RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.city-journal.org/article/double-standards-at-princeton

On July 4, 2020, a few hundred of my then-colleagues at Princeton University signed an open letter endorsing a number of student demands made in the name of “anti-racism” and proposing such alarming policies as the creation of a faculty committee to police “racist behaviors.” Four days later, I published a lone dissent in which I acknowledged the signatories’ right to express their views. I also suggested—and a month later, Conor Friedersdorf came to a similar conclusion—that most of them probably didn’t believe all the things to which they were putting their name or maybe hadn’t even read the document.

Jump to October 7, 2023. In the days after Hamas invaded Israel and committed unspeakable acts of brutality, I was pleasantly surprised that Princeton faculty didn’t issue another such letter. Perhaps, I thought, they had learned that it was unwise to support groups like Princeton’s chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP), which had scheduled a pro-Hamas “teach-in” for the same time as a previously announced vigil for the Israelis whom Hamas had slaughtered and issued a screed blaming Israel for Hamas’s evil.

On October 22, however, the Daily Princetonian published “An open letter from Princeton faculty and students in solidarity with Gaza.” This new letter has so far received 664 signatures from people with Princeton affiliations, 69 of them university employees.

Because this letter was not published in the heat of some traumatic moment, instead appearing more than two weeks after the surprise Hamas attacks on Israel, there is little chance anyone signed it without understanding what’s at stake. The fact that it must have been produced with “care” makes its contents especially horrible: far worse, in my view, than the knee-jerk reaction of a bunch of college kids.

After beginning with a brief expression of “bereave[ment]” for “the tragic loss of Israeli and Palestinian lives,” the signatories make clear where they stand: “The ongoing Israeli assault upon the Gaza Strip must be stopped.” They say nothing about the actions of Palestinian Islamic Jihad and mention Hamas only once. They also amplify misinformation about the Al-Ahli Arab Hospital bombing.

https://victorhanson.com/who-created-the-monsters-among-us/

Students at UCLA and on other campuses, some of them on foreign student visas, and others on some sort of taxpayer-funded support, are now marching with the chant, “Israel, Israel you cannot hide, we charge you with genocide.” So, Hamas gunmen break into Israel, slaughter over 1,000 civilians, mutilate them, behead some, and commit any sort of atrocity, and when the IDF responds our students charge “genocide”?

How would you like any of those graduating college chanters operating on your heart, defending you in court, doing your income taxes, or serving you at the DMV?

Note the irony of our students accusing Israel of genocide often simultaneously chanting, “From the river to the sea”—a euphemism for the mass killing of Jews and the extinction of Israel. Those calling for the mass extinction of Jews following the butchery of more than 1,000 inside Israel now claim victim status when the victim responds. And they of all people now charge Israel with the very crimes that they have been clamoring for in their chanting “From the river to the sea”?

How did we accomplish turning our universities into Nazi-like centers of indoctrination?

Answer: the woke/DEI revolution, and its predecessors of identity politics, were mortal sins of both commission and omission.

Students were taught binaries of victims/victimizers or oppressed/oppressors, based on chauvinist, racist romances about “marginalized peoples” and the demonization of so-called “whites.”

These were collectives, or rather racial stereotypes that gave no room for individual differences: you all are what you are based on skin color.

Much of the hatred was predicated on careerism—we saw that in the “shocked” tears of a few “death to Israel” students who lost their invitations to six-figure corporate incomes.

On campus, the more one stressed his “difference” and “otherness,” whether defined by skin color, sexual orientation, or gender, the more exempt he became in descending down into the dark recesses of pre-civilizational hatred.

Conservatives have recently scored surprise victories against left-wing corporate culture, with successful pressure campaigns against a trio of blue-chip companies—Disney, Target, and Bud Light—that have revealed the potential of a culture-war tactic once considered the Left’s stock-in-trade: the consumer boycott.

The campaigns are notable because they drew blood, figuratively speaking. Disney, which promised to embed radical gender theory in its children’s programming, watched its stock price plummet and signaled a retreat from the culture war. Target, which featured “breast binders” as part of its seasonal “Pride Collection,” saw a decline in sales and promised to “pause, adapt, and learn.” Bud Light featured a transgender “influencer” in an advertising campaign, sending its reputation and sales into freefall.

What lessons can be drawn from these examples? And how can conservatives use boycotts to fight left-wing cultural capture?

