WE ALL remember times in our childhood when our parents placated us with extra affection and toys when a sibling for some reason or another -- say, a birthday or school award -- received special attention. They always tried to equal things out, preventing an outburst of jealousy before the neglected kid had a chance to protest. Surprisingly, a similar situation is now brewing
in the relationship between Jews and Muslims on college campuses across the country. In this case, though, the idea of tit-for-tat is neither applicable nor reasonable.
On Oct. 7, The New York Times ran a statement signed by 300 college and university presidents denouncing the intimidation of Jewish students on campuses. Included in the 300 was University President John T. Casteen III. Despite the significant number of presidents who did sign the statement, many refused to do so since it did not address concerns for Muslim and Arab students. But this omission should not detract from the statement's indispensable message or support.
The American Jewish Committee organized and sponsored the advertisement. Even the name of the group clearly justifies the fact that the statement focused on Jews. It is an organization with an active interest in protecting and promoting Jewish interests. According to its Web site (www.ajc.org), one of the Committee's goals is "to safeguard the welfare and security of Jews in the United States, in Israel and throughout the world." And that's just what they were trying to do with the statement in The New York Times.
The statement's failure to address the intimidation of Muslim students should not have prevented some university presidents from signing the statement. Signing the letter showed solidarity with the Jewish community, not discrimination against the Muslim community. Had a Muslim organization approached the leaders of schools with a similar statement, it's almost certain that they would have signed it as well. The AJC should not have been automatically expected to include Muslims in its lobbying no more than Republicans would expect to be included in a Democratic fundraiser.
Neither should the AJC-sponsored statement indicate any discrimination against Muslims. In fact, like many religious organizations, the AJC fervently works to improve inter-religious relations. Earlier this year, the AJC made a substantial financial contribution of $50,000 to the United Nations to aid Afghan refugees. Obviously, the AJC does not harbor anti-Muslim sentiments, as some may claim caused the anti-intimidation statement to leave out Muslim students.
In light of recent events, possible critics of the statement also should not question its necessity. Needless to say, violence of any nature has not occurred so far on campuses in the United States. According to The Chronicle of Higher Education, pro-Israeli and pro-Palestinian groups clashed at San Francisco State University, with one group eventually shouting, "Hitler didn't do the job." Anti-Semitism is increasing in Western Europe, and with growing demands for American colleges to divest from Israeli businesses and sever ties with Israeli academics, anti-Jewish activity on campuses was a necessary issue for the AJC to address.
The statement in The New York Times was needed also to address discrimination against pro-Israeli and Jewish faculty. Earlier this year, European scholars supported an academic boycott of Israel. According to the Chronicle, the fallout was especially harsh at the University of Manchester Institute of Science and Technology, where Mona Baker, director of its Center for Translation and Intercultural Studies, fired two Israeli academics from two translation journals she runs. As a result, Harvard University English professor and president of the Modern Language Association Stephen J. Greenblatt condemned Baker's actions. In turn, another UMIST professor, Michael L. Sinnott, e-mailed Greenblatt a strongly-worded letter comparing the actions of Israel in Jenin to Nazi Germany's Kristallnacht. Sinnott also claimed that "the real Zionist conspiracy" has "duped" Americans. Those are fighting -- not to mention offensive -- words. So the problem the AJC sees is not imagined.
Apparently, something is rotten in the state of religious relations. Thus, the AJC took action to try to fix it, and college campuses were the ideal first place to do so. Supporting Jews does not mean not supporting Muslims. Condemning intimidation against a particular group at a particular time proves an intolerance of discrimination against any of our fellow man. And in the end, that's all that matters.
(Becky Krystal is a Cavalier Daily associate editor. She can be reached at bkrystal@cavalierdaily.com.)
Read More
PATEL: Personal development courses support students beyond the gradebook
By Heer Patel | YesterdayThe University must rethink its approach to education beyond traditional major-specific requirements and mandate personal development courses.
EDITORIAL: Commercialization threatens U.Va.’s educational mission
By Editorial Board | 2 days agoAfter all, measuring the University’s worth in terms of accrued capital, operational efficiency and numerical rankings molds this space into just another cookie-cutter institution.
YOUNIS: Why every U.Va. student should say yes to English
By Ayat Younis | 6 days agoEvery student at the University, regardless of their primary field of study, can professionally and academically benefit from engaging with the English department.
