Latest news with #Jews'
New Indian Express
5 days ago
- Politics
- New Indian Express
Columbia's $200M deal with Trump administration sets a precedent for other universities to bend to the government's will
How does this deal address antisemitism? The Trump administration has cited antisemitism against students and faculty on campuses to justify its broad incursion into the business of universities around the country. Antisemitism is a real and legitimate concern in US society and higher education, including at Columbia. But the federal complaint the administration made against Columbia was not actually about antisemitism. The administration made a formal accusation of antisemitism at Columbia in May of this year but suspended grants to the university in March. The federal government had initially acknowledged that cutting federal research grants did nothing to address the climate for Jewish students on campus, for example. When the federal government investigates civil rights violations, it usually conducts site visits and does very thorough investigations. We never saw such a government report about antisemitism at Columbia or other universities. The settlement that Columbia has entered into with the administration also doesn't do much about antisemitism. The agreement includes Columbia redefining antisemitism with a broader definition that is also used by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance. The definition now includes 'a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews' – a description that is also used by the US State Department and several European governments but some critics say conflates antisemitism with anti-Zionism. Instead, the agreement primarily has to do with faculty hiring and admissions decisions. The federal government alleges that Columbia is discriminating against white and Asian applicants, and that this will allow the government to ensure that everybody who is admitted is considered only on the basis of merit. The administration could argue that changing hiring practices to get faculty who are less hostile to Jewish students could change the campus climate, but the agreement doesn't really identify ways in which the university contributed to or ignored antisemitic conduct. Is this a new issue? There has been a long-running issue that conservatives and members of the Trump administration – dating back to his first term – have with higher education. The Trump administration and other conservatives have said for years that higher education is too liberal. The protests were the flash point that put Columbia in the administration's crosshairs, as well as claims that Columbia was creating a hostile environment for Jewish students. The administration's complaints aren't limited to Columbia. Harvard is in a protracted conflict with the administration, and the administration has launched investigations into dozens of other schools around the country. These universities are butting heads with the administration over the same grievance that higher education is too liberal. There are also specific claims about antisemitism on university campuses and the privileges given to nonwhite students in admissions or campus life. While the administration has a common set of complaints about a range of universities, there is a mix of schools that the administration is taking issue with. Some of them, such as Harvard, are very high profile. The Department of Justice forced out the president at the University of Virginia in January 2025 on the grounds that he had not done enough to root out diversity, equity and inclusion programs at the public university. The University of Virginia may have been a target for the administration because a Republican governor appointed most members of its governance board and agreed with Trump's complaints.
Sydney Morning Herald
5 days ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
10-year-olds allegedly targeted by antisemitic abuse at Melbourne Museum
The Melbourne Museum is investigating an incident in which a group of high school students allegedly targeted 10-year-old children with antisemitic abuse. Grade 5 students from Mount Scopus Memorial College, a Jewish school in Burwood, reported that a group of students from an unnamed Melbourne secondary school yelled 'dirty Jews' as the two groups undertook a shared activity at the museum on Thursday. In a letter to parents, seen by The Age, Mount Scopus deputy principal Greg Hannon described the incident during a school excursion. 'A small group of students from the other school chanted 'free Palestine' towards some of our students,' Hannon wrote. 'Our group leader immediately confronted the senior school educators to address the behaviour of their students.' Hannon said the primary school students were quickly moved away from the other school group. He said that Mount Scopus would contact the principal of the high school. Mount Scopus parent Tristan Sternson said his 10-year-old boy had been subjected to a 'terrifying experience' by the high schoolers, believed to be 16 and 17 years old. 'He and his classmates were targeted by high school students from a different school,' Sternson wrote in an online post.
