Harvard’s Hamas Confusion An elite college degree is the fastest way to disabuse a student of the idea of truth: By William McGurn
As Israel began exchanging Palestinian prisoners for Israeli moms and children, Harvard was dealing with its own ultimatum.
A week ago pro-Palestinian students gave university President Claudine Gay until Monday to respond to three demands. They were: that Harvard divest from any investments in “illegal settlements in Palestine”; that the university reinstate a proctor suspended for taking part in a mob that surrounded and harassed a Jewish student; and—of course—a promise from Harvard that “pro-Palestinian students and workers engaging in non-violent protest” would face no disciplinary action.
There you have it. The ethos of our modern best and brightest in a nutshell: We are taking a brave stand—but we demand that we pay no price for it.
In fairness, Harvard is no worse than most other universities here. Then again, that’s the scandal: It ought to be. Today the places that are supposed to be exemplars of how a civilized community behaves have become prone to loutish behavior as well as incoherent in their responses.
The ordinary citizen, by contrast, has little trouble recognizing that targeting innocent civilians instead of soldiers makes you a war criminal, not a soldier. Americans are consequently appalled by the pro-Hamas sentiment they see on so many campuses. The confusion has two parts.
The first is the way protest has morphed into a threat to speech. It isn’t only a matter of physical assaults or vandalism, though there’s been plenty of that. Harvard’s suspended proctor, graduate student Elom Tettey-Tamaklo, was captured in a video as part of the mob that blocked a Jewish student’s way while shouting “Shame!” at him. Mr. Tettey-Tamaklo was joined in this by Ibrahim Bharmal, an editor of the Harvard Law Review.
This isn’t speech. Students have the First Amendment right to espouse any idiocy they wish, such as the idea that Israel is entirely responsible for Hamas’s atrocities. But at a university ideas ought to be subject to civilized debate. Unfortunately, the purpose of the demonstrations these days is largely to make honest debate impossible by silencing, inconveniencing or intimidating those with opposing views.
One college president who understood this distinction was Rev. Theodore Hesburgh of Notre Dame. Hesburgh, who died in 2015, was a liberal and a dove on Vietnam, but one with a spine. In 1968 Notre Dame students protested and Central Intelligence Agency recruiters by trying to force their fellow undergraduates to walk across their bodies to get to interviews. Father Ted was appalled.
In February 1969 he issued a famous letter saying that “anyone or any group that substitutes force for rational persuasion, be it violent or non-violent,” would be given 15 minutes. Those who persisted would have their IDs confiscated and be suspended or expelled. Then he enforced it.
College presidents used to recognize such discipline as part of their teaching responsibility. At Harvard, President Gay had to issue a clarifying statement after critics complained that her initial response to the Oct. 7 attacks failed to condemn Hamas explicitly.
The other part of the confusion is more substantive, and has to do with moral distinctions. Is it really that hard to make classic just-war distinctions between violence and force? Who is morally culpable when a combatant hides inside hospitals or behind civilians? What does it tell us about Hamas that increasing numbers of Palestinian deaths are part of its war strategy? Ask the questions. That’s what a university is for.
In 1643 Harvard’s founders adopted “Veritas,” or truth, as their motto, reflecting their belief that truth existed and could be discovered by reason. America’s founders appealed to this same understanding when they declared the truths they held self-evident. Today the most effective way to disabuse a student of the idea that he can know truth is to send him to an elite college.
Exhibit A is former President Barack Obama, Harvard Law ’91, reacting to the Hamas atrocities by saying truth requires “an admission of complexity.” Which turns out to mean we are all somehow complicit in the bloodshed. Apparently there are some things so stupid only someone from Harvard could say them.
With regard to the three student demands and Monday’s deadline, Harvard says “we do not have a comment nor a response to the letter”—the most sensible thing it has said about this mess. The Harvard Crimson reports that eight undergrads are also facing disciplinary hearings because of their 24-hour occupation of University Hall. But as Larry Arnn, president of Hillsdale, points out, what America really needs from Harvard is clear thinking.
“If colleges abandon their final cause, which is truth, their formal cause, which is civil discourse, soon breaks down into bullying, canceling, and extortion,” Mr. Arnn says.
“That disaster has struck colleges deeply, and now it spreads into the society. We become unable to distinguish the murderers from the defenders of children.”
Write to mcgurn@wsj.com
Comments are closed.
