Okay, Sir, I get it: you are (thankfully) different than the idiots, charlatans, terrorist wannabes and actual terrorists who were and are so prominent in their praise of Hamas. Further, you assert that there were other academics who shared your horror over the attacks.
Yup, I get it.
Now, a question or two for you, Sir.
Why was there not an organized group of academics who publicly stated their horror of the attacks and publicly supported Israel? You know, a public grouping of "other" academics to counterpoint all the leftist stupidity and offensive stuff. You argue that the various student groups and the various (stupid and unthinking - oxymoron, no?) university related groups are not indicative of "real" thought at the university level. Why were there only a few names attached to your rebuttal? Why have other academics not asserted their "innocence" as have you? Are you being very careful to not stick up your head lest tall poppy syndrome be in effect at the universities?
I submit, Sir, that, while Ms. Gerson was not one hundred per cent correct, she was substantively correct. I further submit, Sir, that she was SO substantively correct that her grouping of the university communities as being anti-Israel, anti-Jew, pro-Hamas (which so offended you) is a reasonable analysis on her part.
In other words, Sir, you comment much too little and much too late. You MUST be willing to stand up and be counted, publicly, promptly and in all your glory, for the whole damned world to see. And to attack you if they will (and they will) but you must stand up and be counted!
Well said, I think the painting of white and black is always dangerous in a world that is so much in shades of grey. I appreciate the clarity of thought and the nuance that shows is a spectrum of views, opinions, and knowledge even in universities. Thank you to The Line for publishing this.
No, it's not everyone on the left or all university profs. But it's important for us to know the names and professional affiliations of the Nazis among us. Here's a list of 4,000+ who have torn their masks off. I note 300+ professors on this list - which of course is not a comprehensive list of the profs and other Jew-haters willing to publicly justify the Hamas attack: https://hyperallergic.com/852779/4000-canadian-artists-and-cultural-workers-sign-palestine-solidarity-letter/
Nov 1, 2023·edited Nov 6, 2023Liked by Line Editor
It doesn't take more than a few minutes to find numerous academics that completely fit the description Gerson originally made. And I don't know if Mr. Bratt is dishonest to himself or to the readers when he downplays the power student groups hold over faculties and in fact entire universities. Some of the events that have unfolded on campuses in the past few weeks are horrific and have Jewish students truly fearing for their lives. Safe space suddenly takes on true meaning. What's the response of the universities where these events happen, other than days to put out some hand-wringing drivel?
Reviewing Mr. Bratt's Twitter feed in regards to the conflict, I would consider it to be appropriately innocuous. He did manage to repost tweets that either imply or directly blame the explosion at al-Ahli Arab Hospital on Israel. I am certainly not seeing him challenge any of the academics that Gerson is so rightfully offended by.
What's my point? I am betting Mr. Bratt is very conscious of not offending some of the students he claims to have no sway over the institution he works for.
And BTW, have a look at the milquetoast "Statement on violence in the Middle East" offered up by Mount Royal University - so brave, isn't it?
"The recent Hamas terrorist attack on Israel and the horrific impacts on innocent lives resulting from the ongoing conflict in Israel and Gaza is a matter of deep concern for members of our Mount Royal University community. This has been particularly distressing for both Israeli and Palestinian community members — including students, faculty and staff and those with direct ties to the region. We extend our sincere sympathies to all those affected by these terrible events.
We encourage anyone who may be impacted directly or indirectly by this violence to make use of the resources and supports available. These are listed below."
And why, exactly, should their statement read otherwise? Looks like they acknowledge the real harms done to members of both communities, which is considerate.
Why do they need to be "brave", and further to the point, what would "brave" look like? Because you could easily point to anyone saying that Hamas' actions were justified or saying that the immense suffering inflicted upon the people in Gaza is justified and call them "brave" despite both positions being morally abhorrent.
I believe the statement should have specifically stated antisemitism would under no circumstances be tolerated. It's been simmering just under the surface for years, and it's taken the world all of three weeks to reveal itself.
Why is addressing the irrational hatred of Jews so difficult? It has to start with somebody; why don't academics be one of the first groups to do so?
Well, they do actually: their human rights policy expressly spells out that discrimination based on religious beliefs will not be tolerated, which would certainly include antisemitism: https://www.mtroyal.ca/AcademicSupport/_pdfs/policy_1702.pdf
I hardly think some language hidden on a website is as effective as making an explicit point in a news release entitled "Statement on violence in the Middle East"!!!
Well, might I suggest that you write to them expressing your consternation? I don't work for them, but I'd certainly support any well-intentioned effort.
Good points, thanks to the line for posting differing opinions.
I do have one bone to pick on the form, though. Please, please, please stop using initialisms (IR in this case) without at least taking the time to explain what they mean. They make comprehension much more difficult for the uninitiated and it really doesn't take much work to fully spell out the words.
