In the aftermath of Donald Trump’s victory in the US election, Harvard professors quickly rescheduled or even canceled classes, offering students space to “process” their emotions.

Class attendance was optional, assignments were extended, and some professors even opened their offices as “spaces to grieve” the results of an election.

This was their response to an exercise of the democratic process. Harvard’s response last year to the worst massacre of Jews since the Holocaust stands in telling contrast.

On October 7, 2023, when 1,200 Israelis, Americans, and others were massacred by Hamas and Palestinian terrorists, Jewish students were faced not with grief counselors and sympathetic professors, but a mob that was often incited by those same professors. 

The overwrought response to the results of a free and democratic election — which Palestinians have been denied for almost two decades by their own leaders — reveals a troubling pattern of emotional manipulation and simplification by Harvard. It’s a real-world manifestation of a problem that follows the pattern of social media rage-bait. 

On TikTok, algorithm-driven narratives often prioritize distortion over substance. TikTok’s content caters to user preferences, often resulting in echo chambers and oversimplified narratives. However, users generally understand the platform’s nature — it is social media, designed for quick consumption and viral spread. There’s an implicit understanding that content is often exaggerated or sensationalized for engagement.

Harvard, on the other hand, purports to be a bastion of higher learning and critical thinking. Strikingly, its treatment of the Israel-Palestinian conflict has devolved into a similar pattern of reductionism and emotional manipulation. The difference? Harvard’s approach comes with the veneer of academic credibility, making it far more insidious.

On social media, professional expertise is often seen as a plus. Commercial landscapers, fashion designers like me, and devoted activists are sought out for our conclusive opinions. But academia is supposed to be different. Higher education isn’t supposed to deliver an endless stream of hot takes. Universities are meant to teach and hone the process of discovering truth, in contrast to activists who advance crystallized conclusions. You would think that Harvard would want its students in class the day after a pivotal election to engage with the results, not encourage students to retreat from this challenge under the guise of “processing their emotions” — a “processIng” notably free of supervision from mental health professionals. 

“It’s indoctrination, not education,” a faculty member is quoted as saying in the academic audit conducted by the Harvard Jewish Alumni Alliance (HJAA) released in May 2024.

False accusations of Israeli genocide are buttressed by academic theories like settler colonialism. The HJAA audit found that the settler colonialism framework exists across the School of Public Health, the Divinity School, and the English and Anthropology departments of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences, not just in fields focused on the Middle East. 

Since October 8, 2023, Harvard has stubbornly demonstrated that it has sunk below the intellectual standards of TikTok in its approach to the ongoing Middle East conflict. Both Harvard and the social media company present a crude, simplified, and emotionally provocative view of this prominent issue, but at least with TikTok, users know what they’re getting. Harvard today is no better for academic discourse than the comment section on a social media video, the place where carefully cited facts are given the same weight as the poop emoji. In that context, it makes sense that professors would feel students need space to “grieve” a presidential election that didn’t go their way.

However egregious Harvard’s failings are in comparison to TikTok, there is one significant difference, where Harvard does offer hope. We are mired in debates about making social media safe and free, safeguarding the First Amendment while protecting the vulnerable. Clean solutions for social media are elusive. But Harvard does have a clear path to improvement.

Harvard’s recent steps toward institutional neutrality should be applauded and taken as a starting point. Harvard must demonstrate a clear commitment to stamping out antisemitism by adopting the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s working definition of antisemitism, conducting an independent investigation into the issue on campus, and actually enforcing the university’s own code equally and transparently. Faculty members, who too often are the ones pushing antisemitism on their students, should have additional training to combat this. And if professors continue to make campus unsafe for the Jewish community, the administration needs to act as the adult in the room and dismiss them. 

Harvard could also end its collaboration with Birzeit University, known for educating would-be terrorists, graduating actual terrorists, some while imprisoned for conducting lethal terror attacks, hosting military parades featuring mock suicide bombers, and barring Israelis from entering.

Scores of students are already reconsidering their attendance at this storied institution because of its failure to prevent campus from turning into the worst iterations of a social media echochamber. Harvard can either renew its focus on academic integrity — and Veritas — or ride the social media cycle through to irrelevance like MySpace and Friendster.

Roni Brunn is the Vice President of Media Relations at the Harvard Jewish Alumni Alliance and a social media content creator. 

The post Harvard Let Students Mourn the US Election; Where Was That Sympathy Post-October 7? first appeared on Algemeiner.com.