Discussion for article #234031
This is what Netanyahu’s reign has wrought. Shame on him!
Netanyahu can be blamed for many things, but this student’s prejudice isn’t one of them.
1 Like
So, is the student who asked the stunningly awful question, and who still doesn’t seem to to have the first freaking clue what the real problem was since she’s apologizing for the phrasing and not for the underlying prejudices that gave rise to them, one of those people who just goes by one name, like “Cher” or “Fabio,” or did we, perhaps edit out the sentence where her first name was given?
I really hate having to use one of my ten free NYT clicks to get an answer to that.
Netanyahu is a prick, but something seems a bit amiss about blaming him for the fact that these kids seem to think that alone among UCLA students, Jewish students can’t be trusted to be unbiased. Rather than blaming Netanyahu, people should be asking why these students walk into this meeting assuming that a Jewish student can’t be trusted to be fair.
1 Like
This just goes to show that you can start from a good place - a policy of divestment with the goal of ending Israel’s apartheid of Palestinians, and end up in a very bad place - as an anti-Semitic bigot.
4 Likes
My wife and I are Jewish. Neither of us could be described as Zionists. The sad irony is that my mother-in-law makes some of the same assumptions about our views on Israel as the student asking questions in this story.
2 Likes
Better way to phrase a question and still hide the possibility you’re bigoted: “What are your thoughts on the (fill in the blank) issue that is being raised?”
Having been young at one time and–yes–phrasing some things stupidly, I cannot come out full force and condemn this person without knowing a lot more context – this article seems short on that. I have stumbled a few times in my life and have grown to be a better person, a more empathetic person (I’d like to think … and I’ve been told as much) – and I can only hope the young adults in question will desire to grow from their experience.
That said, there is no excuse to basically accuse someone of likely being unfair, prejudicial, etc., in their deliberation only because they are (again, fill in the blank) and couching that accusation in a question.
1 Like
Interest question. Can a Catholic be trusted to be impartial on matters of abortion or birth control? Can a farm-owner be trusted to be impartial on crop subsidies? Is it only economic interests that create conflicts or can religious identification or group identification? What about national origin or dual citizenship? Is it ok to ask a candidate for public office their views on Israel? Is it not ok to ask the question if the candidate is Jewish?
When I lived in California, I worked for two different Jewish surgeons (different jobs). Neither of them were Zionist; neither had much good to say about Israel’s treatment of the Palestinian issue. Truthfully, they were fairly indifferent on the subject of Israel the few times we spoke about the Middle East. Neither were religious, they called themselves “Lapsed Jews.” At both offices, we had at least one Muslim office worker. I do miss San Francisco.
1 Like
IF YOu SUpport DIVestment and DOn’t LOVe IsraeL WIth aLL Your HEart, You’re BASICALLY anti-semite HItler!1!!!1!!!one!1!1!!
1 Like
That question came up surrounding JFKs presidential run. On the other matter, not sure if a president can have dual citizenship.
1 Like
I would say these kids aren’t “anti semitic bigots,” per se. They are people who have assumed certain attitudes which certainly tap into traditional anti-semitic bias (e.g., Jews being particularly clannish). I think as a whole, people have a tendency to assume that any manifestation of prejudice makes someone a bigot, instead of saying that people can have wrong ideas, make jokes, be offensive or insensitive without necessarily bearing any real malice or bias to another group. Rather than say “these kids are bigots,” we should say “these kids are wrong,” and explain why this is problematic.
1 Like
Here is a comment from the NYT that sheds a little more light on the matter:
It should be pointed out that the four students who opposed Ms. Beyda were Fabienne Roth, from Switzerland, Negeen Sadeghi-Movahed, an Iranian-American, Manjot Singh, a Sikh, and Sofia Moreno Haq, a member of the Muslim Student Association. It seems to me that the issue here has a lot more to do with the make-up of the UCLA Judicial Board than it does with pervasive antisemitism on campus.
1 Like
I disagree. I think that you are letting them off too easily by simply saying they are “wrong.” When someone has “assumed certain attitudes which certainly tap into traditional anti-semitic bias”, I think that they can be described fairly as bigoted. They were also bullies.
Also, this is a state school, and they are an official body of that institution controlling appointments and benefits. As such, I think that they are state actors when they sit in their official capacity, and they are subject to constitutional requirements that are not binding on private individuals. Their activities were shameful, and the school should be investigating this and bringing them up on formal disciplinary charges if they violated any terms or conditions of their office. This is not the public square where you can have and express the most hateful of opinions, they are acting in an official capacity, and they need to be reminded of that.
By the way, I would take the same position if it was Ms. Haq applying for the seat and the question came from a Jewish student. It is offensive behavior that must not be sanctioned by the University by looking the other way.
It wasn’t one student’s prejudice. It was the groupthink assumption that Jews are unable to do anything but think about Jews and what is beneficial to them. That equates to automatic support for Israel, which is now total anathema to UC’s student body: they just voted to divest from Israel, as they did with South Africa in the 80s.
So the animus towards Israel, based on many acts by Netanyahu that were more than questionable, translates into animus towards an American Jew.