Spotlight: Cornell
The Cornell Daily Sun has presented this head-exploding screed:
We, the undersigned Cornell faculty, staff and alumni, strongly support the student activists who have disrupted business as usual to protest the University’s conduct amid the horrifying, ongoing assault on Palestinian populations. The students who have mobilized under the banner of the Coalition for Mutual Liberation have fulfilled the best principles of global citizenship, engaged learning and social justice. We applaud their principled struggle.
Commending the students for opposing the wanton destruction of Palestinian lives and territories does not go far enough. These young people are, quite simply, the best of us. They have shown tremendous courage in a climate of fear and repression. We thank them for their commitment and integrity. We will do what we can to ensure that they are not unduly targeted.
The CML activists have made significant personal sacrifices to publicize the demand that Cornell divest from corporations that are linked to Israeli militarism, occupation and collective punishment. Their nonviolent demonstrations have provided a moral compass at a time of official hypocrisy.
In countless ways, the leaders of our society and our institution have signaled that silence is the only acceptable response to the profound suffering within and beyond Gaza. Cornell administrators have exacerbated campus anxiety by attempting to stifle student dissent with a draconian “Interim Expressive Activity Policy,” bypassing the faculty senate. In a moment of anguish for many members of our community, the University has chosen the path of intimidation and bureaucratic aggression.
The crackdown on student protest at Cornell is part of a disturbing trend throughout our society. Efforts to smother critiques of the state of Israel have dovetailed with attacks on Diversity, Equity and Inclusion, ethnic studies and other vital dimensions of modern education. Wealthy elites and reactionary forces wish to deepen the atmosphere of conformity, social apathy and narrow careerism on campus.
The names of more than 300 faculty signatories to the letter can be seen here.
I cannot imagine paying tuition for my child (or me) to attend any school that would hire a single professor or teacher capable of signing a name to that dishonest, historically obtuse, jargon-filled declaration. Not only is it proof positive that a signer has been rendered stupid and irresponsible by bias, but also that this alleged scholar lacks integrity as well as the critical thinking skills God gave an ocelot. As Legal Insurrection (which gets the pointer for this post) observed, “Just stunning. Do these people realize that Israel is the country that was attacked on October 7th?”
Good question, but the shocking answer is that they do realize that, and still issued this garbage. Wanton destruction and profound suffering is what happens to people whose government starts wars with sneak attacks, terrorist tactics, rapes and the murder of civilians. The prospect of wanton destruction and profound suffering is called a deterrent, and the idea throughout the history of civilization has been to discourage such atrocities by making the consequences too horrible to risk.
Young people protesting against the natural and just consequences of starting a brutal war are not “the best of us,” or even the best of anything. They are willfully blind enablers of terrorism as well as ignorant fools, much like the professors who are lauding them. Virtually all of our major universities are stuffed with people like this, and it has become a serious threat to American society as well as its values.
Obviously, matters should never have been allowed to reach this sorry state, but it does no good to moan about that now. Responsible companies and organizations need to stop hiring graduates from such institutions until they either shrivel up and die from being starved of applicants, or reform.
Meanwhile, David Brooks of the New York Times proved that he isn’t always influenced by his progressive captors at the Times to the extent of full Stockholm Syndrome-triggered compliance with leftist cant. In a detailed, fair and thorough analysis of the challenge facing Israel, Brooks signed his name to this op-ed (I have rescued it from the NYT’s paywall so you can read it all) headlined, “What Would You Have Israel Do to Defend Itself?” I would recommend it to Cornell’s pro-Palestinian students and the faculty cheering them on, but Brooks deals with facts, logic and reality, whereas all they can perceive are chimaeras like “global community” and “social justice.”
Ethics Alarms 
I read the Brook’s piece and while on balance I agree his assessment the thrust of his op ed is that while no one is offering an alternative effective strategy Israel must try to win the hearts and minds of the Palestinians. He condemns Israel’s policy makers of being insensitive to the needs of the Palestinians but fails to acknowledge the fundamental biases of those keeping Hamas in power.
Israel could cease all hostilities rebuild all of Gaza and the West Bank for the Palestinians and they won’t be satisfied until Israel ceases to be. What is apparent to me is that Israel is being forced by the world to negotiate against itself. Israel should tell Biden to either support them or face the strong probability that it will take measures to eliminate its enemies and those funding its enemies once and for all.
Boy, I didn’t read it that way. He states outright that Israel has to win the war and eliminate Hamas, and that there’s no safe way to win the war without eliminating Hamas. The fact that the world is turning against Israel for defending itself just proves, once again, that most of the world is anti-Semitic. Biden’s waffling shows that he and his party are cowards and have no integrity, but we knew that. Brooks is too smart to give lip service to the delusion that if Israel is less than brutal to Gaza now, maybe the Palestinians won’t hate the Jews so much and not want to wipe them off the map. It astounds me that anyone could believe that, especially after Oct. 7. It’s been what, three generations of Palestinians who have never been taught anything but to hate Jews? And the same number of generations of Jews who grew up knowing that Palestinians would kill them given half a chance? How do you ever get past that with a “two state solution”? Answer: you don’t. Ever.
Jack. I agree with everything you said. It was the statements about Israel’s past indifference to the Palestinians. I believe he used the term callousness of the Israeli government toward the Palestinians.
I too would be somewhat callous towards others who resent my existence and try to exterminate me.
I suppose my interpretation is predicated on what I read as a mitigating factor of the October 7 attack.
Once the blowback hits, no doubt we’ll hear from a few of those 300 signatories as they claim that they never read the screed before signing it; that they were misled; and/or that they have Jewish friends so they are not anti-semites.
Remember, the pro-Hamas students at Cornell bravely threatened to shoot or stab Jewish students. Jewish students were told to avoid the Kosher dining hall and hide. This petition is in support of such activity and in protest to the University’s response to try to keep the Jewish students from all having to flee the campus for their own safety (22% of the students). While threatening to shoot and stab people is technically nonviolent, I don’t think bragging about it is a good approach.