Paul Wellman
Committee to Defend Academic Freedom at UCSB outside Cheadle Hall
Students Protest Anti-Defamation League’s Involvement in UCSB Matter
Professor William Robinson Investigated for Allegedly Anti-Semitic Email
Friday, May 1, 2009
Yesterday, a well-dressed group of students - most of them hailing from sociology and political science graduate programs - descended upon UCSB’s Cheadle Hall to arrange a meeting with Chancellor Henry Yang concerning charges of anti-Semitism that have been levied by the Academic Senate against sociology professor William Robinson, though not without a little hiccup. Stuck in a Cheadle Hall elevator for about 20 minutes, 13 of the students had to wait until university service workers freed them before they could reunite with others in the group. Emerging from the cramped, hot compartment, sighs of relief were uttered as the temporary captives made their way across the hall toward Yang’s office and a nervous-looking secretary who was wondering what they were all doing there. The students said that their group - the Committee to Defend Academic Freedom at UCSB - had been denied a meeting slot with Yang, as the chancellor said he had no comments on the issue.
By Paul Wellman
On the way to the 5th floor of Cheadle Hall 13 members of the Committee to Defend Academic Freedom at UCSB were briefly trapped in a malfunctioning elevator that was eventually opened with the help of SB County Fire Department and UCSB Maintenance department.
Yang was not in, as he is currently in Washington, DC, but students met with Kevin McCauley, Yang’s executive assistant, who keeps track of the chancellor’s schedule. “We feel that it’s unfair that the administration will meet with an outside organization on this issue and not with an internal group concerned with academic freedom and student affairs,” one of the group’s leaders said, referring to a meeting several members of the faculty had in March with Abraham Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League (ADL).
During that meeting, faculty members who were there said they were invited to lunch with Foxman, supposedly to discuss UCSB’s new Jewish studies program, but that the conversation was centered around an email Robinson - who is Jewish - had sent to 80 students in January that compared Israel’s occupation of Gaza to the Nazi ghettoization of Polish Jews in Warsaw during World War II. “When the meeting started, Foxman quickly launched into what I would call a rant about what he said was an anti-Semitic email that Robinson sent to his class,” said Harold Marcuse, a history professor who was present at the meeting.
By Paul Wellman
Committee to Defend Academic Freedom at UCSB trying to arrange a meeting with Chancellor Henry Yang to discuss the controversy over professor William Robinson’s alleged anti-semitic statements.
The email in question, which included pictures of German troops during World War II side-by-side with pictures of Israeli soldiers, was pulled from a Web site by Robinson, who added his own commentary at the top of the page. “Controversy is at the heart of academic inquiry,” said Robinson, adding that an American Society of University Professors document titled Freedom in the Classroom states that students should have their beliefs challenged during academic study. “Historical comparison is at the heart of academic freedom.” However, two students in his Sociology 130SG course - Rebecca Joseph and Tova Hausman - were offended by the material and reported it to Los Angeles’s Simon Wiesenthal Center as being anti-Semitic. In the formal complaints filed by the students - which are available on the Committee for Academic Freedom’s Web site - one of the students said she had contacted Robinson by email prior to filing the complaint, but received a response indicating that the email he had sent was for personal information only and not related to course material. “I don’t know the students; they never approached me,” said Robinson.
At the heart of the debate is the issue of how the university should handle disputes over academic freedom. Robinson and his supporters assert that issues such as this one should be dealt with internally, as part of a department’s dynamic process of keeping its curriculum relevant. “The right of the faculty member to impart material that is provocative or offensive is part of the academic process, and students should have the right to respond,” said Dick Flacks, a professor emeritus in UCSB’s sociology department, longtime activist, and active member of Santa Barbara’s Jewish community. “These students went to outside sources - the Simon Wiesenthal Center and ADL - and those groups turned this into a case where this professor was guilty of discrimination. A university is supposed to be a place of dialogue, not a place of allegations and judicial proceedings,” he said, adding that he didn’t blame the students for their actions, but that involving the judicial process in this case damages the academic atmosphere.