The Age
5 days ago
- The Age
10-year-olds allegedly targeted by antisemitic abuse at Melbourne Museum
The Melbourne Museum is investigating an incident in which a group of high school students allegedly targeted 10-year-old children with antisemitic abuse. Grade 5 students from Mount Scopus Memorial College, a Jewish school in Burwood, reported that a group of students from an unnamed Melbourne secondary school yelled 'dirty Jews' as the two groups undertook a shared activity at the museum on Thursday. In a letter to parents, seen by The Age, Mount Scopus deputy principal Greg Hannon described the incident during a school excursion. 'A small group of students from the other school chanted 'free Palestine' towards some of our students,' Hannon wrote. 'Our group leader immediately confronted the senior school educators to address the behaviour of their students.' Hannon said the primary school students were quickly moved away from the other school group. He said that Mount Scopus would contact the principal of the high school. Mount Scopus parent Tristan Sternson said his 10-year-old boy had been subjected to a 'terrifying experience' by the high schoolers, believed to be 16 and 17 years old. 'He and his classmates were targeted by high school students from a different school,' Sternson wrote in an online post.
Sky News AU
5 days ago
- Politics
- Sky News AU
Year 5 Mount Scopus Memorial College students receive vile antisemitic abuse during trip to Melbourne Museum
Vile abuse was hurled at a group of Jewish primary school students from Mount Scopus Memorial College during an excursion to Melbourne Museum, marking the latest escalation in a string of antisemitic attacks across Australia. The year 5 students, aged between 10 and 11, were called "dirty Jews" by high school students from a different institution as they shouted chants of 'free, free Palestine'. The abuse occurred on Thursday while the two groups were taking part in an activity in a shared space at the Melbourne Museum. Mount Scopus Memorial's deputy principal Greg Hannon told parents in a letter seen by the Herald Sun that he would be contacting the head of the other school. 'Our group leader immediately confronted the senior school educators to address the behaviour of their students,' he said. 'Upon returning to the college, we conducted a wellbeing check on all students to ensure they felt safe and supported.' The incident has outraged families of the young students, with one parent saying on social media that his son had been called a "dirty Jew", and labelled the act "pure, unadulterated antisemitism". 'Today, my 10-year-old son went on an excursion to the Melbourne Museum,' he said. 'What should have been a day of learning and culture turned into a terrifying experience when he and his classmates were targeted by high school students from a different school. 'They were tapped on the shoulder and then chanted at by these 16 and 17 year old students 'free Palestine' and then, as they walked away, were called 'dirty Jews' and other racist comments.' 'This is not a political debate; this is pure, unadulterated anti-Semitism and hate.' This is not the first time Mount Scopus has been the target of antisemitic abuse. Last year the leading Jewish school was defaced with hateful graffiti inciting death upon Jews, with parents keeping their children at home out of fear. The words 'Jew die' were daubed in black spray paint on the school's white fence. Dr Dvir Abramovich, chair of the Anti-Defamation Commission, is pushing for an investigation into the ''chilling'' Melbourne Museum incident from the Department of Education. 'What happened at the Melbourne Museum is unforgivable and chilling,' Dr Abramovich said. Executive Council of Australian Jewry chief executive Alex Ryvchin also criticised the high school students for bringing 'disgrace to themselves, their school and their country'. 'Where would Australian high school students learn this behaviour?' he said. 'Form the belief that it is OK, even righteous to see a Jewish symbol on the uniforms of 8 and 9 year olds and subject them to chants about Palestine?' 'It comes from a certain moral collapse brought about by nearly two years of normalised abuse and violence, where anyone who holds an opposing view on the war is a Nazi and a baby-killer, where anything down to Jews living peacefully on the other side of the world is justified, or if impossible to defend, it's a false flag.' There has been a rise in both antisemitic and Islamophobic attacks since the Israel-Hamas war gripped the world on October 7, 2023. The Labor government's response to the escalation in antisemtic attacks has been widely criticised by the nation as well as Israeli officials. It comes as Australia's Special Envoy to Combat Antisemitism Jillian Segal vowed to call out the Albanese government if they don't support her in battling antisemitism in Australia. Ms Segal handed down a major report earlier this month, outlining a series of measures to combat antisemitism she claimed had 'reached a tipping point that threatens social harmony, undermines trust in institutions and marginalises Jewish Australian citizens'. Pressure is mounting against Mr Albanese to implement 49 of Ms Segal's recommendations in the report, which advises stripping funding from universities and artists if they fail to act against antisemitism. The Labor government has not yet committed to the recommendations, but Mr Albanese indicated he was open to parts of the plan.
