RSS
How College Campuses Became Bastions of Extremism and Intolerance
The 2023-2024 academic year will be remembered for its inept university presidents, antisemitic college deans, fringe left activist professors, and gullible, pro-Hamas students.
Collectively and individually, especially at the Nation’s top schools, they have twisted to the breaking point the carefully-curated reputations of their institutions. Across the country, campus sympathy has shifted from the victims to the perpetrators of terrorism. College students are waving Hamas and Hezbollah flags, and chanting their praise for Yahya Sinwar.
To specialists who follow the problems of Middle East studies, the displays on college campuses after October 7 were not surprising. But to the majority who do not follow the ins and outs of academic politics, watching college students and faculty members align themselves with political violence in the name of “resistance,” celebrate the murder of Israelis, and call for a “global Intifada” had many Americans questioning whether the results of a college education are worth the cost — and not just in dollars.
On one level, academic brands are merchandizing tools — bumper stickers and clothing displaying school mascots and logos. More importantly, though, is the intangible dimension of the academic brand — one part reputation, pointing to the past, and one part promise, pointing to the future. Universities with storied histories promise that their past success will be repeated with future success.
At the nation’s top schools, brands are focused on exclusivity. Only a very small percentage of students can attend these elite institutions. If the people who run them don’t appear to be the smartest, most impressive and erudite people in the nation, the brand suffers. Claudine Gay lost her job as president of Harvard because of the damage she did to the brand.
Academia could not have been brainwashed without Middle East studies programs and their leaders in the embattled Middle East Studies Association (MESA). Together, they are largely responsible for academia’s realignment against Israel and in favor of Palestinian “resistance.”
They are also responsible for much of last year’s academic brand deterioration. The more prominent the Middle East program at any given school, the greater damage to that school’s reputation.
Since the 1980s, academia has been dominated by leftists, many of whom view the US negatively and elevate America’s adversaries to heroic status. David Rapoport argues that, for many on the left, “When the Vietnam War ended in 1975, the PLO replaced the Viet Cong as the heroic model.” For today’s campus radicals, Hamas has replaced the PLO as the heroic model.
Middle East studies professors have spent the last several decades supporting academic boycotts of Israel, excusing or downplaying Palestinian violence, and “normalizing” Hamas.
They have dedicated their energies and expertise to creating a language that justifies “resistance” against “settler-colonial empires.”
MESA and the Middle East studies professors who control the profession lead by example, demonstrating how they expect their students to think and write and behave. Too many accept political violence by Palestinians as a form of “social justice” and expect their easily-influenced students to do likewise. After all, they also control how or if graduates have access to the job market.
In 1993, one of those professors at the University of California, Berkeley, founded the most virulent of all the student protest groups — Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP).
SJP is a leading vector of the antisemitism eroding academia. It published a “Toolkit for Resistance” on October 8th that provided the template for the first wave of anti-Israel, pro-Hamas protests and continues to be the most significant instigator of campus unrest. Schools that have an SJP chapter have protest problems. Most schools that don’t have an SJP chapter don’t have protest problems.
Schools that do not have an SJP chapter should do everything possible to prevent one from being established. Fordham University is the biggest winner in this category, since it didn’t allow an SJP chapter to take root on its campus.
Because Ivy League schools represent the top brands in academia, they also have the most to lose. Partly because of its location, Columbia has become the epicenter of anti-Israel protests. Consequently, its brand degradation has captured a great deal of media attention. Not surprisingly, Columbia is also a leader in the Palestinization of academia. Its Center for Palestine Studies, founded in 2010, employs ideologues like Joseph Massad and Rashid Khalidi, the former PLO spokesman.
The Columbia brand suffered a damaging blow when Judge Matthew Solomson of the US Court of Federal Claims announced in The Wall Street Journal that he and dozens of his colleagues will not hire law clerks from Columbia.
The new academic year began at Columbia with protests continuing, followed by news that the university had hired one of the pro-Hamas protesters who took over Hamilton Hall in April, to teach a class on Western Civilization.
Brown University has also suffered self-inflicted brand erosion, almost as long as Columbia. In 2020, it endowed the first ever chair for Palestinian studies at an American university, naming it the Mahmoud Darwish Chair, and installing a BDS-supporter.
