RSS
I Was Shunned at Princeton for Being a Zionist; We Must Actively Ensure Academic Diversity Now
A pro-Hamas group splattered red paint, symbolizing spilled blood, on an administrative building at Princeton University. Photo: Screenshot
Universities were once celebrated as arenas of free thought, where diverse ideas could challenge one another, and truth could emerge from debate. However, a new form of intolerance has gripped campuses worldwide, stifling intellectual diversity and turning academic institutions into echo chambers.
My experience at Princeton University illustrates the extent of this culture of suppression and the dangerous consequences it poses for education.
On March 27, 2023, I was invited to speak about Israel’s legal system dispute at the Center for Jewish Life at Princeton. Although I have never hidden my Jewish identity, this was the first time I was invited to speak publicly about Israel. Until then, I was focused on my work as associate research scholar and lecturer, as part of the James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions in the Department of Politics at Princeton University.
As the event date approached, several professors from other departments pressured the organizers to cancel my lecture, arguing that my Zionist viewpoints had no place on campus. The irony was glaring: a university that prides itself on diversity was actively working to silence a viewpoint that didn’t fit the accepted narrative.
On the day of the lecture, I was escorted through a back entrance by campus security. A group of student protesters, encouraged by faculty members, had blocked the main entrance. Their signs read “Racist,” “Democracy for Israelis and Palestinians,” “No Democracy under Apartheid,” and “No Blank Check for Apartheid.”
These were not calls for dialogue, but declarations that dissenting voices were unwelcome. The protest wasn’t about what I might say; it was about sending a message: those who defy the prevailing ideology will face resistance.
Some rioters and demonstrators forcefully entered the building, creating a tense atmosphere charged with disapproval from a faculty that once championed open inquiry. Unfortunately, the lecture was repeatedly disrupted — shouts through megaphones, the beating of drums outside the hall, and verbal outbursts interrupting nearly every sentence from people inside. I could not finish a single sentence. After enduring these disruptions for an extended period, I saw no point in continuing the lecture. Ultimately, the police escorted me back to my car.
Today, many academics see their role as enforcing ideological conformity, leaving no room for genuine debate. My lecture was just one skirmish in a broader battle to reshape the university into a space devoid of diverse perspectives. The hostility extended beyond the lecture hall, revealing a deeper and more systemic issue within the academic environment.
Despite the staunch defense of the Madison program and the colleagues who worked with me on a daily basis, the attacks against me did not stop. Professors defamed me, wrote letters against me, tried to cancel my course, and organized a media persecution campaign. The backlash against my presence escalated in campus publications, where I was labeled an extremist — not for my work, but for my conservative and Zionist beliefs. This wasn’t about academic discourse; it was an ideological purge.
What saddened me the most was that my request for a personal meeting with the president or dean of the university was refused.
This episode is emblematic of a larger trend: the suffocation of intellectual diversity and the rise of a new orthodoxy that threatens the foundational values of academic freedom.
At universities everywhere, professors have been pushing for changes to the hiring process that would prioritize ideological alignment over academic excellence. Their goal is clear: to exclude scholars who don’t fit the desired mold, ensuring a uniform intellectual environment.
The future of education depends on our ability to resist this tide of conformity and reclaim the university as a place where all ideas, even those that challenge the status quo, can be heard.
Universities are acting more like the institutions of the Middle Ages that enforced a single, dominant ideology. Back then, academic freedom was severely constrained by religious dogma. Today, the ideological gatekeeping is no less restrictive, though now it is secular in nature.
The shift toward a singular ideological stance threatens the foundational mission of higher education. Just as medieval institutions imposed theological constraints on academic pursuits, today’s universities enforce ideological boundaries that stifle critical thinking and the pursuit of truth. In this climate, truth is no longer the product of open inquiry but is dictated by those who hold power, leaving little room for constructive debate. The once-vibrant marketplace of ideas has been reduced to a space where only approved viewpoints are allowed to thrive.
This environment fundamentally undermines the pursuit of truth. In spaces where debate is suppressed, critical thinking cannot flourish. Truth has become a function of power, and without the ability to challenge and question, we lose our capacity to scrutinize our own assumptions. Individuals are reduced to caricatures — superficial, unrefined, and lacking depth. Instead of striving to uncover truth, as in propaganda films from authoritarian regimes, the academy employs aggressive tactics to mask its own distance from it.
The impact on students is profound. Many now self-censor, fearing the consequences of expressing views that might place them outside the accepted narrative. They’ve learned that challenging dominant viewpoints can lead to social exclusion or academic penalties. Rather than being trained in critical thinking, students are being conditioned to conform intellectually.