Foxman said that he brought up the Robinson issue at the March faculty lunch, but denied applying pressure on UCSB faculty and administration, as has been charged by several of Robinson’s supporters. “We made no demands that [Robinson] be fired or disciplined,” said Foxman. “We weren’t interested in making this a public issue. We wanted to protect the students from intimidation.”
Kevin McCauley, Executive Assistant to the Chancellor, (left) said he would need to talk with Chancellor Yang before a meeting could be scheduled with the Committee to Defend Academic Freedom at UCSB.
Comments
It seems to me that the adjective "anti-semitic" is used too broadly by many groups and has therefore lost its value in rational discussion. I originally thought it was associated with racist behavior against Jews simply because of who they are. But now it seems anybody who criticizes the policies of the Israeli state, or has an opposing interpretation of Jewish or Israeli history, is labeled an anti-semite. This to me is just plain wrong.
As an example, if I criticized Bush or Obama for their policy positions, would that mean I'm un-American? Of course not. Criticism, critical thinking, and comparative analysis are natural aspects of debate and part of the academic process.
So I agree with the Students for Academic Freedom - the ADL should not have butted in.
EastBeach (anonymous profile)
May 1, 2009 at 7:44 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Robinson loses all credibility when he brands the ADL "very aggressive right wing". Anyone even slightly familiar with the progressive, inclusive role that ADL has played in the past two decades when it comes to social justice, broadening and educating law enforcement and educational groups regarding- bullying, hate crimes, sensitivity to lgbt issues---knows that is a patent lie and truly demeans this mans assertions. Sounds like he just doesn't want anyone---student, community group or fellow academic questioning his bias. oh well. academic freedom means the students have that freedom as well. Grow up.
sbsleuth99 (anonymous profile)
May 1, 2009 at 8 p.m. (Suggest removal)
So while everyone is finger pointing, the issue at hand is being buried beneath the complaining that is going on.
Nobody should be afraid of what anyone else says; if Robinson offends someone, then that person needs to be able to articulate their viewpoint and not go running to the ADL. As the saying goes "build a better mousetrap".
billclausen (anonymous profile)
May 1, 2009 at 10:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Chancellor Yang may not make an official statement in response to the ADL, but let's remember that university bosses are always looking for a big endowment. Philanthropy often comes with strings attached. Let's hope Prof. Robinson doesn't get Finkelsteinized, but it could happen here... ? The Committee to Defend Academic Freedom has displayed laudatory courage.
As to the commenter who implies that Foxman is a beacon of illumination, perhaps he's just a reflexive Israel-firster. Foxman's notorious for spreading the "anti-Semitism" implication too far, cheapening its meaning as EastBeach notes. Prof. Flacks is right that ADL's over-kill is a danger to Jews at large... the muzzled herd may turn and trample the sheepdogs, as well as their innocent co-religionists.
Chicago Jewish News wrote: "Foxman's detractors include Holocaust survivors, pro-Israel professors, observant and secular Jews, and columnists for publications diverse as Jerusalem Post, New Republic, Jewish Press, Wall Street Journal and Forward."
When Jews pull the racism card in response to political commentary, it looks ever-so-much like a soccer player writhing theatrically to fake a foul.
As for the two maimed students, with proper bed-rest they should have a full and speedy recovery.
Adonis_Tate (anonymous profile)
May 1, 2009 at 10:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"Robinson loses all credibility when he brands the ADL "very aggressive right wing". ...."
- sbsleuth99
I decided to poke around to see if there's any merit in Robinson's characterization of the ADL. According to the Wikipedia citation for the ADL, there is:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Def...
So the big picture I carried away is ... the ADL is a mixed bag. The ADL has in the U.S. promoted civil rights and even gun control. But on the subject of Israel, it sits on the right-wing of the political spectrum. That to me is terribly ironic if one should ponder the civil rights of non-Jews in the occupied territories (yes, yes, I know, horrible things have been committed by all sides).