To answer these questions, let’s consult the academic literature on consumer boycotts. First, it’s important to understand the genesis—or, in narrative terms, the “inciting incident”—of a potential boycott. Research suggests that in successful boycotts, activists often highlight a firm’s “egregious act,” a transgression of some deeply held value among consumers, and channel the resulting “negative arousal” into a boycott. To expand participation, activists must create a sense that partaking in the boycott provides an opportunity to “make a difference,” change company behavior, and join in a widely shared cause. The research also suggests that boycotts must begin with a sense of optimism, as the “perceived efficacy“ of a campaign significantly determines its likelihood of success. 

Next, the mechanics. Northwestern University professor Brayden King collected data from 133 boycott campaigns conducted between 1990 and 2005 and used statistical analysis to identify which tactics are most correlated with success. King argues that boycott campaigns succeed through “market disruption,” targeting a firm’s stock price, and “mediated disruption,” targeting a firm’s public reputation. These two strategies are mutually reinforcing, as economic damage can lead to greater media coverage, and greater media coverage of a company’s difficulties can lead to economic damage.

https://www.thefp.com/p/qatars-war-for-young-american-minds

The same country now protecting Hamas’s senior leaders has donated billions to American universities. Here’s why.

Right now, senior leaders of Hamas, the perpetrators of the worst atrocity against Jews since the Holocaust, are huddled in Qatar. They’ve been there for years. But American foreign policy has turned a blind eye. Why? One reason might be that for the last 25 years, this small, energy-rich state has pumped billions into America to purchase influence and good favor.

The Qataris have spent their lavish fortune at American law firms, on lobbying contracts with former senior officials, and on junkets and partnerships with big media companies. The biggest recipients of Qatari largesse, though, have been major universities and think tanks.

The numbers are staggering. According to a 2022 study from the National Association of Scholars, Qatar today is the largest foreign donor to American universities. The study found that between 2001 and 2021, the petrostate donated a whopping $4.7 billion to U.S. colleges. The largest recipients are some of America’s most prestigious institutions of higher learning. These schools have partnered with the regime to build campuses in Doha’s “education city,” a special district of the capital that hosts satellite colleges for American universities:

Since 1997, Qatar has donated more than $103 million to Virginia Commonwealth University for a fine arts campus.

Since 2001, Qatar has donated $1.8 billion to Cornell for a medical school.

Since 2003, Qatar has donated nearly $700 million to Texas A&M for an engineering campus.

Since 2004, Qatar has donated $740 million to Carnegie Mellon University for a computer science campus.

Since 2005, Qatar has donated $760 million to Georgetown University for a school of politics.

Since 2008, Qatar has donated nearly $602 million to Northwestern University for a school of journalism.

https://www.city-journal.org/article/arab-countries-bankroll-u-s-universities

Arab countries are bankrolling American colleges and universities.

For decades, China and Middle Eastern autocracies have been pouring billions of dollars into American and other foreign universities. Such funds support students from their countries but can also support academic programs that propagate these countries’ world views.

China’s so-called Confucius Institutes, for instance, which push the Chinese Communist Party’s agenda on college campuses and seek access to U.S. technological prowess, have garnered much international attention. Including these institutes and other efforts, China contributed $1.2 billion to American colleges between 2014 and 2020. It has spent roughly another $1 billion since 2020.

Middle Eastern countries’ donations draw much less attention. Between 2014 and 2020, Muslim-majority countries together donated $4.86 billion to American higher-educational institutions, representing 29 percent of all foreign donations.

Qatar and Saudi Arabia were responsible for much of this largesse. The two countries together invested $3.7 billion in American higher education and were cumulatively responsible for 2,303 grants, gifts, and contracts, of which 422 exceeded $1 million and 17 exceeded $50 million in value. Most of the largest gifts came from Qatar to Cornell and Carnegie Mellon.

Qatar’s role is particularly troubling, since the country is often an ally to both Iran and Hamas. The country also backs other terrorist groups, including the Muslim Brotherhood, and is home to the most important Middle Eastern media outfit, Al Jazeera. Along with Saudi Arabia, Qatar is among the largest donors to Palestinian organizations and causes.

