Jew See This?
Seriously, though, and leaving the anti-Israel/anti-semitism thing alone, this seems like an amazingly anti-intellectual thing to do."We don't like your government's policies, so we won't allow your chemists to co-author papers, etc." Absurd.
comments powered by Disqus
Aeon J. Skoble - 6/1/2007
>when special criticism of Israel >occurs...[one possible explanation] >is that the speaker simply holds >Israel to a higher standard than >other countries, because of a >fundamental fondness or respect for >its people
That might explain individual remarks from someone like you, but it wouldn't explain this boycott.
Otto M. Kerner - 6/1/2007
I should like to point out that, when special criticism of Israel occurs, "special animus" is only one plausible explanation. The other is that the speaker simply holds Israel to a higher standard than other countries, because of a fundamental fondness or respect for its people. Indeed, this always the case when I criticise Israel, since I consider myself entirely a judeophile (although, partly for this reason, I find myself less and less interested in actually criticising Israel; still, when I have criticised it in the past, that was why).
Also, I think that one may legitimately hold a view in which the criteria for a country's right to exist are not identical to the criteria for a country's overall goodness. In other words, in might be the case that Country X has done many more bad things than Country Y, and yet Country Y's problems are more relevant to the issue of whether it has a right to exist as a particular state.
Additionally, if your anarcho-capitalistic interlocutors are bringing up the anti-state argument as an argument against Israel per se, then I think that's a red herring. Surely, AC's should understand that "Israel" is more than simply a state, and that the abolition of the state won't make Israelis the same as their neighbors.
In any event, anarcho-capitalists believe that Israel would be better off without the State of Israel, so this can hardly be construed as an anti-Israeli argument, let alone an anti-semitic one.
Aeon J. Skoble - 5/31/2007
Yep, perfect example of the double-standard. Wild.
Keith Halderman - 5/31/2007
Let me get this straight. The President of Iran participates in a Holocaust denial conference and that event does not raise an eyebrow among British academics. On the other hand Israel reacts to its neighbors sending suicide bombers and rockets against its civilian population and the UCU thinks that may be grounds for an academic boycott of Israeli institutions of higher learning which are often hotbeds of criticism directed towards their own government. Well, how could anyone possibly construe that as Antisemitism.
Mark Brady - 5/31/2007
David T. Beito - 5/31/2007
You'll get no argument from me. This boycott is stupid.
- Rubio Surges Into Second In New Hampshire
- Branstad Says Cruz Ran ‘Unethical’ Campaign
- Christie Highlights Santorum’s Endorsement of Rubio
- Portman Comes Out Against Trade Deal
- Megyn Kelly Gets a Book Deal
- A Big List of the Bad Things Clinton Has Done
- An Unambiguous Sign Sanders Won Last Night’s Debate
- Still Friends at the End
- Quote of the Day
- Trump Still Leads as Clinton Slips
- Clinton Can’t Shake Image as Wall Street’s Friend
- Maddow Doesn’t See Sanders Winning
- Why Does the Media Still Shield Chelsea Clinton?
- Bush Jokes His Mother May Have Abused Him
- Rubio Closes the Gap in New Hampshire
- Humans Hard-Wired to Teach, Anthropologist Says
- Parents outraged after students shown ‘white guilt’ cartoon for Black History Month
- Maryland is once again considering retiring its state song
- One of the last remaining Nazis goes on trial in Germany
- Historian at the center of Sanders-Clinton debate
- James Loewen Says Additional Baltimore Confederate Statues Should be Removed
- NYT History Book Reviews: Who Got Noticed this Week?
- A historian’s advice to students thinking of getting a PhD in a tough economic climate
- German historian Heinz Richter cleared of charges