Why is Brandeis a Haven for Anti-Israel Rhetoric?

Just as a new conflict breaks out between Israelis and Palestinians in the Middle East, the professoriate’s bias against Israel is resurfacing in novel, ugly ways. The Washington Free Beacon has exposed an anti-Israel listserv at Brandeis University, where faculty members expressed concerns about Israelis harvesting organs, referred to the President of Brandeis and his wife as “Mein Leader und Frau,” and described “humanly decent” Israelis as “self-hating, Arab-loving Jews.” Though Brandeis’ communications director insisted that the viewpoints expressed on the listserv do not reflect the University’s views, she affirmed that “members of the community may hold many different opinions on a variety of topics and express them in ways that do not reflect the university’s official position on a given issue.”

But the listserv isn’t Brandeis’ only source of anti-Israel rhetoric. Brandeis’ Ethics Center has recently had a string of incidents revealing a systemic bias against Israel. The Center’s International Advisory Board chairman accused Israel in 2009 of crimes against humanity. A member of the Center’s board was removed because of ties to demonstrations praising suicide bombers. The Center also hosted Nelson Mandela’s grandsons at the school’s annual celebration of social justice, an event that featured one of them insisting, “When the American government supports the Israeli army in disputes over the land against Palestine. That is discrimination.” (sic)

This anti-Israel rhetoric is curious, given Brandeis’ historical identity as a haven for American Jews. Of course, Brandeis has the prerogative to allow the circulation of unpopular opinions, however loathsome, in the name of academic freedom. But the very real consequence of the anti-Israel bias in higher education is students’ adoption and expression of those same attitudes. This past Saturday, Boston police had to rescue pro-Israel counter-demonstrators from Palestinian sympathizers who shoved them while shouting “Jews back to Birkenau” and “Drop dead, you Zionazi whores.” A Boston Globe photo of the event featured many young people – many of them no doubt students – holding a “die-in” in solidarity with the Palestinian cause. I wonder how many of them attend one of the many liberal arts schools in the Boston area, and how many are taught by professors who aren’t too different from those frequenting the listserv at Brandeis.

David Wilezol

David Wilezol is the co-author of "Is College Worth It?" with former U.S. Secretary of Education William J. Bennett.

3 thoughts on “Why is Brandeis a Haven for Anti-Israel Rhetoric?

  1. Sad how America allows people to come here for freedom and the first thing they do is spread their hate! If these statements of hate and lies were made against any other race or creed their would be an outcry at the school..the fact that this has been going on this long is a disgrace!

  2. I’m disturbed by the column, partly because it seems to call for an incredible amount of repression and censorship on campus (firing faculty who criticize Israel, and even banning speakers who might say something negative about Israel), and partly because this bizarre stretch of logic:

    A few people are alleged to have made anti-Semitic comments at a protest > many young people were at the protest > many young people are college students > some college students attend liberal arts colleges > some students at liberal arts colleges are influenced by their professors, SO THEREFORE, Brandeis professors who criticize Israel are the cause of anti-Semitic comments, and Brandeis is a haven of anti-Semitism.

    As logic goes, this argument really makes no sense. It would be like pointing out that someone once said something racist at a tea party rally, that some college students attend tea party rallies, that these college students may be influenced by conservative professors, and therefore conservative professors are racist and colleges are a haven of racists.

    I’m not fond of guilt-by-association arguments, but guilt by six degrees of separation is even harder to take seriously.

  3. Um, why was Nixon the only President who could go to China? Because he had a lifetime of anti-Communist credentials.

    Not sure why the slam against the president of Brandeis U. is on the list of “anti-Israel” statements. Is he, like, the personification of Israel or something?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.