If There Is “No Place At Cornell For The KKK” – Why Is There A Place For Hamas Supporters?
My Letter to the Editor of the Cornell Daily Sun addressing their double standard, which the Sun refused to publish.
WAJ Note: This letter was provided to us by a Cornell alumnus who was unable to get it published in The Cornell Daily Sun. The background is that a Cornell senior administrator Joel Malina was asked a question at a “private” (obviously not so private) meeting of parents organized by Cornell Hillel, in the context of hateful antisemitic and anti-Israel speech allowed on campus, whether the administration also would allow the KKK on campus if invited by a student group or faculty member. The answer to this hypothetical scenario reportedly was that it would be allowed.
That raises an important free speech issue of permitting offensive speech that is easy to demagogue, and indeed, when the Sun broke the story, it set off a firestorm of demands that Malina be fired, and so on. The Sun itself issued a strong editorial rebuking the administrator, There is No Place at Cornell for the KKK, to which this alumnus wanted to respond as to why the Sun says there is no place for the KKK, but does not announce that same position with groups that support Hamas?
In the interest of airing this important issue, we have agreed to publish the letter that the Sun would not publish.
——————-
To the Editorial Board of the Sun,
I recently read the editorial titled “The KKK Has No Place at Cornell,” and generally agree with the Editorial Board’s views.
However, as a Jewish alumnus who has observed campus over the last 12 months, I had to ask myself the question: would the Editorial Board of the Sun write and publish the same viewpoint with “Hamas” replacing “KKK” as its subject?
As the editorial states: “The University has a commitment to viewpoint diversity and free speech. But when that speech veers into discrimination and targeted harassment, creating an unsafe environment for marginalized students, that’s where the line must be drawn.”
And like the article notes that the KKK is a domestic terrorist organization, Hamas — along with Palestine Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah, and Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine — has been designated by the United States as a “Foreign Terrorist Organization.”
In the last 12 months, a professor praised the October 7th massacre of Israelis as “exhilarating” and “energizing”, a Cornell student has been sentenced to 21 months for threatening to kill Jews, and Jews were prevented from accessing parts of campus and subjected to hateful rhetoric – clear examples of discrimination and targeted harassment. This has gone on to the point that organizations have reached out to New York area Jews, telling them not to apply to Cornell, as it is “not a safe place.”
I think it’s important to note that all of the above links and references were found on just page 1 of a Google News search for “Cornell Jewish”.
The Sun’s Editorial Board sees it necessary to publish this view about a hypothetical KKK member or white supremacist speaking on campus, yet (and please correct me if I’m wrong) I have not seen anything from the Sun’s Editorial Board calling out this actual discrimination and targeted harassment on campus in the last 12 months.
So I ask again, would the Sun’s editorial board agree that “Hamas” and its proponents have no place at Cornell? Or do the limits on free speech end when Jews are its subject?
Josh Mark
College of Human Ecology ’16
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Here’s what differentiates the two, KKK v. Hamas – it’s only hate speech when the left disagrees with what’s being said.
Perhaps what’s being missed in this is the nuance that there’s a difference between *allowing* speech and *agreeing* with what’s being said.
Allowing speech that is “hateful” (who gets to make that determination again?) takes courage.
Banning speech that you disagree with is cowardly and the last refuge of idiots.
Wrong assumption. There should be a place at Cornell for the KKK, namely somebody willing to argue what he believes is true about it, against the orthodoxy. Likewise for Hamas and Israel.
thesis, antithesis, synthesis. It can’t happen in a cancel culture.
You’ve made an important point.
I would reply that you’re not really an expert at something unless you are able to articulate the point of view opposite your own as least as well as your opponent does.
I don’t think rhhardin understood the article. Try reading it again.
It’s (D)ifferent when we do it.
Cornell:
“I would found an institution where any Marxist/Leftist/Socialist/Democrat can protest or shout down or physically attack anyone he/she/zi hates.”
“It isn’t free speech if you don’t let people you don’t like say things you don’t like.” (I don’t know who said it, but I like it.)
Having freedom of speech carries with it an obligation to allow others to speak freely and to be heard. That isn’t that same as agreeing with them.
That’s something the left doesn’t seem to grasp. Too many times, their reaction to speech they don’t like, is to slap their hands over the mouths of speakers so they can’t speak, instead of simply ignoring what is said (or shoving their fingers in their ears).
