A university should be a place for exchanging ideas and discussing sensitive topics. When 30 students staged a protest during Israeli Consul General Akiva Tor’s lecture at UC Davis School of Law last Tuesday evening, the intellectual integrity of that classroom was reduced to symbols of hate and hopelessness. The students would not engage in a conversation. They taped their mouths shut and walked out of the classroom as the Consul General begged them to stay and ask questions. But the students had already choreographed their protest. They knew how the evening would unfold before it began.
The topic of Tuesday’s discussion was “Israel Today: Challenges and Opportunities.” In publicizing this event, I did not mention Palestine, terrorism, rocket fire, recent murders or the heightened standard that is often applied when evaluating military action by Israel. The Consul General came to UC Davis to discuss the current climate in the Middle East, and how it affects Israel. The substance of his discussion, though, was irrelevant to the students’ reactions. Akiva Tor’s nation of affiliation was enough to spark protest and hate.
This type of knee-jerk reaction to Israel is anti-intellectual and counter productive to fostering coexistence on campus and in the Middle East. The Israel-Palestine discussion is being driven into a desperate hole of hopelessness by extremists and their liberal sheep, including young Jewish adults who are afraid of being framed as anti-liberal by talking about Israel – despite its remarkable track record in civil rights, clean tech, innovation and (yes) military tactics. Many of my Jewish classmates who do support a Jewish state did not want the Jewish Law Students Association to host an event about Israel, because they did not want to “deal” with the very reaction that was elicited by Akiva Tor. But by avoiding the Israel conversation, misconceptions remain unchallenged, and we passively legitimize illegitimate beliefs.
Academic institutions are our best hope for an open dialogue between parties with conflicting interests. Thus, blind subscription to any ideology should be heavily discouraged on a university campus. Our responsibility as students is to explore the nuances of important political issues. It is dangerous when individuals and communities develop deep disdain for a country based on buzzwords from ideologues – apartheid, colonial, imperial, military occupation. I call on students to think critically and do their homework before adopting anything and everything under the liberal label. If you’ve done your homework and are still confident in your blanket disdain toward Israel, then bring those ideas to the classroom and let’s have a discussion. My objective in organizing last Tuesday’s event was to spark a dialogue as part of a slow shift from hopelessness to coexistence of ideas – at least at UC Davis. However, I must ask the students who taped their mouths shut and walked out on a discussion with Consul General Tor – what is your objective?
You seek to shift a civil exchange of ideas to a symbolic exchange of emotions, as symbols and emotions are harder to deconstruct than logically, factually sound dialogue. Is it insecurity in your beliefs? Intellectual laziness? Or perhaps you really are that angry and hopeless, and by refusing to engage with Israel’s Consul General, you are urging the local and international community to also disengage with Israel, regardless of its actions. There is nothing Akiva Tor could have said that would have resonated. There is nothing he could have done that you would have seen. You came to our discussion not to talk, but to tape your mouth shut and complain that you aren’t heard.
This is disturbing.
I call on my colleagues to exercise their ideas and exercise them responsibly – for they are powerful and we are privileged in having the key to this power.
Interesting about anti Israel group/s. They seem to change names at every event. Today MSA, tomorrow ASM, MAS. IRT, FDR., BSA, USMC, RAF etc.
Would it surprise anyone if it was discovered that these “correct” groups had the same members? Or interlocking leadership? Such a shame that such smartness waisted. Should peace break out this small (1.7% +/-) of the Arab claimed world, could be another Switzerland. Just a thought, give peace and justice a fair hearing. Both sides have real issues that seem to get lost in the clouds.
“they lack the intellectual capacity…”-Barry broad referring to MSA
^WOW. I really hope you are not amongst my peers at UCD. First, MSA had nothing to do with it. Second you cannot make generalizations about an entire organization. I am an International Relations student who has lived through war and I am currently focusing on Middle East and Africa. I can assure you that I have the intellectual capacity and the experience to tell you that you are misguided, misinformed and are making ignorant accusations. Please slap yourself.
