Officials at Columbia University, facing surging tensions on campus that raised safety concerns, have announced all classes will be virtual on Monday as Passover begins.
Columbia President Minouche Shafik said in a statement the decision was made to “deescalate the rancor and give us all a chance to consider next steps.”
The move underscores how tense the situation has become at the Ivy League school and the enormous challenge facing Shafik to get the situation under control.
The article mentions how Jewish students are afraid that something will happen, which seems pretty reasonable to me given how heated the rhetoric is on this subject. The last time there was a protest at Columbia, protestors’ signs included such gems as “Al-Qasam’s Next Targets”. That doesn’t strike me as a statement hoping for peace.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/21/nyregion/columbia-protests-antisemitism.html
Edit: It’s very interesting to me that simply reporting on factual events gets brigaded with downvotes here. Touching a nerve, perhaps? I think Palestine should be a state, but I will not overlook the violent and antisemitic elements on the Palestinian side either.
It could be that. But it could also be slant from both the administration and the media, who have been downplaying Israel’s actions since the genocide in Gaza started and have painted Iran as an aggressive war-mongering nation when Israel attacked the Iranian consulate first, and then continued to attack Iran while they tried to deescalate. The Passover justification could simply be a convenient excuse, and there’s no way to know for sure that any antisemitism isn’t from bad faith actors rather than the original protestors. It happened with the BLM movement, and there were even reports of undercover cops trying to incite violence amongst the protestors then, like the FBI did when they radicalized the man who would later go on to bomb the Boston Marathon. The NYPD does not have a good reputation, and the administration and the cops have been acting aggressively against the protestors. It could have something to do with:
While that sign is fucked up they were pro-Israeli counter protesters that happened to be Jewish.
If your position begins with “Death threats made to someone’s face are bad, but…” you may want to reconsider your stance. Hate and dehumanization is the source of this whole clusterfuck.
The war is a great cover for antisemitic assholes to spread their hate. The antisemitic assholes spreading their hate is a great excuse to squash legitimate criticism of Israel.
Yeah, that sign is pretty fucked up. Not a good look. However, that’s one sign. Any sufficiently large protest is going to have something that can make it look bad. It sounds like they didn’t actually do anything harmful though, so that’s good. It sounds like just some edgy humor in very bad taste (assuming it’s legit and not a plant). Is that a good enough reason to stop the protests? Do we think the same would be done if things were in the opposite direction?
Edit: Just FYI, I upvoyed you. I hold nothing against posting actual information.
I think threats of violence are a good enough reason to stop protests, but I don’t think it would be treated the same way if it came from the pro-Israel side, unfortunately. The Israeli government in particular have been getting away with far too much and I’d like to see them all at the Hague.