Increasingly, they call on the power of the State to use coercion and force to muzzle speakers with unpopular messages. Witness calls for unconstitutional censorship in the halls of Congress, or the imprisonment of people in England for their social media posts if you doubt that.
So much for ‘diversity,’ huh?
“That’s something the left doesn’t seem to grasp”
They are capable of grasping but don’t dare..
“…their reaction to speech they don’t like, is to slap their hands over the mouths of speakers so they can’t speak, instead of simply ignoring what is said (or shoving their fingers in their ears)…”
The reason these are not their reactions to speech they find offensive (and why silencing speakers is) is that their goal isn’t to not hear certain speakers, it’s to prevent others from hearing certain speakers.
The message we get from the Sun editorial board and from Cornell: “We tolerate Hamas and their supporters, and we won’t tolerate the KKK: what are you going to do about it.” Similarly they will tolerate Antisemitism, again what are you going to do about it? They know that most Jews will do nothing except perhaps write a letter to the editor, which won’t get published. These institutions know Jews won’t fight back physically, but Hamas will. This is the main reason Israel gets such hatred, they fight back: “kill us and we will kill you.”
The Sun editorial board is likely afraid of what might happen to them if they published Josh Mark’s letter.
This “newspaper” publishes only two weekly paper editions.
Also, it has daily internet postings.
In the old days, the number of pages of each edition was a limited factor.
In the current internet world, there are not any space limitations.
It appears that the editors did not want to share the authors point of view, based on content and not space limitations.
This “newspaper” publishes only two weekly paper editions.
Also, it has daily internet postings.
In the old days, the number of pages of each edition was a limited factor.
In the current internet world, there are not any space limitations.
It appears that the editors did not want to share the authors point of view, based on content and not space limitations.
The keffiyeh is the modern equivalent of the swastika, so the university’s position on the KKK and terrorist-supporting anti-Semites should be the same. Plus, criminal trespass (breaking into and occupying buildings), criminal vandalism (defacing buildings and monuments and destroying contents), kidnap (holding custodial or security staff against their will), and threats and intimidation against Jewish students IS NOT FREE SPEECH.
What is the adage? The most repugnant is the most protected….
True, but, as Capitalist-Dad has pointed out, the pro-Hamas faction on campus has been committing crimes in the name of the cause they support and not merely conducting constitutionally protected activities. Crimes (injury to innocent parties) are not constitutionally protected.
DaveGinOly and Capitalist-Dad – you are absolutely correct. Freedom of speech is just that – speech. Burning, looting, trespass, etc. are all crimes and should be punished to the fullest – or at least punished equally.
Islamofascist, Muslim supremacist and terrorist groups are viewed by leftist dhimmis and Dhimmi-crats as constituting an allegedly laudable and morally upright “resistance” against Israeli Jews’ alleged “settler-colonialism,” “apartheid,” “genocide” and other brazenly fallacious and contrived slanders that form the basis of contrived Arab Muslim victimhood and grievance mythologies.
This is how leftists and Dhimmi-crats can attempt to rationalize, whitewash, lionize and enable genocidal Muslim terrorism, rapes, murders, kidnappings and atrocities. It’s all done for an allegedly good cause, don’t you know?
josh hit the mark!
Its worth pointing out that the KKK, that so-called domestic terror group, is an organization that has allegedly repugnant viewpoints (who has actually heard anything written or spoken by a KKK member? Not I) but does not appear to foment any action other than marching together peacefully.
On the other hand, the Jewhaters are actually destroying and occupying property, harassing’s and physically attacking people and property and overtly defend and support murdering and raping Israelis. The whole student movement is rightfully called *at a minimum* terrorist adjacent.
It is a typically Dem tactic to label as terrorist any viewpoints or actions which are at cross purposes to their ideology (praying outside an abortion mill, for example) but to welcome, no matter how repugnant, views and actions which might be construed as aligned with their ideology.
For all the blah blah about “The University has a commitment to viewpoint diversity and free speech.” it is clear the University and its minions want nothing of the sort, and will close down any divergence from its own definition of diversity, which is, All Leftist, All the Time.
seems to be plenty of provable violent action from those kkkdems of yesteryear
they are the grand(wizards)fathers of the current lefty intifada against america
The KKK used to commit acts of violence…
That was when it still had power.
The gentleman with the cigar in this 1969 photo from Cornell was a long-time friend of mine, Dr. Homer Meade. It seems as if Cornell needs a reawakening.
https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/61o0LOLXsGL.jpg
Leave a Comment