Harvard was the first school to have its brand tarnished in the immediate aftermath of Hamas’ October 7 massacre of civilians. On October 8, a group of 31 student organizations issued a joint statement blaming Israel for the attack. They gathered on campus to have their photo taken, which subsequently went “viral.” It was the first of several devastating blows Harvard’s brand suffered last year. Another came when hedge fund billionaire and Harvard alum Bill Ackman announced that he would no longer hire graduates from his alma mater.
Now that the 2024-2025 academic year has begun, anti-Israel protests have resumed at some schools. Minus the tents, Columbia today looks like it did last year. Further brand erosion continues apace.
After enduring months of pro-Hamas encampments, Brown president Christina Paxon acquiesced to the undergraduate mob with a deal that brought temporary peace in return for entertaining student demands for divestment from Israel. Brown’s Advisory Committee on University Resources is scheduled to provide Paxon “with a recommendation on the matter of divestment by September 30, 2024.” If Paxon doesn’t make more concessions, expect more trouble. If she does make more concessions, the troubles may be worse.
Like Brown, Harvard too brought an end to its encampment problem by agreeing to discuss divesting from Israel. How long will that ceasefire last?
The administrations at these schools may think they have solved their problems, but by taking the demands of the students seriously, they have only emboldened them.
Not only are these administrators failing to convince most people that they are the most capable and wise among us; they are failing to demonstrate that they are competent stewards of the brands they inherited.
How soon until the majority concurs with William F. Buckley’s 1961 quip that he “would rather be governed by the first 2,000 people in the Cambridge telephone directory than by the Harvard University faculty”?
Chief Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT) Political Correspondent A.J. Caschetta is a principal lecturer at the Rochester Institute of Technology and a fellow at Campus Watch, a project of the Middle East Forum where he is also a Milstein fellow. A different version of this article was originally published at IPT.
The post How College Campuses Became Bastions of Extremism and Intolerance first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Trump Nominates Marco Rubio for US Secretary of State
US President-elect Donald Trump on Wednesday confirmed that he will nominate Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) to serve as secretary of state in his incoming administration, a potential signal that the next White House will take a more adversarial posture toward Iran.
Trump’s confirmation came a couple days after several media outlets reported that he was expected to tap Rubio, 53, to head the US State Department. The move to place a lawmaker known for his hawkish foreign policy views as the nation’s top diplomat has mollified concerns among some critics that the second Trump administration would adopt a more isolationist approach to international affairs.
“Marco is a Highly Respected Leader, and a very powerful Voice for Freedom. He will be a strong Advocate for our Nation, a true friend to our Allies, and a fearless Warrior who will never back down to our adversaries,” Trump said in an official statement. “I look forward to working with Marco to Make America, and the World, Safe and Great Again!”
Rubio issued a brief statement advocating an approach of “peace through strength” to international relations.
“As Secretary of State, I will work every day to carry out his foreign policy agenda. Under the leadership of President Trump we will deliver peace through strength and always put the interests of Americans and America above all else,” Rubio said on X/Twitter.
Since his election to the Senate in 2010, Rubio has developed a reputation as a foreign policy hawk, advocating for greater investments in the US military and a tougher approach to adversaries such as Iran, China, Cuba, and Venezuela.
Rubio’s policy views have previously resulted in conflict with more isolationist members of the Republican Party, who have argued that the US should step back from international conflicts and increase focus on domestic issues.
The selection of Rubio also indicates the incoming Trump administration will be diplomatically supportive of Israel.
In the year following the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas’s massacre across southern Israel last Oct. 7, Rubio has steadfastly signaled his support for the Jewish state, resisting calls for a ceasefire in Gaza and underscoring the importance of Israel achieving a decisive win against Hamas.
He stated in October 2023 that Israel has “no choice but to seek the complete eradication of Hamas in Gaza,” adding that “this tragically necessary effort will come at a horrifying price” and that “the price of failing to permanently eliminate this group of sadistic savages is even more horrifying.”
In May 2024, the senator cautioned that the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah, the Iran-backed terrorist organization in Lebanon, could soon break out into full-scale war.