Daily Maverick
18-07-2025
- Politics
- Daily Maverick
Bloom dances dangerously close to ‘anti-Semitism denialism' in a hostile UCT campus climate
In this piece, David Saks has, on behalf of the South African Jewish Board of Deputies, authored a reply to Kevin Bloom's article in which the journalist reflects on the narrative that the council of the University of Cape Town had chosen to wilfully sacrifice donor funding on the altar of its so-called Gaza resolutions. Bloom writes that a pro-Israel lobby is attempting to shut down criticism of the Jewish state. Saks challenges this reflection. Those following the debate over the escalation of anti-Semitism at US universities will well remember the almost surreal occasion back in December 2023 when Harvard University's then president Claudine Gay could not bring herself to concede that calls for the 'genocide of Jews' would violate Harvard's rules on bullying and harassment. Asked this question before a congressional hearing, Gay essentially answered instead that it all depended on the context. It was a telling moment, and a revelatory one. More than any officially commissioned report, it demonstrated the extent to which even the most extreme anti-Semitic attitudes had come to be tolerated on leading US campuses, from the most senior leadership downwards. Anti-Semitism on university campuses continues to manifest at unprecedentedly high levels, not only in the US, but globally. South Africa has certainly not been immune to these trends, but, on the whole, it has been considerably less of a problem compared with what is happening abroad. Unfortunately, in recent years the University of Cape Town (UCT) has been something of an exception. Particularly in the aftermath of the 7 October 2023 terror attacks against Israel, but for some time even before that, Jewish students and faculty there have reported being subjected to a range of threats, insults and general abusive behaviour. Not unlike what happened at Harvard, the failure of the university to take appropriate action to address these incidents, combined with its move over the past year towards instituting a boycott of Israeli academia, has contributed to a campus climate that is increasingly anti-Semitic and unsafe for Jewish students and academics. A broadside against mainstream Jewish leadership in SA It is against this background that Kevin Bloom's latest article, which I consider to be a broadside against the mainstream Jewish leadership in South Africa, should be considered (Zionism untethered — inside the legal battle for the soul of UCT, 18 June 2025). In this piece, Bloom weighs in against a court application brought by Professor Adam Mendelsohn in respect of two resolutions adopted by the UCT council last year. How the purpose and substance of Mendelsohn's application was misrepresented by Bloom from a legal and technical point of view has since been adroitly unpacked by Elsa van Huyssteen. Suffice it to say here that contrary to the impression that Bloom tries to create, even a cursory reading of Mendelsohn's affidavits would show that the litigation is not about Zionism and the war in Gaza. Rather, it is about whether the UCT Council, in adopting the impugned resolutions, has exercised its powers 'in accordance with its members' fiduciary duties to UCT', and also over whether the resolutions themselves 'infringe on the right to academic freedom by prohibiting individual academics from pursuing research collaborations of their choice'. Van Huyssteen also points out that the application in no way concerns the contents and applicability of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance's definition of anti-Semitism, for all that Bloom tries to make out that Mendelsohn appeared 'to be insisting' on UCT adopting it. From the perspective of the South African Jewish Board of Deputies (SAJBD), a significant concern is that Bloom not only dismisses credible claims of unprecedented anti-Semitic abuse and harassment faced by Jewish students and staff on university campuses worldwide, including at UCT over the past 18 months, but also suggests these claims are fabricated to suppress criticism of Israel. This emerges most clearly in his quoting approvingly of an affidavit from Princeton University's Professor Joan Scott that has likewise been submitted to the UCT Council. According to Scott, [Zionist] students on US campuses 'express their discomfort in terms of feeling 'unsafe' or 'threatened' … when there is little or no evidence of any physical danger they have experienced'. On this Bloom comments, 'And so Daily Maverick could not help but wonder: Was this also the reality of Zionist fears on the UCT campus?' He adds that this would be for the Western Cape Division of the High Court to decide, but of course has already made his own view on the subject quite obvious. Beyond his misrepresentations over the purpose of the court application against UCT, what Bloom is also arguably doing here is engaging in what can broadly be characterised as 'anti-Semitism denialism'. According to this way of thinking, not only should claims made by Jews themselves about prejudice against them be treated with scepticism, but their very motives in making them should be called into question. It is not, in other words, only about Jews being objectively wrong when they speak out against anti-Semitism, but that they