This is not the first time it happens in the line, hence my bringing it up.
I agree with Bratt on a lot of things here too, but dismissing student groups voices and opinions are one thing, but you can't just ignore the actions of student groups in places like Cooper Union where Jewish students were barricaded into a room while those harmless student groups waved terrorist flags while terrorizing Jewish students. Had that situation occurred at MRU I'm sure Bratt would be singing a different tune.
I'm not so sure Geoff. 100% guarantee that MRU has quietly issued very strict guidelines on public comment, and those guidelines are designed not to offend the student groups the university fears the most.
Let's not forget that in 2022 fully ONE THIRD of students in North America doubted the Holocaust even happened. MRU is terrified of doing something to bring that group to life.
Rick, I absolutely accept your commentary and in my separate comment I have asserted that Bratt's protest of innocence is much too little and much too late. I further stated that he should have stood up and brayed his opposition at the top of his lungs as this stupidity was happening. If MRU issued such guidelines he should have violated them!
I appreciate this article and it is a valuable addition to this conversation. The point Jen made very well is that any academic who purports to justify Hamas' actions is abhorrent, even if not every academic behaves in such a manner.
If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, chances are..........put all of your various subsets of leftists, professors, students, politicians in the same room and hold a vote on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict....i'd bet a month of your tenured salary that you would not see a single hand raised for Israel.......that is what Gerson was writing about.
Many good points. The issue raised is very real, but I think Jen was responding to the MSM reports which seldom sought out actual experts. The Media focused on students and academics that had no particular expertise in the ME. Having spent time in the Levant region and read into the history before and after the creation of the state of Israel I could easily discern that many the media quoted had feelings, but not feelings based on knowledge.
Methinks, Prof. Bratt, that you slice and dice to no avail...and "academics" have got to wear the decline in respect for the entire "wide portrait" of academe. Once uniformly respected, universities--and the people they employ--are, rightly, one of the institutions now mistrusted.
Excellent article. Tragic events tend to illicit reaction everywhere, as they should particularly when civilian life is taken and in brutal fashion. However, stirring more dissent and polarization is not helpful or factual. Thanks for bringing some factual insight in response.
I really appreciate the "Flipping the Line" posts. Its an important part (to me) of why I subscribe.
Okay, Sir, I get it: you are (thankfully) different than the idiots, charlatans, terrorist wannabes and actual terrorists who were and are so prominent in their praise of Hamas. Further, you assert that there were other academics who shared your horror over the attacks.
Yup, I get it.
Now, a question or two for you, Sir.
Why was there not an organized group of academics who publicly stated their horror of the attacks and publicly supported Israel? You know, a public grouping of "other" academics to counterpoint all the leftist stupidity and offensive stuff. You argue that the various student groups and the various (stupid and unthinking - oxymoron, no?) university related groups are not indicative of "real" thought at the university level. Why were there only a few names attached to your rebuttal? Why have other academics not asserted their "innocence" as have you? Are you being very careful to not stick up your head lest tall poppy syndrome be in effect at the universities?
I submit, Sir, that, while Ms. Gerson was not one hundred per cent correct, she was substantively correct. I further submit, Sir, that she was SO substantively correct that her grouping of the university communities as being anti-Israel, anti-Jew, pro-Hamas (which so offended you) is a reasonable analysis on her part.
In other words, Sir, you comment much too little and much too late. You MUST be willing to stand up and be counted, publicly, promptly and in all your glory, for the whole damned world to see. And to attack you if they will (and they will) but you must stand up and be counted!
At last ( and quite rare for The Line), a calm and thoughtfully balanced treatment of a truly difficult subject, from a credible source. Bravo!
Well said, I think the painting of white and black is always dangerous in a world that is so much in shades of grey. I appreciate the clarity of thought and the nuance that shows is a spectrum of views, opinions, and knowledge even in universities. Thank you to The Line for publishing this.
Yes of course "both sides"
No, it's not everyone on the left or all university profs. But it's important for us to know the names and professional affiliations of the Nazis among us. Here's a list of 4,000+ who have torn their masks off. I note 300+ professors on this list - which of course is not a comprehensive list of the profs and other Jew-haters willing to publicly justify the Hamas attack: https://hyperallergic.com/852779/4000-canadian-artists-and-cultural-workers-sign-palestine-solidarity-letter/
It doesn't take more than a few minutes to find numerous academics that completely fit the description Gerson originally made. And I don't know if Mr. Bratt is dishonest to himself or to the readers when he downplays the power student groups hold over faculties and in fact entire universities. Some of the events that have unfolded on campuses in the past few weeks are horrific and have Jewish students truly fearing for their lives. Safe space suddenly takes on true meaning. What's the response of the universities where these events happen, other than days to put out some hand-wringing drivel?
