Fight fire with forum

Nine of the nation's most controversial scholars took to the podium "In Defense of Academic Freedom" at a packed Rockefeller Chapel on Friday. The conference, which featured Tony Judt, John J. Mearsheimer, and, via video, Noam Chomsky, was held in the wake of two tenure decisions at nearby DePaul University that set off a firestorm in the academic community.

This past June Norman Finkelstein—a controversial historian of the Holocaust and critic of the United States's relationship with Israel—was denied tenure at DePaul. His supporters, including University of Chicago political-science professor Mearsheimer, claim that Finkelstein, whose "scholarship is known around the world," was dismissed in the face of "outside pressure," notably from Alan Dershowitz, a forthright defender of Israel and lauded Harvard Law professor. Mehrene Larudee, a supporter of Finkelstein's at DePaul, was also denied tenure.

Noam Chomsky, Massachusetts Institute of Technology professor emeritus of linguistics, could not attend the conference in person, but he addressed the crowd of approximately 1,500 by video, declaiming "the ongoing assault on academic freedom" as part of universities' general "conformist subservience to power."

Tony Judt, professor of history at New York University, elaborated on the academy's susceptibility to power, taking up the cause of Mearsheimer's new book, The Israel Lobby. Judt criticized the interests that, he said, silence frank discussion of Israel's policies with accusations of Holocaust denial and anti-Semitism. Such efforts preclude "the openness to say that there is a difference between hating Jews and criticizing Israel," Judt said, warning, "if we don't allow that discussion we may get real anti-Semitism."

Ethan D. Frenchman, '08

Freedom1_thumb.jpg Freedom2_thumb.jpg Freedom3_thumb.jpg

Photos (left to right): Finkelstein's supporters monger T-shirts before the conference; attendees file into Rockefeller Chapel; Mearsheimer addresses the crowd as Columbia professor Akeel Bilgrami, PhD '83; Tony Judt; and writer and conference organizer Tariq Ali look on (left, center, and right, respectively).

October 17, 2007

Judt criticized the interests that, he said, silence frank discussion of Israel's policies with accusations of Holocaust denial and anti-Semitism. Such efforts preclude "the openness to say that there is a difference between hating Jews and criticizing Israel," Judt said, warning, "if we don't allow that discussion we may get real anti-Semitism."

The problem is that most anti-Semites deny being anti-Semites and instead claim to be merely "criticizing Israeli policies." Criticism is one thing— a normal thing in a democratic society—but criticism is based in well substantiated pieces of evidence arranged in a logically coherent manner that takes into account what is truthful in what the alternative positions state.

Too often, these crypto-anti-Semites will claim to be only criticizing Israeli policy, but the criticism will be rooted in false claims about the Arab-Israeli conflict, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the Holocaust, or the history of the Zionist movement; facts taken well out of context; or appeals to anti-Semitic canards such as conspiracy theories.

Yes: there are legitimate criticisms of Israeli policy—and one can read of them in the Israeli press, but far too often, those who complain they are "being shut down with the charge of anti-Semite" are just that.

Posted by: Ian Thal at October 18, 2007 1:55 PM

Post a comment




Remember Me?