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 - 6/1/2007
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.
- Florida professor to burn Confederate flag
- Could another English king be buried under a parking lot?
- Huckabee says archaeology supports the Bible
- George W. Bush's CIA Briefer: Bush and Cheney Falsely Presented WMD Intelligence to Public
- Unfinished film about the Holocaust made in 1945 to finally be seen by audiences
- Daniel Pipes calls the rulers of Iran "madmen" on official Iranian TV
- A Professor Tries to Beat Back a News Spoof That Won’t Go Away
- NYT History Book Reviews: Who Got Noticed this Week?
- Sean Wilentz is being called “Hillary’s Historian"
- Hundreds of British historians challenge assumptions of “Historians for Britain” campaign