Zionist and unpatriotic
Im Tirtzu tainted itself when it committed the crime that it originally accused its opponents of, namely, trying to stifle academic discourse.
By Avner de-ShalitThe Im Tirtzu movement is a student group established a few years ago on campuses across the country. At first, its members claimed that the political atmosphere in their lecture halls had made them feel silenced and excluded. My personal impression is that this claim is incorrect, but it was legitimate and should have been examined. Any student who claims he is silenced and excluded because of his opinions deserves to have his claim checked, because the campus is supposed to be a place where freedom of opinion rules.
Once they had attracted enough attention, Im Tirtzu's leaders apparently realized that they had an opportunity to gain power. From then on, the movement became a political one. This is also legitimate and welcome. The question is, what is the movement's political aim, and do its ends justify its means?
The movement claims its goal is to strengthen the Zionist aspect of student education in the social sciences faculties. At first, the struggle was over curriculum content, and here, the movement made a pathetic move: It wrote a pseudo-scientific report alleging that a certain percentage of social science courses were anti-Zionist.
The results were meant to strike fear: 80 percent in one university, 70 percent in another. But the report was baseless. Neither Zionism nor anti-Zionism has anything to do almost any of these courses. That is why the criterion is absurd. To this day, I don't know if Im Tirtzu considers statistics courses Zionist or anti-Zionist. That is how the movement fell into its own trap.
The following example demonstrates this well: A course that deals with social justice was cataloged as anti-Zionist. What does one have to do with the other? Or perhaps the course runs counter to Im Tirtzu's positions on social issues?
But the public, including Knesset members (both the naive and the less so ) and the education minister, learned about the report from the headlines, without being familiar with its details or methodology. Thus a fact was established: The vast majority of courses in the social science faculties are anti-Zionist.
But now the cat is out of the bag. Im Tirtzu is no longer calling for changes in curriculum content; it is waging an ugly political battle over staffing: It wants the lecturers replaced.
The movement's campaign has thus undergone an enormous shift. At first, it complained of (leftist ) political considerations in the appointment of lecturers and said this must not be permitted. Now, it says (rightist ) political considerations should govern the appointment of lecturers.
Woe to us if political positions ever become the consideration guiding lecturers' appointments. The impressive achievements of Israeli scholars (it was recently reported that Hebrew University's social science faculty ranked 49th in the world ) stem in part from the fact that the only consideration in appointing researchers is excellence, not Zionism or anti-Zionism.
Moreover, Im Tirtzu prides itself on its Zionist orientation. This writer is also a Zionist, and proud of it. But Zionism, like any national movement, has different shades and expressions. And Im Tirtzu's shade appears to be blatantly anti-patriotic. Instead of being proud of the scholarly achievements of Israeli researchers, the movement is threatening to stop donations by Jews abroad.
Maybe this is a Zionist act, according to their understanding of Zionism, but it is certainly not a patriotic one. In practice, Im Tirtzu is joining those who call for a boycott of Israeli universities.
The writer is dean of the faculty of social sciences at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Why Facebook Connect?
Comment on Haaretz.com articles with your Facebook login, and share your thoughts on your own wall.
- Latest
- Most Viewed
- Most Rated
- Open all
If Israel is a perfect nation or not, if its Arab and Hareadi communities are equally wealthy to the rest of the "mainstream" or not, and if governmental policies are the core of these problems or not, are all important matters that Israel should constantly examine and re-examine. There is always room for improvement. Israel is by no means perfect. I think that there is common ground here for most Israelis. So are so many other nations imperfect. But the matter at hand goes far deeper than the issue if/should Israel be engaged in self-examination of political and social equality or lack of. Academics professing the boycotting of the very institutions of higher education that they are part of, these being the very epicenters of Israeli political, social and scientific learning and discourse, is self-defeating and extremely destructive. If these professors see themselves as the "canaries in the mineshaft" to warn Israelis of this or that injustice, then the last thing one should do here is to sanction the institutions that feed these very canaries. If there ever will be an effective boycott of Israeli academic institutions, then they will falter and some/ many will fall. Throw out the academics, and who is left to argue for the sake of democracy? Former Professor "X" who now works in the fruit market or washes cars? These Israeli academics who advocate the boycotting Israeli universities to my opinion are effectively anti-democrats in the extreme, and should be removed from their posts promptly because of the danger they are promoting. They are no less dangerous than arsonist, gasoline and matches in hand, and who who would happily burn down a campus because in the name of 'democracy' they don't like the politics of the country that supports it.
Clearly you didn't like the statistics that point out that the two "non-Zionist" minorities of Israel (Arab and Haradi) are also the two poorest and most discriminated against sectors in Israeli society. You clearly didn't like reading about the facts of high employment, high crime, low enforcement, low participation in police and institutional racism against the Arab sector that are all established facts including by the State Comptrollers Office in several reports on the Arab sector. To you learning these facts is anti-Zionist because these facts stink so its better to just hide them under the carpet. The kind of Zionism you advocated (to bury your head in the sand and hope everyone will just see and know how righteous we are) is not the Zionism I believe in that is socialist, pluralist and democractic.
People are self segregating into military, politics, and intellectuals...."Taylor discovers that the apes, who can talk, are in control and are divided into a strict class system: the gorillas as police, military, and hunters; the orangutans as administrators, politicians and lawyers; and the chimpanzees as intellectuals and scientists. Humans, who cannot talk, are considered feral vermin and are hunted and either killed outright, enslaved for manual labor or used for scientific experimentation."
Most of the professor who support the boycott of Israeli Universities are not raising the issue of academic freedom. Like any right, it has limits. They are traitors to the Country that supports them and their institutions and should not be allowed to teach but rather should be in jail. The donors are correct. Do not give any money to Israeli Univesities until they throw these four, and other faculty out. In the United States, one cannot defend arguments for the death of the president by using "academic freedom." I know one of the professors and he studied under a Nazi at Notre Dame University in the US. All Americans of any sense of duty should NOT give to the major universities in Israel until they have certified themselves to be free of traitors. By the way, traitors are not the same as staight forward dissenters. Dissent is what is covered by free speech, even acadmic one, not treason.
I suggest that you, your im tirzu friends and others of your ilk, organize huge bonfires on the campuses in order to burn the books and published articles of the "traitors". You can wear any colour shirt you wish, while doing this...brown is not obligatory
Let's be clear: the logical and inexorable conclusion of the Boytcott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement against a nation as tiny and dependent on international commerce as Israel is the extermination of that nation. That is also the goal of the movement (read statements by Omar Barghouti). Those who advocate for BDS in any form -- including academics who feign ignorance -- are advocating for the liquidation of the state of Israel.
Social justice and injustice is at the heart of zionism but we all know that so-called Israeli Arab NGOs who claim to fight injustice in Israel and are overly represented in social studies in Israel claim to be discriminated as if they are the innocent victims and as if we live in a fascist state!! To claim that courses dealing with social justice have nothing to do with zionism undermines the correct argument that social studies should be examined about the validity of it programs its pluralism and above all which has been neglected the responsability of the Arab sector in Israel!! Jews in the diaspora know they can only change society when they behave as responsable loyal citizens of the states they live in!! So how come at social sciences departments in Israel Jews do not demand the same from Israeli Arabs when they want to advance their causes in Israel? Rights come with plights and responsability!! I did not hear even one university representative admitting that indeed they need to have a critical self reflection of their own behaviour!! You are paid for by taxpayers who are ordinary Jews in general, respect those who pay you!!
non-zionist jews, christians, muslims, druze, athiests, etc. - don't they also deserve a say on how 'their' taxes are spent?