH better at communicating with their alumni than Harvard has been. I’m pretty pissed at Harvard right now for several reasons, and that’s one of them.
If one wanted to be charitable in their interpretation, one could point out that having just become a national news story she was probably quite inundated with incoming communications…
Is this a sneak brag at your incredibly impressive Alma Maters?
I went to Penn for graduate school and actually I’m pretty embarrassed about that right now. They recently sent me a request for donations, and, no? I absolutely do not feel like giving them money right now. Even though I loved my program, this whole thing has put a damper on my enthusiasm.
I can imagine how the Harvard students might be feeling.
I’m going to step back and apologize for participating in the hijack of this thread.
It’s very hard to talk about just the plagiarism without some awareness of everything else going on. And this is IMHO , where tangential opinions are often relevant. But let’s at least stick to current events at Harvard and other US universities, please. And try to tie posts to the plagiarism charges.
The plagiarism charge is just a piling on. It’s not a matter of qualifications. She did the job poorly. Those who are attacking her for any other reason than her job performance should be condemned, but that’s not a reason to support her continuing in the job. It’s a sad state of affairs that this became a ‘viral’ political issue and she resigned under a pressure from a barrage of hate messaging and outright threats. She should have had the chance to prove herself in the job or at least resign quietly after a while. Ironically this all blew up when she failed a simple pop quiz in a congressional hearing.
I’m not sure that’s ironic: when she lacks the time to plagiarize, she comes up with the wrong answer; when she has the time to plagiarize, she does. Isn’t that, like, literally the reason she resigned?
It literally says “and riots” right after the part about “protests and civil disobedience “. In the same sentence. Not even the benefit of an Oxford comma separates it from the other fragment you quoted.
Her plagiarism looks like nothing but sloppiness in failing to cite sources, or less in some cases. I think she came up with the wrong answer because she thought she could bullshit her way around her failure to address antisemitism at Harvard and the reason she resigned is the backlash that came from outside her academic bubble, much of it unfair and hateful in nature. Had she never committed anything that could be considered plagiarism the situation would have been the same as her life and career was picked apart to find reasons to attack her.
She did a her job poorly. Spectacularly poorly in this one highly publicized incident. I don’t think she was well suited for the job, but I’m not seeing indications that other college presidents do better in general. They just didn’t get put on the hot seat.
This is clearly a “nah” … she was giving the “cribbed” answer if anything. And it was from a pure literal what are the official rules answer apparently an accurate answer.
It was a flub that all three made because they were not actually answering what the question was, in the context of the hearing. That was dumb but it was the sort of dumb I have learned to expect from bureaucrats and especially academic ones. Blinders fully on. It was however I strongly suspect the position their legal people had coached them to straddle: a fine point regarding “action” vs “speech” that is impossible to parse in the context of that venue.
Her plagiarism stands alone. Again perhaps given focus because of that flub but worthy of dismissal on its own if it was the pattern it seems it was.
And as the WaPo opinion piece states and I mentioned earlier, under Harvard rules this isexplicitly considered a violation.
Part of the matter is if you are a promising student the appropriate authority can decide you deserve a chance and may be given a limited disciplinary measure and encouraged to clean up your act if you want to move on. But when you are already the Face of the Institution, there’s not that much wiggle room.
FWIW the relative blind eye to antisemitism is not exclusive to these elites and predates the Hamas attack.
My daughter is a recent graduate of University of Vermont and while a student there had been multiple antisemitic incidents with the then president gaslighting Jewish student complaints. My daughter was front and center in this. It was pretty bad. The worst was the hijacking of a support service for victims of sexual assault as a means to attack and exclude Jews. Even worse than the vandalism attacks to my daughter’s experience.
I lean on the freedom of speech side of the scale especially in university settings but it does get Animal Farm-esque: all are equal and some are more equal than others. The line determination between “speech” and “action” sure seems to be in a different place for Jewish students than for others.
I wonder if her plagiarism was intentional or if she just has a good-but-imperfect verbal memory. Assume if those examples are honestly a little weird.
But it doesn’t matter. A Harvard student would be thrown out for that. Heck, i knew a guy who was taking nearly twice the recommended course load, and late one night, seriously sleep-deprived, he typed up his notes instead of his paper and passed it in. The “paper” didn’t even have complete sentences, it was obviously not intentional. He was hauled up before the ad board and ultimately was allowed to continue, but not without having been told he’d be expelled, having his parents warned that he’d be expelled, and having to listen to a lot of very stern lectures about his evil.
When i heard the plagiarism charges i figured it was only a matter of time before she’d have to leave.