It’s too early to make direct connection between a school’s anti-Israel agitation and its donations from Middle Eastern countries, but the biggest recipients, such as Cornell, NYU, Georgetown, and Harvard tend to have large pro-Hamas elements. Student groups on each of those campuses have embraced the Hamas cause, most prominently at Harvard, where more than 30 student groups initially signed pro-Hamas statements, though some have since sought to dissociate themselves.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12695497/columbia-university-professors-letter-antisemitism-defend-hamas.html

By HARRIET ALEXANDER and MACKENZIE TATANANNI 

Almost 300 staff at Columbia University on Tuesday signed a letter condemning their colleagues for defending students who said Hamas’ terror attack of October 7 was justified.

They stressed that freedom of speech is vital – but that did not extend to justifying acts of terrorism.

They said they are ‘astonished’ and ‘horrified’ that anyone could condone the murders.

The Tuesday letter came 24 hours after more than 100 staff at the Ivy League college spoke out in support of the students.

The row was sparked by an October 9 statement from the Columbia chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine, which saw the students praise the ‘against the odds’ terror attack – which left 1,400 Israelis dead.

‘Yesterday was an unprecedented historic moment for the Palestinians of Gaza, who tore through the wall that has been suffocating them in one of the most densely-populated areas on Earth for the past 16 years – an open-air prison blockaded by Israeli soldiers via land, air, and sea,’ they wrote.

‘Despite the odds against them, Palestinians launched a counter-offensive against their settler-colonial oppressor – which receives billions of US dollars annually in military aid and possesses one of the world’s most robust surveillance and security apparatuses.’

The statement sparked furious scenes, which have been replicated at colleges and universities across the country – roiling students and staff and seeing donors threaten to withdraw their funding. Some students who publicly defended Hamas have had their job offers rescinded. Billionaire investor Leon Cooperman has threatened to cut off donations to his alma mater over student support for Palestine.

https://tomklingenstein.com/higher-ed-support-for-hamas-exposes-disdain-for-america-in-top-colleges/

Why are American academics and American college students so drawn to an antisemitic movement?

If you don’t like the pro-Hamas demonstrations by American college students, then you won’t like American higher education, which is the garden in which these flowers were grown.

Within hours of the atrocities committed by Hamas operatives who invaded Israel on October 7, groups of American college students had organized to express their support for the terrorists. This caught many Americans by surprise. How could college students at some of America’s best universities sympathize with the perpetrators of gruesome attacks on unarmed civilians?

The surprise, however, was not universal. Those of us who pay close attention to American higher education were well aware of the rising tide of antisemitism on many campuses, and aware as well of the anger that these institutions had honed against Israel and the sympathies they had cultivated for Palestinian radicals. College officials were likewise aware that, among the students enrolled in their institutions, a significant number are affiliated with factions that loathe Israel, support Palestinian “resistance,” and are well-organized practitioners of public protest. Some college presidents initially issued mealy-mouthed disapproval or offered criticisms of both Hamas and Israel as equally at fault. After finding their equivocations poorly received, they issued new statements that were sometimes sterner about Hamas, but often continued to chastise Israel as well.

Some college presidents did forthrightly condemn Hamas and express strong support for Israel. At the end of October, a coalition founded by 16 college presidents issued a statement titled, “We Stand Together with Israel Against Hamas.” That statement eventually collected over 100 signatories.

But the larger academic scene lacks such common sense.

https://www.city-journal.org/article/harvards-double-standard-on-free-speech

After Harvard student groups blamed Israel for Hamas’s atrocities, the global backlash was so fierce that the university’s president, Claudine Gay, released a video statement that in some ways proved even more puzzling. “Our university rejects the harassment or intimidation of individuals based on their beliefs,” she said. “And our university embraces a commitment to free expression. That commitment extends even to views that many of us find objectionable, even outrageous.”

Really?

This was news to the scholars with unpopular views at Harvard who have been sanctioned by administrators, boycotted by students, and slandered by the Crimson student newspaper. And it was certainly news to anyone who follows the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression’s annual analyses of threats to free speech on campus.

In this year’s FIRE report, Harvard’s speech climate didn’t merely rank dead last among those of the 248 participating colleges. It was also the first school that FIRE has given an “Abysmal” rating for its speech climate, scoring it zero on the 100-point scale (even that was a generous upgrade, as its actual composite score was -10). That dismal distinction made headlines last month across the United States, Europe, the Middle East, and Asia—but not on the Harvard campus. The Crimson didn’t even publish an article in its news section, much less an editorial; Gay didn’t make a statement, either.