Universities now stand at a crossroads. They can continue down this path, fostering a culture of ideological uniformity and suppressing free exchange. Or, they can return to their foundational principles as places where ideas are tested, debated, and refined. True pluralism goes beyond superficial diversity; it requires an environment where conflicting viewpoints can coexist and engage. The most crucial pluralism to champion is not one of appearances, but one of ideas.
Once, scholars would say, “Here are my arguments. What are yours?” Today, the spirit of intellectual inquiry is under siege. The new mantra is, “Here are my arguments, and if you dare to disagree, we will remove you — and still call ourselves pluralists.”
We are in a state of emergency. Universities must go beyond mere statements of commitment to free speech, such as the Chicago Principles, and take active measures to restore ideological balance. The situation is so dire that it now demands affirmative action, not just to protect academic freedom, but to actively recruit conservative voices that have been systematically excluded.
We typically think of affirmative action in terms of race or gender, with the aim of fostering a diversity of perspectives, particularly those that have been marginalized or excluded. If admission to academic institutions were solely based on academic excellence, conservatives would have no trouble being admitted and advancing. However, in recent years, not only has excellence ceased to be the sole criterion, but conservatives have also become singled out. Paradoxically, despite their academic achievements, they are often excluded because of their views. Thus, to truly ensure a diversity of perspectives within academia, we must cultivate ideological diversity, not just gender or racial diversity. Affirmative action should extend to protecting and representing conservative views, adapting the existing mechanisms to include voices that are currently marginalized and silenced.
Mitchell Langbert and Sean Stevens highlight the severe ideological imbalance among faculty at major universities, particularly within the social sciences. Their study found that the overall ratio of registered Democrats to Republicans among faculty members is 8.5:1. In specific fields, this disparity becomes even more extreme. In sociology, the ratio is 27:1 in favor of Democrats, and in anthropology, it skyrockets to 42.2:1.
This troubling trend is not limited to specific fields; it also extends across some of the most prestigious universities. Brown University has a ratio of 21.3:1, indicating a significant imbalance, while Columbia’s ratio of 24.5:1 shows a slightly higher dominance of liberal perspectives. Yale’s ratio reaches 31.3:1, reflecting an even greater skew toward one political ideology. Princeton University presents a more serious case with a ratio of 40:1, demonstrating a pronounced lack of conservative viewpoints. At the top of the scale is Harvard, where the ratio reaches a staggering 88:1, highlighting an overwhelming and nearly complete absence of ideological balance.
These figures underscore the urgency of adopting corrective measures to foster a more balanced and intellectually diverse academic environment. The marketplace of ideas must remain vibrant and contested. Otherwise, the very essence of learning is lost.
My experience of persecution is not a personal problem. It is a symptom of a much more severe issue. I was persecuted because I am part of a conservative viewpoint, which is one that is systematically excluded from the academic discourse.
The time has come to reclaim the true mission of the university. We must ensure our academic spaces remain open to all voices, not just those that comfortably fit the prevailing narrative. Intellectual freedom is not just an academic ideal — it’s the bedrock of a vibrant society. It must be defended, even when inconvenient, because only then can we keep the pursuit of knowledge alive.
Ronen Shoval taught and conducted research at Princeton University during the 2022-23 academic year. His latest book, “Holiness and Society: A Socio-Political Exploration of the Mosaic Tradition,” was published by Routledge, 2024.
The post I Was Shunned at Princeton for Being a Zionist; We Must Actively Ensure Academic Diversity Now first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Israel for First Time Claims Responsibility for Killing of Hamas Leader Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran
Iranians attend the funeral procession of assassinated Hamas chief Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran, Iran, Aug. 1, 2024. Photo: Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via REUTERS
Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz on Monday acknowledged for the first time that Israel killed Hamas chief Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran in July.
“These days, when the Houthi terrorist organization is firing missiles at Israel, I want to convey a clear message to them at the beginning of my remarks: We have defeated Hamas, we have defeated Hezbollah, we have blinded Iran’s defense systems and damaged the production systems, we have toppled the Assad regime in Syria, we have dealt a severe blow to the axis of evil, and we will also deal a severe blow to the Houthi terrorist organization in Yemen, which remains the last to stand,” Katz said during an event honoring defense ministry personnel.
Israel will “damage their strategic infrastructure, and we will behead their leaders. Just as we did to Haniyeh, [Hamas leader Yahya] Sinwar, and [Hezbollah leader Hassan] Nasrallah in Tehran, Gaza, and Lebanon [respectively] — we will do it in Hodeidah and Sana’a,” Katz continued. “Whoever raises a hand against Israel will have their hand cut off, and the long arm of the IDF [Israel Defense Forces] will strike them and settle the score.”
Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis are all internationally designated terrorist organizations backed by Iran. Katz’s comments came after the Houthi rebels in Yemen fired a ballistic missile at Tel Aviv over the weekend. The Houthis have also been attacking commercial shipping in the Red Sea for more than a year, saying they are acting in solidarity with the Palestinians in Gaza and will prevent all ships from heading to Israeli ports.
Haniyeh, the exiled political chief of Hamas, was killed in an explosion in Iran’s capital city on July 31. Iran had accused Israel of carrying out the assassination and vowed revenge; however, for months the Israeli government had neither confirmed nor denied responsibility for Haniyeh’s death.
Haniyeh was based in Qatar and had been the face of Hamas’s during the Israel-Hamas war, which the Palestinian terroris group launched with its invasion of and massacre across southern Israel last Oct. 7.
Following Haniyeh’s death, Sinwar was named the terrorist group’s overall leader after being its top official in Gaza. Sinwar, who masterminded the Oct. 7 attacks on Israel, was killed by Israeli forces in Gaza in October.
The post Israel for First Time Claims Responsibility for Killing of Hamas Leader Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
‘Should Scare Every American’: Top Trump Adviser Mike Waltz Explains Dangers of Iran Getting Nuclear Weapons
US Rep. Mike Waltz (R-FL) speaks on Day 1 of the Republican National Convention (RNC) at the Fiserv Forum in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, US, July 15, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Mike Segar
US Rep. Mike Waltz (R-FL), who was recently tapped to serve as the White House national security adviser for the incoming Trump administration, outlined in a new interview why Iran’s nuclear program could pose a major threat to the United States and must be stopped.
During an interview with Daily Wire co-founder and conservative podcast host Ben Shapiro, Waltz said that his constituents often do not understand how Iran’s nuclear ambitions impact American interests. The lawmaker explained that Iran obtaining nuclear weapons could kick-start an arms race and geopolitical firestorm in the Middle East, potentially forcing the US to become more involved in the region militarily.
“No. 1, if Iran gets a nuke, the Saudis are going to want a nuke, the Turks are going to want a nuke, and the Middle East exploding, not literally but figuratively, in a nuclear arms race should scare every American,” Waltz said.
Though Waltz conceded that nuclear proliferation in the Middle East would not necessarily result in “World War III,” he asserted that it would be “catastrophic for the world.”
The lawmaker added that a nuclear-armed Iran would endanger Israel, which he described as America’s “critical ally, morally and historically and geopolitically,” and that the US should take threats by Iranian leadership to eliminate Israel seriously.
“We should believe [Iran’s so-called ‘supreme leader,’ Ayatollah Ali Khamenei] who intends to wipe Israel off the face of the earth if they have nukes,” Waltz said.
Waltz also praised Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for “exposing Iran’s air defenses so that they literally are naked right now and on their back foot.” He appeared to be referring to Israel’s precision airstrikes on Iranian military and air defense sites in October which devastated the regime’s air-defense system and ballistic missile program. The strikes were in response to Iran’s ballistic missile barrage against Israel weeks earlier.
Waltz went on to say that the incoming Trump administration plans on “hitting” Iran’s finances throughout the Middle East and stopping the flow of money “out of Tehran into Beirut and into [Iran’s] proxies in Syria.”
Iran has supported several terrorist proxies throughout the Middle East, including Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon — both of which have been devastated by Israeli military operations in recent months. The Iranian regime also backed the recently ousted Assad regime in Syria, where Israel launched limited operations to ensure security at its northeastern amid uncertainty about Syria’s future.
“I hope that all of this has Hamas so isolated. They really thought the cavalry was coming from the north with Hezbollah. Now, that has been shown not to be true; Hamas has every exit blocked except one, and that is to release our hostages if you want to live,” Waltz said.
Harsh US sanctions levied on Iran under the Trump administration from 2017-2021 crippled the Iranian economy and led its foreign exchange reserves to plummet. US President-elect Donald Trump and his Republican supporters in the US Congress have criticized the Biden administration for renewing billions of dollars in US sanctions waivers, which had the effect of unlocking frozen funds and allowing the country to access previously inaccessible hard currency.
US intelligence agencies have for years labeled Iran as the world’s foremost state sponsor of terrorism, noting it devotes significant sums of money and weapons each year to supporting proxies across the Middle East such as Hamas and Hezbollah.
