******************** POSTING RULES & NOTES ******************** #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. *****************************************************************
What a terrible article. Notice how the Times went out of its way to link the discussion about this woman's ethnicity with the anti-Israel boycott, as though the people responsible for one are responsible for the other. Even if it were clear that the ethnicity-related questions were a sign of a wave of "anti-Semitism" -- they aren't, unless you gut the term of any structural understanding -- there is no clear relationship at all. The Times simply assumes that they are one in the same, and that somehow the boycott of Israel was responsible for the way this woman was treated during the interview. A more important question that the Times, in typical fashion, ignored, was what it means to have so-called "Jewish affiliations". In a time where the elites often attempt to co-opt dissent by empowering members of oppressed groups with affirmative action in hiring programs, a more relevant question, which the Times hints at, is whether or not being Jewish serves such a purpose. In a time in which American Jews are in places of extraordinary power and privilege, it is not clear that hiring token Jews serves the same purpose as, say, having a black staffer to counter accusations of discrimination against African-Americans. And unless one believes that being race-blind is desirable or even possible, there is no reason that they should not have factored in her ethnic background for "diversity purposes". Moreover, if membership in so-called Jewish community groups carries political affiliations (such as support for Israel), that is a perfectly relevant line of questioning. It is pro-Israel groups themselves that have attempted to dominate the American Jewish community's voice and have sidelined Jewish dissidents and pushed them away from the rest of the community, which was what sparked the Open Hillel movement. Ignoring the political affiliations of so-called "Jewish" (read: Zionist) groups is irresponsible for a campus undergraduate body that wants to get rid of institutional racism. - Amith On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 9:03 PM, jay rothermel via Marxism < marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu> wrote: > ******************** POSTING RULES & NOTES ******************** > #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. > #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. > #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. > ***************************************************************** > > > http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/03/06/us/debate-on-a-jewish-student-at-ucla.html?referrer= > _________________________________________________________ > Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm > Set your options at: > http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/amithrgupta%40gmail.com > _________________________________________________________ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
