The cost of antisemitism at US universities

Imagine, for a moment, that the Trump administration is serious about fighting antisemitism in higher education. Many people doubt this, but imagine.
Then what do the escalating attacks on universities who fail to fight antisemitism mean? They show that universities are willing to pay tremendous amounts for the privilege of supporting antisemitism on their campuses. The Trump administration says it will cut off $400 million of funding to Columbia unless it devotes itself seriously to ending antisemitism on its campus. Columbia’s response? Equivocate, prevaricate, delay, publish statements full of platitudes, and do next to nothing. Express outrage that freedom of speech is under attack, based on claims that there’s a “chill” in the air. Point to a handful of cases in which people may be punished for what they’re saying, while failing to apologize for the harassment of far larger number of Jews by the anti-Israel forces on campus and by the University itself. Protest self-righteously about how research is being halted, when the halt could have been avoided had the University been willing to forcefully address antisemitism–a nice variant on blaming Jews for everything that’s happening. And those scientists upset about funding cuts–where were they when antisemitism was running rampant? Did they care that their research was proceeding in an institution in which their Jewish and Zionist colleagues, students, and administrators were under attack? If so, they did a good job of keeping their feelings to themselves.

What about Harvard? Harvard presents itself as a righteous standard-bearer for higher education, promoting the highest ideals of the academy throughout the US and around the world–until its president was asked whether calling for the mass murder of Jews might not be OK. Its new, Jewish president, who regularly proclaims how upset he is about antisemitism, says that Harvard has done a lot to attack antisemitism during the last 15 months or so–but won’t say specifically what.

Harvard has refused to publish the report of its own antisemitism committee. It claims to have a plan for future action against antisemitism–a secret plan that hasn’t been made public. In the face of the Trump administration’s threat to withhold billions of dollars, the University proclaims that it is defending freedom of speech, academic freedom, and Western civilization’s commitment to freedom of thought, without mentioning that it’s also implicitly defending its right to normalize and propagate antisemitism, and, seemingly, its right to receive billions from the federal government without having to obey laws against discrimination.
Universities around the country are carefully watching what’s happening to Ivy League universities. They will no doubt claim that they are hoping to learn from the Trump administration-Columbia/Harvard confrontation how best to preserve freedom of speech and academic freedom. But their attentiveness may be interpreted another way. Perhaps they are hoping to learn what they can get away with.

Consider the University of Washington, Seattle. It is rated one of the worst universities in the country for the antisemitic atmosphere on campus; the Office of Civil Rights of the US Department of Education found that it failed to act meaningfully against antisemitism; and the report of its own antisemitism task force found that it normalized antisemitism. It has also been receiving over half a billion dollars a year from the National Institutes of Health, plus vast additional sums from other federal agencies. You’d think that–sensing its vulnerability–it would be taking meaningful action against antisemitism. But, beyond rejecting a call for divestment from companies doing business with Israel, it isn’t. The atmosphere on campus remains poisonous; no action has been taken against students whose anti-Israel/antisemitic encampment last spring disrupted classes and campus life (especially for Jews), or against those who vandalized university property, or those who disrupted a meeting of the University’s Board of Regents last fall. Some faculty claim that there’s no antisemitism on campus–just fake accusations of antisemitism intended to undermine freedom of speech and academic freedom. How can the UW hope to continue normalizing antisemitism? It’s watching what happens to other universities to find out.

The Trump administration is surely undermining the rule of law; it does seem to be going after people for what they say rather than what they do; and it’s not even clear how long it will persist in its campaign against antisemitism. Nevertheless, its campaign so far teaches us a lot about antisemitism in American higher education. Universities are so committed to antisemitism that they are willing to put vast sums at risk rather than take serious action against it. When they get called out for antisemitism, they may acknowledge that there’s antisemitism on campus, and admit that antisemitism is kind of bad. But they will immediately add that while opposing antisemitism a little is OK, opposing it strongly is not, because doing so somehow puts freedom of speech and academic freedom at risk–and we can’t have that, can we? Universities show they are hypocrites when it comes to freedom of speech and academic freedom–they will defend the freedoms of some but not others. Universities claim that the Trump Administration’s alleged efforts to fight antisemitism are halting research into basic science and new cures for disease. But that has got it backwards. Universities are showing that for the sake of propagating antisemitism, they themselves are willing to halt research into basic science and new cures. Will universities succeed in getting the public to believe that they truly stand for freedom of speech and academic freedom? Or will they be unmasked, the strength of their commitment to antisemitism visible to all?