“The imperative that Israel has at some point to address it, even though there’s a real threat there of a full-scale war with Hezbollah, which militarily is a lot more challenging and destructive,” Rubio said.
Last month, Rubio condemned Iran’s direct attack against Israel after the Iranian regime fired a barrage of nearly 200 ballistic missiles at the Jewish state.
“I urge the reimposition of a maximum pressure campaign against Iran and fully support Israel’s right to respond disproportionately to stop this threat. The United States will continue to stand with Israel,” Rubio said in a statement.
Rubio has also assigned blame to Iran for fomenting instability and chaos in the Middle East, adding that the regime has also acted as the “primary” oppressor of its own civilians.
“The primary source of violence, conflict, suffering, and instability in the Middle East is the criminal ‘Islamic Republic’ regime which has also oppressed the people of [Iran] for almost [45] years,” Rubio said on X/Twitter.
Beyond Rubio, Trump has also handpicked other administration members with pro-Israel bonafides. Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY), a lawmaker who has gone viral for her blistering repudiations of university presidents over their response campus antisemitism, has been selected to serve as ambassador to the United Nations. Trump also selected Rep. Mike Waltz (R-FL) to serve as his next national security adviser.
The post Trump Nominates Marco Rubio for US Secretary of State first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Trump’s Top National Security Picks Have Expressed Strongly Pro-Israel, Anti-Iran Views
US President-elect Donald Trump’s selections for national security adviser and defense secretary have a history of making statements in support of Israel’s right to defend itself from neighboring threats.
In the week following his resounding victory at the polls, Trump has swiftly moved to fill his incoming cabinet with allies of Israel.
Among his top national security picks, the president-elect has chosen US. Rep. Mike Waltz (R-FL) to serve as his national security adviser and nominated Fox News host and Army National Guard officer Pete Hegseth as the next secretary of defense.
Waltz, a Green Beret and former Pentagon policy adviser, has developed a hawkish reputation on foreign policy matters. He supported Israel’s retaliatory strikes against Iran in October, arguing that the Jewish state should target Kharg Island, a major hub of the regime’s oil exports. The representative also suggested that Israel attack Iran’s nuclear facilities outside of Tehran. The lawmaker has openly criticized the Biden administration for allegedly holding Israel back from a full force retaliation against Iran.
Waltz has also argued that the US should attempt to weaken Iran through sanctioning the Chinese buyers of Iranian oil, saying that isolating Iran economically would cripple their ability to finance the operations of terrorist groups such as Hamas, the Houthis, and Hezbollah. He has also helped spearhead bipartisan efforts to recategorize the Houthis in Yemen as an official international terrorist organization, a move that he argues would isolate the group by making financial transactions with them illegal.
On Tuesday, Trump raised eyebrows by tapping Hegseth to head the Pentagon. Hegseth, a former infantry officer in the Army National Guard deployed to the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, has repeatedly expressed affinity for Israel. Hegseth, a devout Christian, argued on television that Jews have a right to live in Israel on Biblical grounds. In his 2020 book, American Crusade, Our Fight to Stay Free, he stated that Israel is “central to the story of Western civilization” and that the Jewish state is “inextricably linked” to America.
“If you love America, you should love Israel. We share history, we share faith, and we share freedom. We love free people, free expression, and free markets,” he wrote. “And whereas America is blessed with two big, beautiful oceans to protect it, Israel is surrounded on all sides by countries that either used to seek, or still seek, to wipe the nation off the map.”
During a 2016 trip to Israel, Hegseth said that he was “struck by the pervasive sense of purpose which permeates Israel and its people who understand the special nature of its founding and defense.” He also said that America can “learn from Israel” and that the Jewish state “is indispensable for the future of the West and human freedom.”
Following the 2020 killing of Iranian General Qasem Soleimani, who headed the Quds Force responsible for overseeing Iran’s proxies and terrorist operations abroad, Hegseth urged then-President Trump to bomb Iran’s nuclear production facilities.
“I happen to believe that we can’t kick the can down the road any longer in trying to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear bomb. They used the killing of Soleimani as an excuse to say ‘we’re scrapping the Iran Deal.’ We all know they were scrapping it anyway,” Hegseth said on Fox News, adding that America should notify Iran of its plans to destroy its “nuclear production facilities,” “key infrastructure,” “missile sites,” and “port capabilities.”