I think it’s important to stress Californian’s point. Having dialogue does not entail bringing in one representative of one side to speak to you. To say this event was intended to create dialogue is laughable at the least. And it’s funny that everyone seems to be ignoring the fact that one protester did remain behind and attempted to engage Tor.
addressing one portion of the article is not a change of dialogue nor does it twist thee argument….it adds a different perspective as you did so yourself
Nuance, dialogue, and rejection of ‘sheep behavior’ are all laudable goals. Student imperatives, even. But how does hosting a talk with the Israeli consul facilitate these objectives? Consuls, like diplomats, are obligated to parrot their party’s lines. Consuls like Akiva Tor are poor choices for speakers if dialogue is the true objective, because dialogue requires an open-mindedness and willingness to change/concede points that is simply outside of a diplomat’s job description. I’m sure Tor’s words were informative, but if you seek DIALOGUE, another speaker (or, perhaps, a panel of speakers?) would have been a better choice.
Just as you ask the protesters to consider the limitations of their approach, please consider the limitations of your own approach.
“Justice4all” is not only trying to change the subject (from academic dialogue to international diplomacy), but is also using twisted logic. Namely, he/she refers to the Palestinians walking out of negotiations with Israel — and then blames Israel for stopping the very dialogue that the Palestinians walked out of. (One wonders whether they had their mouths taped shut when they walked out on negotiations with Israel.)
Clearly, the settlement issue is just a handy excuse for not negotiating. It hadn’t stopped the Palestinians from negotiating before. And when the Israelis did implement an unprecedented halt in settlement construction, the Palestinians ignored it until the halt was practically over anyway.
I would like to stress “justice4all”‘s point again… this protest had NOTHING to do with or was not affiliated with the UC Davis MSA. It was a group of students, getting together to protest against numerable crimes, injustices, and imprudence of the Israeli government.
The actions the Jewish Law Students Association took were unnecessarily defensive and plainly rude. The inability for the speaker who is supposedly knowledgable about Israel and the Middle East could not, in the end, answer a question so fundamental to Israeli politics – illegal settlements.
If people want to hold a dialogue that Consul General Tor was “begging” the protesters for… I suggest the Israeli government and invitees get their information and facts straight.
Please get your facts straight
The MSA had NOTHING i repeat NOTHING to do with the protest and i dont think its wise to use their name as the perpetrators…it was a group of students getting together unaffiliated with any group on campus
i was an observer of the event…if miller was into dialogue then why did she forcable remove someone out of the hall to the extent of putting her hands on him?? had it not been for the clapping of the protestors, who knows what else would have happened…he was asking a question and when tor became flustered and unable to adress the question (illegal settlements) she made him leave
if she wanted dialogue why did she tell the protestors to leave?
if israel wants dialogue, why didnt they stop stellement building during the peace negotiations like american and pali asked??? stopping for talks? stopping the deaths and destructions for talks???
The Boycott, Divest, and Sanction agenda is morally and intellectually bankrupt. It adopts the language of social justice, not in search of Justice, but to confuse and mislead. The true goal of BDS is to harm and tear down, and every intellectually honest observer must be aware of that.
The critical thinker can tease apart legitimate political debate from BDS by remaining alert to the three D’s – Delegitimizing Israel’s right to exist, applying a Double standard to the Jewish state’s behavior, and Demonizing Israel as a state different from other nation-states.
BDS is a way for anti-Semites to cloak their hate in the robes of political debate. Unfortunately, it ensnares kinder people who would not normally behave so coarsely.
The writer makes a valid point. The MSA is not interested in a discussion with the Counsel General because they know that they lack the intellectual capacity to discuss the Israeli-Palestinian conflict with a knowledgeable person. Their interest is confined to propaganda stunts where they cannot be challenged. This is consistent with the long connection of Arab nationalist groups to fascist movements and it’s general silence on the issue of genocide in the Arab world and the atrocious human rights record of Arab countries, including many groups within Palestine. Just last week, a Palestinian actor was murdered in Jenin by Islamic Jihad because he dared to work with women. From the MSA….only silence and the same old cowardly tactics.