NYU Law’s Students for Justice in Palestine chapter circulated a statement in which it not only casually supported the killing of Israeli civilians but also argued that framing is everything and that the Zionist grip over the media is omnipresent.” It also referenced “Islamophobic Zionist-funded US media”
We must be clear: criticism of Israel is not necessarily antisemitic, regardless how severe. Even if harsh criticism of Israel crosses the antisemitic border, there may be marginal instances where it is sufficient for the critic to make a plausible denial.
This is not one such case. First of all, this objectionable language isn’t a critique of Israel. It’s an attack on the media of the USA and West.
Second, antisemitism is the most apparent form that hides behind antizionism. It is possible to substitute “Zionist”, and you will be left with an obvious antisemitic trope.
That is precisely what the SJP statement says. Everyone who is familiar with the recent history of antisemitism can see that Jewish control over media outlets is a very clear antisemitic trope. Wikipedia lists “controlling the media” as one of the top “antisemitic canards”.
David Duke may be able to help you if you don’t know the meaning of this phrase or doubt my explanation. For example: “There is a problem in America with a very strong, powerful tribal group that dominates our media…” And “Wow, I think this whole Trump University case, really, if we exploit it, can really expose the entire Jewish manipulation of the American media.” Sometimes Duke refers, as NYU Law’s SJP does, to “Zionist Control” of media.
It is not surprising to find an SJP chapter that mimics classic Nazi-style antisemitism. This is what SJP is known for. It is more remarkable, however, to see the reactions of other student groups.
One might believe that NYU Law students, once considered a safe haven for Jews exempted from Harvard’s anti-Jewish-quotas and whose students are sensitive to minorities, could have been among the first to condemn SJP’s antisemitic rhetoric. It would not be true.
Aaron Sibarium reported in Washington Free Beacon
Over the next 24 hours, 11 student groups wrote to the law school’s all-student listserv to express their support for the statement: the Black Allied Law Students Association, the Middle Eastern Law Students Association, the Muslim Law Students Association, the South Asian Law Students Association, the Disability Allied Law Students Association, the National Lawyers Guild, the Women of Color Collective, the Coalition on Law & Representation, the NYU Review of Law and Social Change, and Ending the Prison Industrial Complex.
The vitriol poured in when Jewish students protested against the pile-on. Michael Stamos (a first year student at the school of law) replied, “Quiet baby.” Helen Campbell, third year student at the law school, laughed off the idea that Students for Justice in Palestine ought to condemn Israeli civilian attacks. She wrote that you don’t condemn an epidemic of flu or earthquake.
Every student who signed on to SJP’s statement is responsible for at least negligently endorsing antisemitism, under the “known or should have known” standard. Those who should have known, but either did not read the SJP statement carefully or somehow missed the antisemitic implications of the Jews/Zionists-own-and-control the media shtick, should publicly withdraw their endorsement.
If I was an employer looking for NYU students to interview, I would ask anyone who is a member of any organization that has signed up to SJP antisemitism to explain why they chose to stay in the same group.