are being wrong on purpose because they have another agenda. Anti-Semitic prejudice To make an obvious point, portraying Jews as being capable of fabricating persecution narratives about themselves and coercing others into accepting them as true is itself a form of anti-Semitic prejudice. There is even a designated term for this, namely 'The Livingstone Formulation'. Coined by University of London academic David Hirsh, this focuses on the manner, particularly on the political left, in which accusations of anti-Semitism are (almost reflexively) responded to with counterclaims that the complainant is weaponising anti-Semitism to suppress criticism of Israel. As Hirsh shows, this rhetoric device is itself dishonest and propagates anti-Semitic stereotypes about Jewish power and deceit. Anti-Semitism denialism has a long history. Its most infamous form is Holocaust denial, which asserts that the systematic genocide of European Jewry during World War 2 did not occur and was fabricated by Jews for their own malicious purposes. Those who adhere to such beliefs are for the most part far right Nazi apologists, but anti-Semitism denialism often surfaces on the left as well. One thinks of the persistent insistence by acolytes of the former Soviet Union that there was no problem of anti-Semitism behind the Iron Curtain and that those claiming otherwise were simply engaging in anti-Soviet propaganda. Such knee-jerk defences on the part of the hard left continued throughout the Cold War era, even as Soviet Jewish dissidents were being dispatched to the gulags for such crimes against the state as learning Hebrew, practising their religion and wishing to immigrate to Israel. Then there are those who deny the persecutions that triggered the mass exodus of Jews from Arab-speaking countries following Israel's establishment. That countries like Syria, Iraq, Libya, Egypt and Yemen today have no or at best a few dozen Jews still living there, whereas prior to 1948 there were tens of thousands, is either never acknowledged, or attributed to the evil machinations of the Zionists themselves. As a local example of anti-Semitism denialism, I would remind readers of how last year then Minister of Justice Ronald Lamola blandly informed the international community that there was 'no anti-Semitism in South Africa' and that claims to the contrary were 'a nonsense'. This came just weeks after the SA Jewish Board of Deputies had met with President Cyril Ramaphosa and provided him with chapter and verse details on how local anti-Semitism levels had escalated by more than 600% following the 7 October 2023 massacres. It was also despite legal proceedings, both criminal and civil, having been instituted in a number of these cases. In the wake of Lamola's statements, social media was awash with claims that Zionist Jews were fabricating charges of anti-Semitism to divert attention away from what was happening on the Israel-Gaza front. The self-same insinuations that Bloom makes in his article, in other words. A common feature of anti-Semitism denialism in all these cases is that those propagating it do so in the face of extensive and conclusive evidence to the contrary. Which brings us to the issue about anti-Semitism on university campuses. Has there indeed been a significant escalation in this regard, as Jewish rights organisations insist, or, as Kevin Bloom and his ilk would have you believe, are such claims no more than a Zionist sleight of hand aimed at silencing and penalising those who speak out against Israel? In actuality, it is not a question at all. That university and college campuses globally have become hotbeds of anti-Semitism is attested to by a copious and ever-growing body of evidence that is as conclusive as it is damning. However much the actions and rhetoric of those concerned might be couched in anti-imperialist, anti-apartheid or anti-Zionist narratives, in practice it consistently manifests in Jews on campus being subjected to acts of intimidation, gaslighting, character assassination, exclusion, verbal or written insults and sometimes physical violence. Harassment, vandalism and assault Since the events of October 7 there have been a plethora of detailed investigative reports demonstrating the extent to which the situation has deteriorated at institutions of higher learning throughout the Western world. The Anti-Defamation League, which tracks incidents of anti-Semitic harassment, vandalism and assault in the US, found that incidents on college and university campuses spiked by 321% in 2023, most occurring after 7/10, and the 2024 figures were not much better. Typical examples of the incidents recorded were Jewish students being routinely confronted by militant anti-Israel activists making such statements as 'Death to Jews', 'go back to Poland' and 'the 7th of October is going to be every day for you'. Beyond the in-your-face abuse, insults and threats has been the practice of social shaming, whereby students and faculty are encouraged to avoid normalising relations with Jewish students. The parallel situation in the UK was described in a report by the Community Security Trust, whose purpose is to work for the safety and security of the UK Jewish community in December 2024. This found that in the academic years covered by the report (2022-2024) 325 university-related anti-Semitic incidents were recorded, which was more