A few weeks back Harvard announced that it would henceforth practice “institutional neutrality” on hot button political and social issues, and no longer issue official university statements. This is an obvious case of closing the barn door after the animals have all escaped, and is clearly a dodge to avoid offending competing alumni and faculty interests with any kind of position on the Hamas War against Israel. For once taking the leftist line could cost Harvard—in fact its tolerance for anti-Semitism already has.
There was a carve-out, of course. Harvard will entertain arguments from anti-Israel protestors to divest Harvard’s endowment from any Israeli-linked assets. Harvard will likely not do this in the end, but it had to make this concession to the campus Hamasniks in order to appease them for the moment.
Now Harvard has come out with two reports, one from the “Presidential Task Force on Combating Antisemitism,” and the second from the “Presidential Task Force on Combating Anti-Muslim and Anti-Arab Bias.” Because of course the bias problem is perfectly symmetrical, and Harvard needs to address “both sides” of the problem. It’s a shabby attempt at moral equivalence in an effort to placate the left, and the Wall Street Journal dutifully reported it thus: “Harvard Finds Jewish and Muslim Students Were Harassed, Bullied and Discriminated Against.”
The evidence of anti-Semitism on the Harvard campus is clear—some of it recorded on cell phone cameras, although all one needed to do was walk across campus during the spring protests and take in the signs and listen to the deranged protestors. As for hate incidents against Muslim students, the Harvard report relies wholly on self-reporting from students who were interviewed:
People of color from other groups and identities — often Black and South Asian students – shared experiences of racism and hatred because they were allies, or because they were misidentified as Arab, Muslim, or Palestinian. Muslim women who wear hijab and pro-Palestinian students wearing keffiyehs spoke about facing verbal harassment, being called “terrorists,” and even being spat upon.
The likelihood is that none of these things happened. About 95 percent of campus hate crimes against minorities turn out to be hoaxes, but the salience of victimhood on campuses make it impossible to resist Jussie Smolettism.
According to the FBI database for hate crimes, in 2022 (the most recent year available) there were 1,124 reported hate crimes against Jews, but only 92 anti-Arab and 158 anti-Islamic hate crimes reported. But Harvard wants you to think the problem of ethnic hate is perfectly symmetrical.
More from the report:
They felt that the words “Palestine” and “Palestinian” had in effect become taboo on campus. Students also said that Harvard lacked sufficient faculty and course offerings dedicated to Palestinian studies and the complexities of the Israel-Palestine conflict — a reality that perpetuates a lack of understanding on campus about the current crisis in Gaza, which many in the community believe to be an ongoing genocide, and about the long-standing issues around recognition of Palestinian identity.
So, not enough pro-Palestinian faculty and propaganda in Harvard’s curriculum? Just how will Harvard respond?
The Task Force will dedicate the summer to conducting research into the historical, political, and sociological origins of anti-Muslim, anti-Arab, and anti-Palestinian bias on campus. We will also analyze collections of qualitative and quantitative data for understanding the issues we face, collate and evaluate existing policies that relate to those issues, and explore opportunities for creating bridges across divides by fostering pluralism through intentional and creative engagement with diversity. . .
The University can address the specific issue of lack of recognition of the Palestinian experience by expanding curricular offerings related to Palestinian studies and seeking to recruit tenure-track faculty to enable this effort. This would also help educate our diverse community and deepen the academic exploration of the Middle East at Harvard. . .
Such a systematic review should then endeavor to address gaps identified, by leveraging existing resources as well as visiting faculty and other scholars who may be invited through various programs, including the Scholars at Risk program that could bring scholars from Gaza to Harvard. [Emphasis added.]
So Harvard is going to give in to the demands for more radical offerings from their faculty and curriculum. And “Gaza scholar” has to be one of the most brazen academic oxymorons ever. In any case I’m sure Qatar will be happy to pay for it all.
Separately, probably time to ponder the question posed by NY Times columnist Bret Stephens, though he doesn’t get around to answering the question posed by the headline (he will in a future column he says—I hope the answer is Yes):
Should American Jews Abandon Elite Universities?
The notable fact about the anti-Israel campus demonstrations is that they are predominantly an elite phenomenon. Yes, there have been protests at big state schools like the University of Nebraska, but they have generally been small, tame and — thanks to administrators prepared to enforce the rules — short-lived. It’s Stanford, Berkeley, Yale, Penn, Harvard, Columbia and many of their peers that have descended to open bigotry, institutional paralysis and mayhem.
Two questions: Why the top universities? And what should those on the other side of the demonstrations — Jewish students and alumni most of all — do about it? . . .
If you are an Ivy League megadonor wondering how to better spend the money you no longer want to give a Penn or a Columbia — or just a rising high school senior wondering where to apply — maybe it’s time to forgo the fading prestige of the old elite for the sake of something else, something new.