Once upon a time, journalists and scholars on both the left and right were staunchly devoted to free speech and academic freedom, if only out of self-interest. Liberals like Nat Hentoff of the Village Voice defended the rights of Klansmen and Nazis because they knew the First Amendment was their profession’s paramount principle. But in the past decade, that bipartisan devotion has been disappearing, particularly at elite colleges. Harvard’s journalists and scholars adopted the principles that Hentoff criticized in the title of one of his books: free speech for me, but not for thee.

Leftists are free to stir controversy without fear of punishment from Gay and other administrators, and they can count on the Crimson to defend them. Jewish groups on campus were outraged last year when the Palestine Solidarity Committee’s annual spring event, Israeli Apartheid Week, featured lurid murals accusing “Zionists” of being “racists” and “white supremacists.” The Crimson’s editorial board promptly declared itself “proudly supportive” of the murals and the international BDS (Boycott, Disinvestment and Sanctions) campaign to make Israel a pariah state. When that editorial stirred further outrage and accusations of anti-Semitism, the Crimson’s president issued a statement proclaiming the newspaper’s commitment to “freedom of expression.”

But that commitment vanishes when the campus’s leftist majority gets angry. The targets of their anger have received, at best, no support from the Harvard administration or the Crimson. At worst, those voices find themselves denounced, investigated, disinvited, or punished by administrators, and they have endured the Crimson’s outrageous campaigns to silence, sanction, and banish them.

https://www.newsmax.com/newsmax-tv/ron-desantis-israel-college/2023/10/28/id/1140065/

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis blasted woke antisemites and anti-Zionists in American colleges, the media, and the “worthless” United Nations on Saturday on Newsmax.

“I don’t care what some imbecile on a college campus says; I don’t care what liars in the media say; and I certainly don’t care what worthless institutions like the United Nations say: We are going to stand with Israel in this dark hour for them,” DeSantis told “Saturday Report.”

DeSantis, who is campaigning for president and speaking Saturday in the Las Vegas gathering of the Republican Jewish Coalition Conference, hailed his state for having revoked Florida college students’ “privilege” to support Hamas in the war against Israel over “material support to terrorism.”

“You may have a right to say certain things, but that’s material support to terrorism if you’re saying you’re part of what they’re doing, so we deactivated the Students for Justice in Palestine and were the first state to step up to the plate and do that,” DeSantis told host Rita Cosby before his RJC address.

“I was the first candidate to say that if you have foreign visa holders out there making common cause with Hamas, I’m canceling their visa and I’m sending them back,” DeSantis added. “That’s a bare minimum.

“They don’t have a right to be here on a student visa. It’s a privilege to be here on a student visa. There’s a lot of Americans that would probably want those slots. There’s other foreign nationals who actually like the United States who would probably want [one].

“They have no right to have those visas, and if they’re going to make common cause with terrorism, we are going to eject.”

The problem on college campuses in sharing anti-Israel progressive narratives has been building for a long time, according to DeSantis.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2023/10/make-pro-hamas-countries-that-fund-american-universities-fess-up/

We need to know more about the support that nations such as Qatar, which offers material and financial aid to Hamas, are sending to U.S. colleges

After the mass terrorist atrocity along the Israel/Gaza border on October 7, we had the horrific sight of radicals on American campuses siding with Hamas. For example, some student organizations have overtly engaged in clear victim-blaming. One Cornell professor even overtly celebrated Hamas murders. This kind of extremism has caused some businesses to run for the hills; they’ve withdrawn job offers and  threatened to never hire the students involved. Some prominent foundations and wealthy, influential individuals, including former Utah governor and ambassador Jon Huntsman, have canceled their donations to colleges and universities. Former Harvard president and Clinton- and Obama-administration veteran Larry Summers declared himself “sickened” as well as “disillusioned and alienated” by how his former university handled this issue.

It is nearly impossible to know all the factors that play a role in this sort of radicalization and pro-terrorist sentiment on campus, alongside the administrators’ sympathy and acquiescence. But one thing is a simple fact: American universities receive massive sums of money from countries that openly support Hamas and terrorism more broadly, and we know very little about what these countries are getting for their money. We need transparency about these transactions. Fortunately, just days after the attack, the House Education and Workforce Committee rolled out legislation, months in formation, to help address this problem.

Make no mistake, this is a big issue. The tiny, oil- and natural-gas-rich country of Qatar is one of the most profligate Hamas-supporting nations in the world.