So to me, Robinson still seems credible.
p.s. The Wikipedia citation also sheds light on Adonis_tate's reference to political scientist Norman Finklestein. He called out those on the Jewish right who were over-using the label anti-semite on critics of Israel. This apparently contributed to his denial of tenure at DePaul University.
EastBeach (anonymous profile)
May 2, 2009 at 1:32 a.m. (Suggest removal)
"As for the two maimed students, with proper bed-rest they should have a full and speedy recovery."
Ha!
billclausen (anonymous profile)
May 2, 2009 at 4 a.m. (Suggest removal)
What hit me after I posted the first time was how incapable these students are of critical thinking--as evidenced by having to run to the ADL for help. Why is it that they cannot stand on their own feet and rely on the strength of their argument?
Going to school should be more than just about learning rote politics but rather should be about teaching people to come to conclusions based upon careful self-critique and examination of facts.
billclausen (anonymous profile)
May 2, 2009 at 4:11 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I wonder how Prof. Robinson would feel if someone had sent him a picture depicting one of his heroes, Che Guevara in an SS Uniform? Guevara was a racist who carried out political executions, so the comparison seems just as valid as the one Robinson made.
Guevara's racism
http://www.reason.com/news/show/28436...
and from a different Independent, Guevara as "killing machine."
http://www.independent.org/newsroom/a...
revisionist (anonymous profile)
May 2, 2009 at 7:46 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Rev, funny you bring up the Che thing. As an I.V. resident & a Cuban immigrant it always sickens me to see supposedly intelligent young people parading around w/ t-shirts that have his picture on them. This vermin is a Hitler incarnate in my view.
Yet these "social justice" types seem to feel he is a saint & even worship the guy.
So I've decided to go on a counteroffensive w/ my "Felix Rodriguez, REAL Cuban Hero" t-shirt.
Felix is the Cuban born CIA agent that erradicated that tumorous growth off the the butt of the Earth on a bright sunny day in Bolivia, 1967.
Talk about anyone NOT progressive should ALWAYS begin w/ mention of Che & may he burn in hell along w/ Castro, Pol Pot, Idi Amin, Stalin & the rest of that scourge.
Professor Robinson IS entitled to his view, but so is EVERYBODY else.
Like Bill Clausen often states: "You're not a left leaning bully professor & I'm not a cowardly freshman in your class" (or something like that). W/ that statement, Bill has managed to provide a view into the average left-leaning college classroom & the indoctrination that occurs there by some professors.
I think the "kind" professor was bullying students to accept his point of view.
As for the comparison of IDF to nazi storm troopers, HAHAHA! So wrong!
Israel invaded Gaza after numerous rocket attacks, suicide bombings, sniper attacks, mortar shellings, border crossings to commit terrorist acts by the Palestinians & Gaza accepts TONS of $$$ from Iran & Syria to carry out their war of proxy against the legitimate state of Israel.
Nazi Germany invaded Poland w/ ZERO provocation from Poland, systematically segregated Jews from the rest of the population & had a scheme in mind.
In all, freedom in the classroom is legit, but does it have to ONLY apply to academia? I don't think so :) henry
hank (anonymous profile)
May 2, 2009 at 10:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The following comment makes a good point about the hypocrisy of the Left on the issue of free speech and open discussion. From
http://volokh.com/posts/1241179913.shtml
"As for the rather hasty charge of anti-Semitism, while it's unfortunate, it's hard to feel that much sympathy for the kind of person who in 2006 in effect accused everyone who opposes illegal immigration of racism. Given that Robinson is so quick to level such exaggerated charges about racism, his being accused of anti-Semitism may be both unjust and poetic justice at the same time."
The article by Robinson referred to above, where he equates the Minutemen with the KKK is here
http://alainet.org/active/11240&lang=en
revisionist (anonymous profile)
May 2, 2009 at 11:36 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Finally, at one time, people like Dick Flacks and William Robinson on the socialist Left were solidly pro-Israel -- here's Pete Seeger, who sang odes to "Uncle Joe (Stalin)", of all people singing Tzena Tzena
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WyX-Rc...
revisionist (anonymous profile)
May 2, 2009 at 11:40 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Pete Seeger was not only a communist, but also an idiot.
