Monday, April 23, 2018
Elder of Ziyon
The boycotters have been wetting themselves over last week’s
“victory” getting 50 student groups at New
York University (NYU) to jointly pledge a boycott of not just Israel, but
campus groups (i.e., organizations created and run by other NYU students) and
off-campus groups (such as Birthright, StandWithUs and the ADL) that support
the Jewish state.
While the effort to get student organizations to join
together to ostracize Israel supporters was one major goal of Students for
Justice in Palestine (SJP) and Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) who drove the NYU
measures, the pledge also helped SJP achieve another vital goal: rulership over
left-leaning politics within a university.
As I’ve noted before, the intersectional
pecking order tends to lead to domination by the ruthless. Allegedly, the intersectional construct
assumes every injustice is linked with every other, requiring all oppressed
groups to join together in solidarity. Such
solidarity tends to be a one-way street, however, which is why alleged Israel
“oppression” is on the intersectional-left’s agenda while the murder of woman
and gays throughout the rest of the Middle East will never be.
The initial response to the NYU outrage has been the usual
supportive (if tepid) criticism of the boycott by school administrators,
coupled with sorrow-and-regret statements by local students and Jewish leaders
on and off campus. What is missing is
outrage, and an agenda fueled by the outrage that should accompany this level
of injustice.
As long-time readers know, I tend to council caution in
turning to authority figures (especially government) when dealing with
BDS-related issues that could be solved by on-the-ground activists, including
student activists. But the organization
of dozens of campus groups to attack their Jewish schoolmates reeks of such overreach
that it demands a response beyond what even the most capable campus groups can
generate.
With that in mind, here are a few steps that would have a
high impact on the situation at NYU:
1.
Alumni donors who care
about Israel or just care about the toxic atmosphere at their alma mater should
contact the school and alert them that their donations are on hold until the
school gets its house in order. Efforts
to stem the flow of donor dollars to the school should extend to campaigns
within the donor community to get others to pledge to not give to NYU while the
campus is ruled by mobs engaging in illegal discrimination.
2.
Speaking of illegal
discrimination, legal support groups should immediately contact city, state and
national bodies mandated to battle discrimination and provide whatever is
needed for them to open investigations into whether anti-discrimination law is
being violated at NYU.
3.
Such investigations – which
can be supplemented by private civil and criminal lawsuits – should target not
just the school, but the campus groups and individual members of those groups
to make sure everyone who might be involved with illegal discrimination is
required to live with the consequences of their choices (rather than force
others – like school administrators – to take the brunt of consequences for
irresponsible student behavior).
4.
While I’m not sure how
student groups are funded at NYU, on most campuses this is done through a
mandated student fee that bodies within student government get to
distribute. But if it turns out that funds
are being used to support student groups actively discriminating against other students,
that means fees students are forced to pay are being used to fund potentially
illegal activity. Given this, there may
be legal grounds to halting such funding immediately (or during the next
academic year), or replacing mandated fees with a voluntary opt-in (vs.
opt-out) alternative.
5.
During the outrage that
would ensure if any or all of these suggestions are put into place, our side
should refrain from talking about (or even mentioning) the Middle East. Rather, all of our talking points should
focus on “illegal discrimination,” using the phrase as incessantly as our
opponents use “Apartheid.”
These are certainly harsh measures likely to make the
atmosphere on campus even more toxic.
But right now, the only people being targeted are Jewish students
leaving the Israel haters free to spew their poisons without consequence.
School administrators tend to make decisions based on who
will cause them the most vs. the least trouble, which is why they are not
likely to come down hard on 50 campus groups who could take over their offices,
especially if the countervailing threat comes from a Jewish community writing
them tearful letters about feeling unsafe.
But visits by civil rights lawyers from the city and state of New York,
as well as the Federal Department of Education (especially one run by Ken Marcus) would
definitely change leadership calculus, hopefully causing them to take the reins
of the school they allegedly lead.
As noted before, legal responses should be limited to just
those situations where political options have been blocked or are
impossible. But if one chooses to go down
the legal route, such a response should be overwhelming, even (dare I say it)
disproportionate, in order to let the world know that an assault on Jews is no
longer cost free.
