Hannah Cann tells us why she loves political correctness.
Do you have swine flu? No. Do you know anybody who does have swine flu? Probably not. So what's all the fuss about?
Can't afford ethical clothing but can afford a night out at Ziggy's? Jennifer Heyes discusses where students' priorities should really lie.
Three of The Yorker's blogs team have had a hard think about what general rules they live their lives by and written them down in the form of their own Personal Philosophies.
The original motion called for a ‘comprehensive and consistent’ boycott of all Israeli academic institutions, a provocative and forcefully articulated motion which lead to widespread condemnation from the international academic community. Fearing prosecution under the Race Relations Act on the charge of ‘harassment on the grounds of race or nationality’, union officials decided that a more ‘softly softly’ semantic approach was necessary.
Utilising the kind of evasive political patois that even Tony Blair would be proud of, a motion was passed on Wednesday which required union members "to consider the moral and political implications of educational links with Israeli institutions’.
Furthermore, this nebulous directive requires union members ‘to discuss the occupation with individuals and institutions concerned, including Israeli colleagues with whom they are collaborating." In a nutshell, academics are now obliged to vet potential colleagues, to ask pertinent political questions, embracing those who toe the party line and exiling those who don’t.
Refusing to deal with Israeli academics who disagree with you as if you are the torchbearer of definitive truth is incredibly stubborn and just a little bit sanctimonious.
Now, I don’t doubt that higher education in the Palestinian territories is seriously hindered by the Israeli occupation. Strict controls on the import of books and supplies along with the imposition of road blocks and checkpoints all hinder the acquisition and exchange of knowledge. However, this motion is misguided and will do nothing to help the Palestinian cause. For a start, it clearly undermines everything that academia is supposed to stand for: free and open debate, a willingness to consider the ideas and opinions of others even if they are in direct opposition to your own.
Refusing to deal with Israeli academics who disagree with you as if you are the torchbearer of definitive truth is incredibly stubborn and just a little bit sanctimonious. And what about the many Israeli academics who are sympathetic to the Palestinian cause, figures who could tangibly effect the relationship between the two peoples? Ostracising the universities they work for hardly seems like the best way to go about it- even if as individuals they might pass the newly implemented vetting process.
The boycott is was brought on mainly by the treatment of the Israeli government towards Palestine, not the actions of the universities themselves. If you are going to start boycotting the world’s academic institutions on a government's sense of morality then you might as well shut your eyes and prod a map with a marker pen. Most of the countries you might hit could be considered a worthy target.
In Iran, all academic output must be approved by a panel of clerics so as you can imagine, subjects such as secularism and democracy are firmly off the menu. After the Islamist revolution of 1979, all universities in the country were closed for three years and all academics who were against the revolution were dismissed from their posts. In China, academics are frequently charged with spying just for daring to discuss policy reform with foreign academics. In recognition of situations such as these, the union did pass motions criticising amongst other deplorable acts, the genocide in Darfur and Mugabe’s political oppression of Zimbabwe.
Yet still, Israel is the only nation which faces direct action. Why is this?
Is it because of Israel's ties with America? Is it more acceptable in the eyes of UCU to take action against a wealthy, democratic nation like Israel than it is to openly criticise countries like Saudi Arabia, where women are banned from testifying in court and non-Muslim worship is a crime? Is it just plain old anti- semitism? All questions for another blog. Yet whatever the answers to these questions may be, it is clear that more informed, unfettered debate is the key to repairing this diplomatic schism, not less.
Totally agree, foreign policy has no place in student politics. Boycotting Israeli academics achieves nothing and those that wish to were free to do so anyway, it shouldn't be implied or mandated. What a load of tosh / leftist fascism.
John Stuart Mill spoke of the dangers of silencing even one voice, incase that one voice spoke truth when all around him spoke falsely.
This boycott is very serious indeed, as it makes the statement that any research done in israel is somehow less worthy because they are israeli. It implies israel has no place in international academia.
Trying to associate israeli universities with war crimes in palestine is like accusing all american universities of supporting the vietnam war, when infact a great deal of criticism of the war came from academics. Ditto with the Iraq war. Must we boycott ourselves in protest at iraq??
This, i think , is a mix of left-wing anti-semitism, unquestionable left-wing defense of the muslim cause no matter of it's consequences and moralities, and left-wing curbs on freedom and tolerence.
Sadly in an age of PC-madness where any comment by any enemy of the government can be construed as racist or xenophobic, it seems it's still open season on israel and jews, often bundled together by the uneducated elites as 'zionists'. There are very very distinct differences.
And of course, the UCU know israel cannot afford to fight back in a way that, say, pakistan or iran could. But boycotting one of those countries would be racist, wouldn't it...oh the hypocrisy.
You will all be pleased to hear that for the week 8 UGM this term, a motion regarding the boycott of Israeli lecturers/universities will be proposed. As has been said, the 'boycott' of individuals and institutions because of an area of foreign policy is utterly ridiculous and stifles freedom of speech for a minority of people who themselves often completely distance themselves from the acts of the Israeli government (even if personally, I see them as legitimate). It would be fantastic if our SU stands up to the individuals trying to prevent the spread of academic learning and freedom of speech and support the motion. Week 8 voting should be big!
I hope they get prosecuted for discrimination on grounds of nationality. It's not an issue that affects academics.
Stupid, stupid political correct crap from the unions.
Unions should be about workers' rights for it's members. Not preaching about foreign regimes completely distant from their industry.
Absolutely despicable behaviour from the UCU. Everyone who voted for this motion ought to hang their head in shame.
I'm surprised that the article failed to mention the historical context of an academic boycott, possibly because the connotations are a little hard for Israel supporters to stomach.
An academic boycott was an effective part, not a solution, in anti-apartheid action and I believe it will play a similar role in action against Israel's criminal behaviour, it is one step in mounting popular opposition to Israel's genocide in Gaza, its contempt for Palestinians, its illegal occupations and expansions.
Crucially, the comparisons with Zimbabwe/Iran are redundant, the key factor in political action against Israel is that the UK and US government are fully supportive of Israel, and therefore opposition must start from grass-rots popular sources until political parties get the message (as it was in South Africa).
If you think Israel is behaving disgracefully in anyway and think its time the UK started to take a tougher stance with Israel then vote for the motion.
(P.S Number 2, I don't know anyone on the left who dislikes Israel because of anti-semitism, and I didn't hear anyone denouncing the condemnation of Mugabe, or China, as racist so why use such a cheap tactic in regards to Israel? Grow up please)
Whoever posted the previous comment has obviously missed the entire point of the article. And must know a hell of a lot of people on the left to make such a claim.
You must log in to submit a comment.
Report