JohnLocke (anonymous profile)
May 2, 2009 at 8:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)
And still is.
JohnLocke (anonymous profile)
May 2, 2009 at 8:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Yeah! a complete tool, that Seeger...
anyone who has committed his whole life to supporting the less fortunate, peace, and human rights, penned songs which will live forever, taught a generation (or two) to play banjo, and was the subject of an entire Bruce Springsteen album -- that is a loser!
As a great man said "I hold that he who takes offense always errs, but not so he who gives it."
binky (anonymous profile)
May 2, 2009 at 9:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)
From what I've read, Pete Seeger later denounced Josef Stalin.
billclausen (anonymous profile)
May 2, 2009 at 9:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)
May 3rd is his 90th birthday.
billclausen (anonymous profile)
May 2, 2009 at 10:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)
As a great man said "I hold that he who takes offense always errs, but not so he who gives it."
Yeah, true that, but it can go both ways :) henry
hank (anonymous profile)
May 3, 2009 at 7:35 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Must be lots of great men in these blogs...
JohnLocke (anonymous profile)
May 3, 2009 at 9:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Then it's settled. We're ALL great men! HAHAHA! :) henry
hank (anonymous profile)
May 3, 2009 at 4:44 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The ADL is a so called civil rights movement advocating for the rights of Jews. Currently they are attempting to suppress a Jew, Professor Robinson, who is guilty of straying from the ADL party line. There is a certain irony in that.
I agree with Prof Flacks when he says this kind of suppression of free speech is a danger to Jews everywhere, and everybody else for that matter. It is also an insult of our intelligence. Criticism of Israel, with a few exceptions, is not anti-semitism. Professor Robinson is expressing views that even some Israeli's hold.
lbsaltzman (anonymous profile)
May 3, 2009 at 7:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)
YoyuTube is now coordinating with the ADL to censor "hate" speech. When Abe Foxman spoke in Hope Ranch recently, he mentioned the need to "tame the Internet." The meeting was described in glowing terms in the SBNP.
Federal Hate Crimes Bill, HR 1913 was passed in the House April 29 (thank you, Democrats), and on April 28 Ted Kennedy introduced his Senate version of the Federal Hate Crimes Bill, S 909. Another sell-out not brought to you by public campaign financing! Laws are subject to interpretation, and interpretation is also subject to influence (I can still say that!)
AIPAC held their annual "policy conference" (ahem) starting Saturday, and presumably about half of our senators and congresspersons showed up to pay obeisance as in past years. Not all Jews are hard-core Israel-firsters, but our politicians act like it's safer to assume that they are.
Soon we may be like Canada, Australia and several European countries where you can be jailed for citing "canards" however true. We may extradite citizens whose comments appear on foreign computer screens. I don't know about Joe Six-pack, but I'd just as soon go on being "repugnant" and "repellent" as a free American than be jailed for inconveniencing a rich lobby.
(BTW, Hitler's ghost told me to "regurgitate" all those ancient untruths.)
Adonis_Tate (anonymous profile)
May 3, 2009 at 11:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)
So was he just presenting a contrast or was he assassinating by association? Was he presenting facts or drawing a conclusion. Similar traits does not a siamese twin make. And a good teacher doesn't present the answer with the question. Or answer a question at all when the answer itself is subjective. The value in that kind of question is in the consideration.
Ezzyme (anonymous profile)
May 4, 2009 at 12:41 a.m. (Suggest removal)
You can't do much better than to be opposed by people like "revisionist" and "John Locke", who are unable to make an intellectually honest argument.