The post ‘Should Scare Every American’: Top Trump Adviser Mike Waltz Explains Dangers of Iran Getting Nuclear Weapons first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
US Far-Left Lawmakers Call for End of Probe Into Spain for Barring Ships Bringing Arms to Israel
US Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) addresses attendees as she takes part in a protest calling for a ceasefire in Gaza outside the US Capitol, in Washington, DC, US, Oct. 18, 2023. Photo: REUTERS/Leah Millis
A cohort of American progressive lawmakers has called for the US Federal Maritime Commission (FMC) to drop its investigation into Spain for reportedly denying port entry to cargo vessels transporting US weapons to Israel.
Democratic Reps. Rashida Tlaib (MI), Cori Bush (MO) and Summer Lee (PA) on Friday sent a letter to the FMC, expressing “deep concern” over its recently announced investigation into Spain’s decision to “deny port entry to ships carrying weapons bound for the Israeli government.” The three congresswomen lauded Spain for enacting an arms embargo against Israel, citing what they called the “ongoing genocide” of Palestinians in Gaza, where Israel has been fighting Hamas since the terrorist group invaded the Jewish state on Oct. 7, 2023.
“This investigation is a reckless insult to our allies in Spain, which has only sought to enforce in good faith its sovereign national policies and uphold international law, including its treaty obligations to prevent genocide,” the congresswomen wrote.
The lawmakers then lambasted the US for “violating these same obligations and its own domestic laws” by continuing to support Israeli “human rights abuses, war crimes, and credible evidence of genocide. Tlaib, Bush, and Lee did not mention Israel’s efforts to avoid civilian casualties or Hamas’s strategy of using civilian sites for terrorist operations. However, they nonetheless argued that Washington should join Madrid in punishing Jerusalem for its military campaign in Hamas-ruled Gaza.
The FMC, an independent agency of the US government, said it opened its probe into Spain earlier this month after receiving information that the NATO ally had refused to allow at least three cargo vessels — two of which were US-flagged — into its ports.
“The commission is concerned that this apparent policy of denying entry to certain vessels will create conditions unfavorable to shipping in the foreign trade,” the FMC said in a notice published in the Federal Register, official journal of the US federal government, on Dec. 5.
Two of the three incidents noted by the commission involved vessels run by the Danish shipping giant Maersk in November. The other occurred in May, when Spanish officials said they refused permission for the Danish Marianne Danica ship because it was “carrying weapons to Israel” and added they will not allow ships carrying arms for Israel to stop at its ports moving forward.
“Reports that the Government of Spain has denied access to certain US-flagged vessels raise serious concerns. Section 19 of the Merchant Marine Act, 1920, 46 U.S.C. § 42101, authorizes the commission to identify and offset unfavorable shipping conditions in U.S. foreign trade that result from the laws or regulations of a foreign government,” FMC commissioner Louis Sola said in a statement last Thursday. “If confirmed, Spain’s actions could constitute a violation of the law, and could result in substantial offsetting fines on Spanish-flag vessels, limitations on cargo carried between Spain and the United States, and other remedial actions within the commission’s discretion.”
Spain could be fined up to $2.3 million per voyage if the country is found to have interfered with commerce in such a way.
“Disruptions to international trade systems not only threaten global shipping networks, but also compromise the consumer markets they support,” Sola added. “Spain’s uniliteral restrictions on US-flagged vessels could raise questions about the core principles of non-discriminatory practices.”
Spain has been one of Europe’s fiercest critics of Israel following Hamas’s Oct. 7 massacre across southern Israel, amid the ensuing war in Gaza.
In October, Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez urged other members of the European Union to suspend the bloc’s free trade agreement with Israel over its military campaigns against Hamas in Gaza and the terrorist organization Hezbollah in Lebanon.
Sanchez’s demand came three days after the Spanish premier urged other countries to stop supplying weapons to the Jewish state.
Spain stopped its own defense companies from shipping arms to Israel in October 2023.
In May, Spain officially recognized a Palestinian state, claiming the move was accelerated by the Israel-Hamas war and would help foster a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Israeli officials described the decision as a “reward for terrorism.”
Spain, like many other countries around the world, experienced a surge in antisemitic incidents targeting the Jewish community following Hamas’s Oct. 7 massacre.
Meanwhile, US lawmakers Tlaib, Bush, and Lee have been among the most outspoken opponents of Israel in the US Congress, falsely accusing the Jewish state of “genocide” and pushing Jerusalem to accept a ceasefire just weeks after the Hamas atrocities of last Oct. 7.
The post US Far-Left Lawmakers Call for End of Probe Into Spain for Barring Ships Bringing Arms to Israel first appeared on Algemeiner.com.