MARILYN PENN: TRUSTEES AND HONOREES…..SEE EDITOR’S NOTE PLEASE
http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.9451,css.print/pub_detail.asp
This, and several by Bruce Kesler are among the best columns written about the Kushner controversy and Jeff Wiesenfeld, but alas, thanks to the intervention of Chairman Benno Schmidt who blathered about “principle” and ” fairness” and ” I might agree with trustee Wiesenfeld, whose political views on the matter are not far distant from my own”…blah, blah blah….rsk
Editor’s Note: On Friday May 6, CUNY’s Board of Trustees moved to reverse the decision to withhold an honorary degree from Kushner.
Jeffrey Wiesenfeld, a trustee of CUNY, dared to exercise the power with which he was entrusted, namely to act in what he considered to be the best interests of the university which he serves. He spoke for 4 minutes on the subject of why the Board should not approve the selection of Tony Kushner for an honorary degree. He gave his reasons for his point of view and sat down. No arms were twisted, no threats were made. One trustee did his homework, researched the political tenets of the outspoken playwright and concluded that these were not an appropriate reflection of the university or the city whose name it bears. The Board, one of whose members confessed that she had no idea who Tony Kushner was, then voted and were not successful in reaching a majority consensus. They voted again and perhaps out of mental laziness (not wanting to find out who this candidate was) or exasperation that this might turn into a bigger debate that would take longer than their stipulated deadline, decided to scotch the whole idea and move on.
At this point, it’s important to emphasize that an honorary degree is not an entitlement equivalent to completing the coursework that is the ordinary route towards a graduate degree. It is conferred upon an individual at the subjective evaluation of the trustees. It is also not a trial at which the nominee is requested or entitled to defend himself. It is not a public referendum and resides solely in the hands of the trustees to confer. To this extent, Jeffrey Wiesenfeld behaved honorably and admirably by not simply rubber-stamping a candidate without some discussion. In fact, in the letter that Tony Kushner subsequently wrote to the Board, he reserves his most vitriolic opprobrium for the 11 trustees who remained silent after Wiesenfeld’s objections: “Did any of you feel that your responsibilities as trustees of an august institution of higher learning included even briefly discussing the appropriateness of Mr. Weisenfeld’s (sic) using a public board meeting as a platform for deriding the political opinions of someone with whom he disagrees?….I can’t adequately describe my dismay at the fact that none of you felt stirred enough by ordinary fairness to demand of one of your members that, if he was going to mount a vicious attack, he ought to adhere to standards higher than those of internet gossip.”
So much for the process of choosing a candidate. Now on to the content of what Mr Kushner has stated on record and the merits of Mr. Wiesenfeld’s complaint. In his letter Mr. Kushner writes, “I believe that the historical record shows, incontrovertibly, that the forced removal of Palestinians from their homes as part of the creation of the state of Israel was ethnic cleansing, a conclusion I reached mainly by reading the work of Benny Morris, an acclaimed and conservative Israeli historian …” In the first place, making judgments as scurrilous as the accusation of ethnic cleansing in a Jewish state that has over a million Palestinian citizens shouldn’t rest mainly on the opinion of one historian, particularly one who has totally retracted his previous ultra-liberal positions and subsequently morphed into a conservative. Secondly, the issue of Palestinian flight from Israel is multi-dimensional with most historians admitting that they were urged to leave by their own leaders so that they wouldn’t be killed in the war the Arabs were poised to wage in defiance of the UN recognition of the Zionist state. Sincere intellectuals do their homework before they issue public statements that are so inflammatory – the term ethnic cleansing is commonly used interchangeably with genocide. It surely is the obligation of a concerned trustee to scrutinize the statements and sentiments of a proposed honoree. Would Mr. Kushner have wanted CUNY to honor someone who was racist, pro-life, misogynistic, anti-gay, Islamophobic, tea party? Of course not and we know that academia, the media, the New York Times and all the usual bastions of liberalism would not have tolerated these verboten ideas either.
Mr. Wiesenfeld, in behaving with the utmost sense of responsibility to his post, daringly crossed the line of political correctness. It is absurd to accuse Israel of ethnic cleansing at the same time that you champion the cause of Palestinians who refuse to recognize Israel, refuse to renounce violence and have announced that Jews will not be allowed to live within the boundaries of their future state. Surely Mr Kushner is aware that the charge of ethnic cleansing is simply the first step to delegitimizing Israel’s very right to exist, a campaign with which the majority of Americans strongly disagree. The august institution of higher learning made the right call despite the refusal of all but one trustee to open the floor to debate. CUNY should not be honoring a wordsmith who uses highly charged words so loosely and indiscriminately, nor should they be honoring a man whose confusion over the legitimacy of one of our staunchest allies remains apparent.
FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor Marilyn Penn is a writer in New York who can also be read regularly at Politicalmavens.com.
Comments are closed.