JayB (anonymous profile)
May 4, 2009 at 1:03 a.m. (Suggest removal)
In support of Adonis Tate's concerns about the erosion of free speech, I present the following link. I realize that such laws do not exist in the United States--yet--but what is going on in Sweden is happening in the name of creating a more tolerant society. This ties in the the reluctance to criticize Israel; in short, don't criticize any historically oppressed group or face the consequences.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%85ke...
billclausen (anonymous profile)
May 4, 2009 at 4:18 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I wish we lived in a world where ADL, Prof. Robinson, and UCSB students could hold hands, break bread, and argue sensibly. Wait, we do. Take advantage of it.
boysandgirls (anonymous profile)
May 4, 2009 at 10:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Guevara's racism
http://www.reason.com/news/show/28436.ht...
and from a different Independent, Guevara as "killing machine."
http://www.independent.org/newsroom/arti...
Sorry to bring this up so late, but there is no racism save for somebody's opinion about Che from reading a book. The second is an opinion piece as well. In fact, it is propaganda. Let's see, a revolutionary involved with wars and government takeover, hmmm.... a killing machine? naaahhhh..... I now see the revision will not be televised.....
spacey (anonymous profile)
May 4, 2009 at 10:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)
If in this country, a jew (in this case Professor Robinson) can criticize Israel and be accused, even "persecuted" for being anti-semitic, then the term has truly lost its meaning and has taken instead the form of an adjunct to muzzle opinion and suffocate the truth. I can only say that if we allow this systemetic exclusion of expression of anything that stimulates debate and intellectual reasoning, ...then our freedom has certainly met its demise. I feel sorry for you, America, "the land of the free!!!!"
Nannoun (anonymous profile)
May 5, 2009 at 10:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)
So was he just presenting a contrast or was he assassinating by association? Was he presenting facts or drawing a conclusion.
-Ezzyme
Good questions. In my experience there can be very fine lines (or areas of gray). There are lots of different teaching styles out there.
Looking back to my college days @UC, some of my professors were kinda bland and stuck to rote lectures and textbook assignments. Others were much more dynamic, interactive, and "aggressive" in their teaching styles. I much preferred the latter, they really challenged me. Remember, even when a college professor says to a student, "interpret it this way", they are often indirectly challenging you and giving you two choices - (1) reason and accept his/her answer, or (2) come up with a different position and support it. That is the academic process and the extent to which that can happen is a measure of the quality of the student/teacher relationship.
Whether that kind of atmosphere is fostered by the professor is difficult to assess just by reading written lecture notes. You need to be there in the classroom, listen to the lectures, and take advantage of office hours to speak with the professor. You also need to talk with the grad students who are serving as that professor's TA's. Those TA's are often studying under the professor and can provide additional perspective or interpretation.
At a 4-year university where the students are upper division juniors and seniors, there is no need for spoon feeding.
EastBeach (anonymous profile)
May 5, 2009 at 12:33 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Anti-Israel does not equal anti-semitic.
The original e-mail is accessible here: http://sb4af.wordpress.com/robinson-c...
It is not anti-semitic, but wouldn't a good teacher lead the students through the facts, rather than ramming his own conclusions into their heads?
jimstoic (anonymous profile)
May 5, 2009 at 4:10 p.m. (Suggest removal)
1
Preston has done a truly horrible job of reporting on this story. In his opening paragraph, he says "charges of anti-Semitism . . . have been levied by the Academic Senate". And that is just not true. The University is primarily concerned with Robinson's violation of the faculty code of conduct, which prohibits a professor from sending students unsolicited emails that are unrelated to the course work. Such an action would be an abuse of power and that is what the University is (in my view, appropriately) investigating.
I think that the University may also be investigating whether the professor was honest in his response to the allegations. One of the students said that the professor told him (or her) that the email was personal and unrelated to the course work. Of course, now he and his supporters are taking a contrary position - that the email was related to the course and that the university, the students and the public should not be interfering with the professor's academic freedom to teach whatever he likes.
In any event, it seems almost as if Preston simply cut and paste his article from Robinson's supporters' website, or let them write most of the article for him.