than double the figure recorded in the previous report. Recorded instances included 10 cases of assault and 21 of damage and desecration of Jewish property. Globally, leading universities are waking up to the fact that they have a real problem, and some at least have been doing something about it. One is the University of London's Goldsmiths College, which commissioned an independent inquiry that in due course concluded that Jewish students and staff had indeed experienced anti-Semitism in the course of their studies or work. The Council and Executive Board of Goldsmiths fully endorsed the findings, stating that anti-Semitism would not be tolerated and that the college would be 'acting against such behaviour as a form of racism'. Similarly, Harvard University established a task force 'to examine the recent history of anti-Semitism and its current manifestations on the Harvard campus with the aim of identifying causes of and contributing factors to anti-Jewish behaviours'. The final report of that body, released in April this year, confirmed that instances of anti-Semitic harassment at the university had reached unacceptably high levels. One of the most alarming indicators of the breakdown of Harvard's on-campus community was found to be the multiple accounts of social shunning that had emerged in the course of the investigation. From these two credible investigations (among others that have been conducted) one can easily see that anti-Semitism on both US and UK campuses has not been overstated or even invented by the Jews themselves, but is a genuine and pervasive menace. Since both were commissioned or conducted by the relevant academic institutions themselves, Bloom would not even have the supposed excuse of rejecting them on the grounds of their having been sponsored by Jewish organisations. Why, then, does he persist in disregarding this body of evidence? Regrettably, and in stark contrast to other South African university campuses, UCT has also reportedly witnessed a significant increase in anti-Semitic attacks. Contrary to the offensive strawman argument that Jews/Zionists seek to conflate all legitimate criticism of Israel with anti-Semitism, no mainstream Jewish leaders are in actuality seeking to shut down debate on this, or any other subject. Robust but acceptable discourse The problem rather is when what can be regarded as robust but acceptable discourse over issues that are well known to be highly emotive and bitterly contested goes beyond simply engaging in free speech to amount to intimidation, harassment, incitement to violence and racially charged hate speech. Those who wish to condemn Israel, even in extreme, exaggerated terms, have every right to do so. However, conveying intense hostility toward Jews who are connected to Israel in a way that violates their dignity, threatens their safety and deprives them of their right to express their own beliefs and opinions is another matter altogether, and indeed, must be regarded as anti-Semitic behaviour. Particularly since October 7, but also before that, the SAJBD received regular reports of anti-Semitic attacks. These have included Jewish students being physically assaulted while praying on campus, slapped, having posters they were carrying ripped out of their hands and torn up, and those displaying outward manifestations of their Judaism being crassly insulted and not infrequently threatened. All these incidents have been brought to the notice of the university, with disciplinary action being taken against one of the perpetrators, but not to date against others. There is another kind of harassment that is going on, more low level and not as egregious and in-your-face, but much more pervasive, and, from a psychological point of view, just as harmful. By way of example, a Jewish student at UCT reported sending a neutral question on a course WhatsApp group asking when their essays would be returned, to which another student replied: ' When Palestine is free', and to which several classmates responded with agreement, emojis, and affirmations. This was in a context that had nothing whatsoever to do with the Israel-Palestine issue, but was motivated solely by the student's being Jewish. The anti-Israel boycott resolution adopted by the UCT Council last year has only legitimised this kind of 'othering', exacerbating hostility towards Jewish students on campus, emboldening those who use anti-Zionism as a smokescreen for anti-Semitism, and reinforcing the idea that Jewish students must disavow Israel to be accepted. Bloom attempts to turn all of this on its head by holding anti-Zionist Jewish dissidents (like himself) to be victims of harassment and persecution by fellow Jews seeking to intimidate them into silence. This rather clumsy piece of misdirection quickly falls apart when considering the objective evidence of who is trying to censor who. On the contrary, it is those who wish to identify as Zionist and express views supportive of that ideology and of the State of Israel who are being bullied, smeared, silenced and sidelined. In a democratic society, this should not be allowed to happen anywhere. And that is especially true when it comes to universities, institutions whose fundamental purpose is to provide intellectual spaces where a full spectrum of opinions on the widest variety of topics can be safely expressed and civilly debated. DM