Reviewing Mr. Bratt's Twitter feed in regards to the conflict, I would consider it to be appropriately innocuous. He did manage to repost tweets that either imply or directly blame the explosion at al-Ahli Arab Hospital on Israel. I am certainly not seeing him challenge any of the academics that Gerson is so rightfully offended by.
What's my point? I am betting Mr. Bratt is very conscious of not offending some of the students he claims to have no sway over the institution he works for.
And BTW, have a look at the milquetoast "Statement on violence in the Middle East" offered up by Mount Royal University - so brave, isn't it?
"The recent Hamas terrorist attack on Israel and the horrific impacts on innocent lives resulting from the ongoing conflict in Israel and Gaza is a matter of deep concern for members of our Mount Royal University community. This has been particularly distressing for both Israeli and Palestinian community members — including students, faculty and staff and those with direct ties to the region. We extend our sincere sympathies to all those affected by these terrible events.
We encourage anyone who may be impacted directly or indirectly by this violence to make use of the resources and supports available. These are listed below."
And why, exactly, should their statement read otherwise? Looks like they acknowledge the real harms done to members of both communities, which is considerate.
Why do they need to be "brave", and further to the point, what would "brave" look like? Because you could easily point to anyone saying that Hamas' actions were justified or saying that the immense suffering inflicted upon the people in Gaza is justified and call them "brave" despite both positions being morally abhorrent.
I believe the statement should have specifically stated antisemitism would under no circumstances be tolerated. It's been simmering just under the surface for years, and it's taken the world all of three weeks to reveal itself.
Why is addressing the irrational hatred of Jews so difficult? It has to start with somebody; why don't academics be one of the first groups to do so?
Well, they do actually: their human rights policy expressly spells out that discrimination based on religious beliefs will not be tolerated, which would certainly include antisemitism: https://www.mtroyal.ca/AcademicSupport/_pdfs/policy_1702.pdf
I hardly think some language hidden on a website is as effective as making an explicit point in a news release entitled "Statement on violence in the Middle East"!!!
Well, might I suggest that you write to them expressing your consternation? I don't work for them, but I'd certainly support any well-intentioned effort.
Good points, thanks to the line for posting differing opinions.
I do have one bone to pick on the form, though. Please, please, please stop using initialisms (IR in this case) without at least taking the time to explain what they mean. They make comprehension much more difficult for the uninitiated and it really doesn't take much work to fully spell out the words.
This is not the first time it happens in the line, hence my bringing it up.
I agree with Bratt on a lot of things here too, but dismissing student groups voices and opinions are one thing, but you can't just ignore the actions of student groups in places like Cooper Union where Jewish students were barricaded into a room while those harmless student groups waved terrorist flags while terrorizing Jewish students. Had that situation occurred at MRU I'm sure Bratt would be singing a different tune.
I'm not so sure Geoff. 100% guarantee that MRU has quietly issued very strict guidelines on public comment, and those guidelines are designed not to offend the student groups the university fears the most.
Let's not forget that in 2022 fully ONE THIRD of students in North America doubted the Holocaust even happened. MRU is terrified of doing something to bring that group to life.
Rick, I absolutely accept your commentary and in my separate comment I have asserted that Bratt's protest of innocence is much too little and much too late. I further stated that he should have stood up and brayed his opposition at the top of his lungs as this stupidity was happening. If MRU issued such guidelines he should have violated them!
I appreciate this article and it is a valuable addition to this conversation. The point Jen made very well is that any academic who purports to justify Hamas' actions is abhorrent, even if not every academic behaves in such a manner.
If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, chances are..........put all of your various subsets of leftists, professors, students, politicians in the same room and hold a vote on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict....i'd bet a month of your tenured salary that you would not see a single hand raised for Israel.......that is what Gerson was writing about.
Many good points. The issue raised is very real, but I think Jen was responding to the MSM reports which seldom sought out actual experts. The Media focused on students and academics that had no particular expertise in the ME. Having spent time in the Levant region and read into the history before and after the creation of the state of Israel I could easily discern that many the media quoted had feelings, but not feelings based on knowledge.
A welcome dose of nuance to a fraught situation.
Methinks, Prof. Bratt, that you slice and dice to no avail...and "academics" have got to wear the decline in respect for the entire "wide portrait" of academe. Once uniformly respected, universities--and the people they employ--are, rightly, one of the institutions now mistrusted.
Not pay any attention to the students? They are adults and are eligible to vote. We are also constantly reminded that they are "the future".
Excellent article. Tragic events tend to illicit reaction everywhere, as they should particularly when civilian life is taken and in brutal fashion. However, stirring more dissent and polarization is not helpful or factual. Thanks for bringing some factual insight in response.
Very well expressed, I agree completely.