Backlash over Congress Anti-Semitism Testimony

[Laan Yaa Mo]

Search The Times and The Sunday Times

Grovelling to wokeism has tipped our universities into an ethical void
The refusal to condemn antisemitism reveals the scale of the disaster engulfing higher education
Matthew Syed
Sunday December 10 2023, 12.10am GMT, The Times

If you want to gain a sense of the moral abyss into which universities have descended, please take a few moments to watch the video of the heads of three American universities testifying before Congress last week. The presidents of Harvard, MIT and the University of Pennsylvania were in Washington to give their insights into the surge of antisemitism across campuses.

Towards the end of the session an electrifying moment occurred that will, I suspect, come to be seen as a watershed in American history. Congresswoman Elise Stefanik asked a simple question to pierce through the evasions that had been offered up to that point: “Does calling for the genocide of Jews violate [your university’s] code of conduct or rules regarding bullying and harassment? Yes or no?”

The question was beautifully framed because it was one to which no decent person could say anything but “yes”. The answer didn’t depend on one’s views about a ceasefire or a two-state solution; it hinged only on basic humanity. Moreover, we all know that these people would have answered instantly if the question had been about the genocide of black people or indigenous Americans or virtually anyone else.

But this was a question about a different group. Jews. A group who according to the surrealist teachings of critical race theory, which has seeped like a poison into the minds of students, are suspect. A group that sit near the top of the hierarchy of racial “privilege”. A group who are oppressors, aggressors, colonisers. People whose human rights, according to this tortuous belief system, are in direct conflict with those of Palestinians. As Herbert Marcuse, the intellectual godfather of what we might call extreme wokeism, put it: “The exercise of civil rights by those who don’t have them presupposes the withdrawal of civil rights from those who prevent their exercise.”

And this is why they hesitated. Their faces worked. Their smiles rigidified. I am guessing rather like teachers during the Cultural Revolution who frantically self-monitored to ensure their remarks didn’t fall foul of the Red Guards, they were seeking to avoid transgressing woke ideology. “It depends on the context,” Sally Kornbluth of MIT said to gasps from the audience. Liz Magill of Penn dug deeper, saying that it was a “context-dependent decision”. You could see that they didn’t believe what they were saying. Their sentences were stilted. Their got lost in their own circumlocutions.

Pushed again, Magill sought to clarify, saying that such hate speech would only become harassment “when it became conduct”. Eh? Was this university leader telling us that harassment doesn’t consist in calling for Jews to die, but only in killing them? Was Hitler doing nothing wrong when writing Mein Kampf and building the infrastructure of the Holocaust but only crossed the line when his henchmen released Zyklon B into the gas chambers?

Apologists for the three women took to social media later to argue that this sinister spectacle was, in fact, evidence of a jolly good commitment to free speech; that their unwillingness to condemn calls for genocide showed their reverence for the First Amendment. Ah yes. We all saw that commitment to free speech when these same people connived in the non-platforming of speakers with right-leaning views, a trend that has exploded over the last decade. No, this wasn’t about free speech; it was about fear. These presidents were revealing dread of their own student bodies. And who can blame them? Professors who have violated woke strictures have been hounded out of their jobs (a female academic who said there are two sexes recently had to take a leave of absence after weeks of persecution); graffiti has been daubed on their homes; some have endured assaults. It is any wonder that a majority at universities admit to self-censoring? As one put it: “I learnt along with every other student to walk on eggshells for fear I may say the wrong thing.”

You perhaps won’t be surprised to hear that the three heads have spent recent days apologising as horrified donors have deserted them in droves. Last night Magill tendered her resignation as Penn president, although she remains a faculty member at the university’s Carey Law School. But the truth is that they performed a precious service by highlighting the disaster that has unfolded in higher education, not just in America but here, too. In the UK, it would be easy to focus on stories like Bristol University last week announcing that it had dropped the national anthem from graduation ceremonies or a sociology professor calling for a venue hosting a Jewish event to be “blown up”. But these are mere pixels in a picture whose totality has to be glimpsed to recognise the scale of the debacle.

This brings me to perhaps the most pernicious thing of all. Conventional wisdom suggests that woke ideology has conferred soft power on the “left” which, in time, will translate into political power and (if you care about left-wing politics) greater social justice. This rests, let me suggest, on a hideous conflation. Wokeism has nothing to do with left-wing politics or social justice; it is more akin to a kind of religious fundamentalism. I mean, how is the condition of a kid living in a tower block materially improved by performative activism about “intersectionality” or pedantic quibbles about “cultural appropriation”? How are their lives enhanced by adolescent thought police eviscerating yet another campus victim for some arcane instance of wrongthink?

This isn’t an agenda for the working classes; indeed, nobody with the slightest contact with the real world has the faintest idea what these kids, indoctrinated into a farrago of unfalsifiable pseudo-ideologies, are babbling on about when they proclaim that “words are violence” or that “feelings are facts”. No, this is a luxury belief system, a doctrine of upper-middle-class adolescents whose dawning realisation that their soggy humanities degrees are not going to get them far in life has coalesced into a searing and increasingly unhinged hatred of their own nations and histories.