2
Robinson was the person that put the charges of "anti-Semitism" in play and he did that in the SPAM email that he sent to his students. Before giving any of his students an opportunity to respond to his email or debate its content, he made it clear that he would view any criticism of his ideology as an allegation of anti-Semitism. That is not "academic inquiry", it is academic blackmail.
3
I commend these two students for taking a stand that they knew would be incredibly unpopular with their peers. The UCSB community has been hijacked by the pro-Palestinian lobby that refuses to recognize the complexity of the Arab-Israeli conflict. If most UCSB students are to be believed, Israel alone caused the Arab-Israeli conflict and Israel alone has the power to make peace with the Palestinians. If any student that has "studied" the issue believes that (in any small degree), then the university is simply failing them. This conflict is incredibly complex and the Palestinians, though not blameless, are pawns in a greater struggle that involves Syria, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Lebanon, the United States, Israel, many European nations and a host of non-state actors - some of whom are extremely powerful.
4
The professor's original email was entirely devoid of academic merit. It was propaganda and nothing more. Whether the professor violated the faculty code of conduct or not, the suggestion that something can be learned from the juxtaposition of graphic photographic images is academically and intellectually absurd.
The Holocaust was a singular event in history. The Nakba was a singular event in history. It is time for academia to recognize that it is not necessary to destroy all evidence of the Holocaust to understand the significance of the Nakba.
MesaMesa (anonymous profile)
May 6, 2009 at 5:28 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Dear "MesaMesa,"
Given the fact that everyone I talked to gave me a different interpretation of this scenario, and that it took until Monday to catch up with UCSB officials regarding their academic inquiry procedure, I'd like to see anyone else do a better job synthesizing such a nebulous patch of information on such short notice. I certainly didn't fault those two students, who everyone agrees were well within their rights to complain, but I think that your reading of my piece is colored by your own leanings. I was as balanced as I could possibly be. My job is to cover all sides of the debate, and the entire situation was framed within the context of the immediate action that day, which happened to be a protest by the Committee to Defend Academic Freedom at UCSB.
Cheers, -b
benjamachine (Ben Preston)
May 6, 2009 at 11:34 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Came across this article about how UCSB had already severed ties with ADL last year for its stance on another human right issue.
http://www.asbarez.com/2009/06/05/uc-...
Gaucho714 (anonymous profile)
June 7, 2009 at 2:31 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"Given the prevailing lack of discipline, it would have been impossible to use Congolese machine-gunners to defend the base from air attack: they did not know how to handle their weapons and did not want to learn." This is an example of Guevara's racism?
Anyway, MesaMesa's argument is in places starkly irrational. How does Robinson put the charges of anti-Semitism in play by sending materials critical of Israel through the course distribution list? Is this because some students my think the e-mail is anti-Semitic? Isn't that what happened?
The professor's original email was, first, a letter to the editor from a Jew concerning the Palestinian situation, the publication of which caused the editor to be fired in the face of a boycott by the Jewish community. The letter and the firing have tremendous academic value in a class concerning global issues.
Second, the e-mail contained a photo essay comparing photographs of German brutality against Jews during WWII, many of which concerning the German colonization of Eastern Europe, to photographs of Israeli brutality against Palestinians during the Zionist colonization of Palestine, which extends through the present. The value of this comparison in a sociology course on global issues is self-evident. You have to be willfully ignorant not to see it.
The suggestion that US institutions of higher learning find it "necessary to destroy all evidence of the Holocaust to understand the significance of the Nakba" is hyperbolic nonsense. Holocaust studies is a fundamental part of curricula across the United States. Who is trying to destroy the evidence of the Holocaust? Holocaust denial when it comes to the Judeocide is virtually nonexistent in the US academy.
Finally, like every murder, every historical event is a singular event taken in terms of itself. This is why, if we want to understand the deeper structures and dynamics that cause and order events, we must compare historical cases. If by singular, you are saying it is sacred, then you very wrong. No historical event is sacred.
wwsword (anonymous profile)
June 27, 2009 at 11:23 a.m. (Suggest removal)