A Colonial Settler Institution

A Settler-Colonial Institution

I find it instructive when students, and even professors, at universities in the United States express their judgment classifying the state of Israel as a white, European, settler-colonial institution. As a result of this classification, many of them declare almost any act of violence against Israelis as justifiable resistance, and almost any action in defense of Israelis, even basic self-defense, as unjustifiable oppression. Some of these academics consider the continued existence of the state of Israel as a crime. Many recommend boycotting Israel.

To achieve this classification, the scholars must make some modifications in the classical definitions of these terms.

White European – somewhat less than half the Jewish population of Israel descends from Jews of European countries. Even there, the indigenous population generally did not consider Jews as indigenous, or white. Jews counted as some sort of foreign presence throughout most of the history of Jews in European countries. This generalization holds in Nazi Germany, of course, but also in Tzarist Russia, in the Soviet Union, in Italy, in France, in Spain, and so forth. In Europe, generally, Jews were classified as from somewhere else.

More than half of the Jewish population of Israel descends from Jews of Asian and African countries, where they counted as a separate minority population, but no more white than their Arab, Persian, Ethiopian, or Indian neighbors.

And about twenty percent of the citizens of Israel are not Jews at all; these include Muslim and Christian Arabs, Druze Arabs, and other groups, most of whom also would not get classified as white.

Colonial – Empires established colonies in far-flung parts of the world, sending their own citizens to colonize those foreign outposts, to rule the indigenous peoples, and to export the precious raw materials back home to enrich the mother countries.

No Empire sent any significant number of its citizens to Israel. Most of the Jewish citizens of Israel descend from refugees, who were happy to escape from countries where they were unwelcome. England did originate the Balfour Declaration, but it did not populate Israel with British Jews. It allowed Jews from other countries to come to Mandatory Palestine for some decades, until England changed its mind and prevented Jews from coming to the land.

The Jews who did come to Mandatory Palestine, and subsequently to Israel, were not emissaries of an empire coming to a foreign land. They were, most of them, refugees unwelcome elsewhere returning to their ancestral homeland. They, most of them, could not go “home” to their country of origin in Europe, Africa, or Asia. Someone who suggests that Jews do not have a homeland in Israel could explain what other place counts as homeland of the Jews.

No empire expected the Jews of Israel to export raw materials to the mother land, since, for all is beauty and for all its rich history, Israel has not had significant raw materials to export.

So declaring the state of Israel a white, European, settler-colonial institution requires bending every one of the adjectives.

Without bending the adjectives, what institution could really count as a classical white, European, settler-colonial institution?

How about Harvard University?

It was established by subjects of the King of England, who had come to this new land to establish profitable colonies, to export raw materials back to England, to displace or rule over the indigenous peoples. The colonists could, and many did, return to England, if they chose to do so. They counted as white, different from the indigenous people they called Indians, and from the few Blacks in the colony, some of whom they considered legally their private property, enslaved people.

The name of the location of Harvard University proclaims its status as a settler-colonial institution: Cambridge, Massachusetts. Colonists named their city Cambridge, the name of a venerable English university, a landmark in the motherland that they proposed to emulate in this foreign outpost. The territory they named Massachusetts, not an English word at all, but the name in the language of one of the indigenous peoples.

Without bending any of the adjectives, Harvard University perfectly fits the definition of a white, European, settler-colonial institution.

Are these academics prepared to declare the continued existence of Harvard University a crime? Or to invite violent acts of resistance against everyone affiliated with Harvard University? Or ask any individuals connected with Harvard University to refrain from self-defense? Are these academics prepared to withdraw from Harvard University? Are these academics prepared to divest from Harvard University?

Why not?