And this explains perhaps the most conspicuous political paradox of our age: why has the rise of economic inequality not led to the election of left-leaning governments whose raison d’être is (or should be) to offer redress for social injustice? Why has it benefited populists such as Trump, Farage and Meloni, whose policies often shaft the aspirational poor? The reason, I’d suggest, is that most working-class people are even more repulsed by woke ideologues and their rampant anti-western, antisemitic bias than by their demagogic opponents. And I don’t blame them. In this sense, wokeism hasn’t merely undermined our universities; it has ruinously split the patriotic left — the kind personified by great figures like FDR, Ernest Bevin and Attlee. This should not just make us sad but shudderingly angry in an age where we need a new social contract more than ever.

But let us finish with universities. I suspect most people can see why we’ve ended up at this impasse: appeasement. Departments have serially genuflected before wokeism, acquiescing in a million little retreats on cancellation, harassment and non-platforming. This has to stop and stop now. For unless universities stand up for open inquiry and empirical rigour, they will not merely squander more donations but what’s left of their intellectual credibility. And what then would be their purpose?

[Whistler]

I am always amused when right leaning commentators trot out the word 'woke', such a hackneyed expression that no longer has any meaning apart from its use at hurling insults.

There is little doubt that Colleges are in fact left leaning, one of the reasons why. A recent survey found that only 23% of Republicans believe in higher education, so they have withdrawn from participation in this sector of education. They do not believe in higher education! I can think of very few nations in the world that has a cohort of anti education sentiment apart from other religious fundamentalist nations. Jehovah Witnesses and other cult like groups also oppose higher education, like Republicans they particularly oppose the arts and courses like philosophy. Why, because they oppose free thinking.

If the GOP refuse to engage in the support of higher education, that only leaves progressives in that sector.

In this case the question asked was a wedge question, from one of the most extreme right wing Senators in America, one that still supports Santos and that says a lot. I would think carefully before answering one of her loaded questions as well.

[Laan Yaa Mo]

I am always amused when Whistler comes up with his stock answers in defence of the extremist views of woke. He seems to forget, or is unaware, that many liberals and people on the left are also critical of woke and its silly views. Criticism of woke is not confined to the right. Furthermore, the writer also mentions the damage woke has caused in the U.K. There are not many members of the U.S. Republican Party living there, no?

Or perhaps you agree with woke's anti-semetic remarks? Up to you.

[Whistler]

I am always amused when Whistler comes up with his stock answers in defence of the extremist views of woke.

Now that says it all.

LYM, ever thought about commenting on the substance of a post?

[Laan Yaa Mo]

I am always amused when right leaning commentators trot out the word 'woke', such a hackneyed expression that no longer has any meaning apart from its use at hurling insults.

It looks like you pulled another boner, Whistler. The writer. Matthew Syed, was a candidate for the Labour Party, and is hardly a right leaning commentator. It rather sums up your political acumen, no?

[Whistler]

I am always amused when right leaning commentators trot out the word 'woke', such a hackneyed expression that no longer has any meaning apart from its use at hurling insults.

It looks like you pulled another boner, Whistler. The writer. Matthew Syed, was a candidate for the Labour Party, and is hardly a right leaning commentator. It rather sums up your political acumen, no?

I did read the article, next question?

The guy stood for the Labor party 22 years ago FFS, the then leader Tony Blair was about as far right as any labor leader has been in the last 100 years. He has since joined the Conservative party. Of course he is a right leaning commentator.

Once again, care to comment on the substance of what I posted, or just interested in taking cheap shots?

[jackspratt]

The guy stood for the Labor party 22 years ago FFS, ........... He has since joined the Conservative party.

Has he?

Do you have a link for that?

[Whistler]

The guy stood for the Labor party 22 years ago FFS, ........... He has since joined the Conservative party.

Has he?

Do you have a link for that?

My apologies, his wiki profile said he endorsed Hunt to be leader in the 2019 election for conservative leader, which did not necessarily describe him as a member of the party.

So let me back off and describe him as generally being an opponent of the Labor party, to be balanced, he has not been a fan of certain conservative policies as well

[Udon Map]

... many liberals and people on the left are also critical of woke and its silly views.

Yes, but the problem for the U.S. is that the left/Dems (take your pick) are unwilling to stand up to the woke people and tell them that their views are unacceptable. Instead, the Democratic party has been pandering to them.

[jackspratt]

Yes, but the problem for the U.S. is that the left/Dems (take your pick) are unwilling to stand up to the woke people and tell them that their views are unacceptable. Instead, the Democratic party has been pandering to them.

Bad enough in its own right, but pales into insignificance in its impact when you compare it to the abject failure of the GOP/conservatives to call out Trump for many years now.