Hegseth also argued that attempts to restrain Israel from direct confrontation with Iran are “ridiculous” and that the Islamic regime represents an “existential threat” to the Jewish state.
“Israel wants to deal with Iran, we should let them … If it was not for Israel, Iran would have had the bomb already,” he said.
The post Trump’s Top National Security Picks Have Expressed Strongly Pro-Israel, Anti-Iran Views first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
American Jewish Organizations React to Trump’s Choice for US Ambassador to Israel
American Jewish organizations were quick to react to US President-elect Donald Trump’s announcement that he would choose former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee to be the next US ambassador to Israel after he assumes office in January.
“Mike has been a great public servant, governor, and leader in faith for many years. He loves Israel, and the people of Israel, and likewise, the people of Israel love him. Mike will work tirelessly to bring about peace in the Middle East!” Trump wrote in his announcement.
Huckabee, an evangelical Christian, has long been a vocal pro-Israel voice. He has repudiated the anti-Israel protests that erupted in the wake of Hamas’s massacre across southern Israel last Oct. 7 and criticized incumbent US President Joe Biden for sympathizing with anti-Israel protesters during his speech at the 2024 Democratic National Convention (DNC). The incoming ambassador also lambasted the anti-Israel encampments at elite universities, stating that there should be “outrage” over the targeting and mistreatment of Jewish college students.
Ted Deutch, the CEO of the American Jewish Committee (AJC), posted on X on Tuesday that his organization “looks forward to working with Gov. Huckabee and newly appointed Special Envoy for the Middle East Steven Witkoff to strengthen the US-Israel relationship, bolster Israel-diaspora relations, and promote strong connections between American Jewry and Israel.”
Other Jewish communal organizations, such as the Jewish Federations of North America and the Anti-Defamation League, have so far not made statements.
The Republican Jewish Committee (RJC) said it was “thrilled” with the choice. “As a man of deep faith,” the RJC wrote, “we know Governor Huckabee’s abounding love of Israel and its people is second to none.”
It continued, “As the Jewish state continues to fight an existential war for survival against Iran and its terrorist proxies, Governor Huckabee will represent America’s ironclad commitment to Israel’s security with distinction.”
On the other side, however, the Jewish Democratic Council of America (JDCA) called Huckabee “utterly unqualified for this role” and argued that “his extremist views with regard to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will not further the national security interests of the United States or advance prospects for peace between Israelis and Palestinians.”
Huckabee told Israel’s Army Radio in his first interview since the announcement of his ambassadorship that “of course” the annexation of the West Bank is a possibility during Trump’s second presidential term.
“Unfortunately, when it comes to the US-Israel relationship,” the JDCA concluded, “Donald Trump will continue to only be motivated by his own narrow self-interest, and we’re deeply concerned about what that means for the United States and Israel.”
J Street also opposed the choice, writing in a statement that “Huckabee, a right-wing, evangelical minister with a long history of championing settlement expansion, annexation, and a radical ‘Greater Israel’ agenda, holds principles and espouses views that — if now implemented — would shatter the foundations on which a healthy and strong US-Israel relationship has been built over the past 75 years.”
J Street on Monday urged the Biden administration to withhold offensive weapons from Israel as part of a partial arms embargo, arguing that the United States needs to hold Israel accountable for alleged human rights “violations” before Trump takes office.
Huckabee has taken positions on the Israel-Palestinian conflict considered further to the right than most American Jews and politicians. The former governor has defended Israel’s right to build settlements in the West Bank, acknowledging the Jewish people’s ties to the land dating back to the ancient world.
“There is no such thing as the West Bank — it’s Judea and Samaria,” Huckabee has said, referring to the biblical names for the area. “There is no such thing as settlements — they’re communities, they’re neighborhoods, they’re cities. There is no such thing as an occupation.”
Huckabee has also argued, including during his 2008 US presidential campaign, that any future Palestinian state should be created from land in Arab countries, rather than from territory that Israel captured in 1967 during the Six-Day War.
The post American Jewish Organizations React to Trump’s Choice for US Ambassador to Israel first appeared on Algemeiner.com.