[Udon Map]

Yes, but the problem for the U.S. is that the left/Dems (take your pick) are unwilling to stand up to the woke people and tell them that their views are unacceptable. Instead, the Democratic party has been pandering to them.

Bad enough in its own right, but pales into insignificance in its impact when you compare it to the abject failure of the GOP/conservatives to call out Trump for many years now.

Agreed.

[marjamlew]

Everytime I see the word woke I think of this slightly amusing meme:

[Whistler]

Nice one Mr M.

The world has turned in recent years, intolerance has inceased to a disturbing level. For some there is no middle road, without any doubt this has been driven by those that have taken control over the conservative side of politics, aided and abbetted by a concentration of media in the hands of a few.

'Woke' for them is anybody who is not in locked step with a highly conservative agenda. Genuine loony left is lumped together with the moderate left. also lumped into the same bucket are those who are middle of the road (where I identify myself). It too often includes moderate conservatives, the term RINO is as pejorative as 'Woke'. Lies are now called 'Post Truth' or 'Alternative facts', childish name calling is de ri·gueur.

In the past few days, at a Trump Rally in Durham, New Hampshire, the host asked the MAGA crowd if they supported Trump being a day one dictator....the crowd roared its approval. That is frightening, and would have been inconceivable even a decade ago.

I still remember the days of manning voting booths in the past. If somebody did a coffee run, they took orders from liberals, labor, the greens and other parties. If somebody needed a toilet break, others would take their pamphlets and hand them out until the poll worker returned. Genuine tolerance and respect for others despite them having a different point of view.

Sad to see that attitude be destroyed by Right Wing extremists, no doubt in my mind whatsoever it is these vandals responsible for this degradation of the political agenda.

[Laan Yaa Mo]

Nice one Mr M.

The world has turned in recent years, intolerance has inceased to a disturbing level. For some there is no middle road, without any doubt this has been driven by those that have taken control over the conservative side of politics, aided and abbetted by a concentration of media in the hands of a few.

'Woke' for them is anybody who is not in locked step with a highly conservative agenda. Genuine loony left is lumped together with the moderate left. also lumped into the same bucket are those who are middle of the road (where I identify myself). It too often includes moderate conservatives, the term RINO is as pejorative as 'Woke'. Lies are now called 'Post Truth' or 'Alternative facts', childish name calling is de ri·gueur.

In the past few days, at a Trump Rally in Durham, New Hampshire, the host asked the MAGA crowd if they supported Trump being a day one dictator....the crowd roared its approval. That is frightening, and would have been inconceivable even a decade ago.

I still remember the days of manning voting booths in the past. If somebody did a coffee run, they took orders from liberals, labor, the greens and other parties. If somebody needed a toilet break, others would take their pamphlets and hand them out until the poll worker returned. Genuine tolerance and respect for others despite them having a different point of view.

Sad to see that attitude be destroyed by Right Wing extremists, no doubt in my mind whatsoever it is these vandals responsible for this degradation of the political agenda.

The usual whitewash from the Whistler. Nothing surprising there.

[Whistler]

LYM. Here is a refreshing thought for you. Instead of making a vacuous comment on a post. Why not at least attempt to address the substance of that post with a well thought out and balanced statement.

[Laan Yaa Mo]

You might want to try reading the commentary before running off to display your displeasure thinking it had something to do with right-wingers trying to get a leg up on you. Do you know what the question was that was put to the representatives of the esteemed universities? Do you understand why they hesitated to provide a yes or no answer? How would you Whistler answer the question, “Does calling for the genocide of Jews violate [your...] code of conduct or rules regarding bullying and harassment? Yes or no?”

[Whistler]

You might want to try reading the commentary before running off to display your displeasure thinking it had something to do with right-wingers trying to get a leg up on you. Do you know what the question was that was put to the representatives of the esteemed universities? Do you understand why they hesitated to provide a yes or no answer? How would you Whistler answer the question, “Does calling for the genocide of Jews violate [your...] code of conduct or rules regarding bullying and harassment? Yes or no?”

I already answered this. You referenced my response to the post by another poster, not earlier posts, not posts on other threads, not comments on the exceeding boring Gay's Cup posts you make, you posted against one post only and the comment was meaningles dribble like so many of your posts.

[Laan Yaa Mo]

I am not sure why you are making this so complicated. It only requires a yes or no answer.

Does calling for the genocide of Jews violate [your...] code of conduct or rules regarding bullying and harassment? Yes or no, big boy?

[jackspratt]

I am probably as liberal as you can get on this Forum - but even I can see, and it is patently obvious, that intolerance is not a preserve of the right/conservatives in today's political climate.

And neither is the prevalence of meaningless dribble - or is that drivel?

[Whistler]

I am probably as liberal as you can get on this Forum - but even I can see, and it is patently obvious, that intolerance is not a preserve of the right/conservatives in today's political climate.

And neither is the prevalence of meaningless dribble - or is that drivel?

Not many things are exclusive Jack, but do you think the level of intolerance is equal on both wings of the political spectrum