The Columbian Crisis

The Columbian Crisis

Once again there is turmoil in higher education institutions in America. This time the focus is on Columbia University. Hundreds of students have set up a tent city on the campus grounds. The university authorities are unable to handle the current situation. The students have been moved to distance learning. The police were called in to disperse the tent city and arrested about 100 students.

Let’s start by understanding the situation, do we have the right to blame students for expressing their political and moral stance? Do young people have the right to express their opinions even in such aggressive forms?

Despite the desire to blame the students themselves first and foremost, the answer is no. Students are young people whose views are shaped by various, sometimes conflicting factors of the surrounding reality. They sincerely and overly emotionally react to life, their minds are in the process of maturing.

As for adults who have allowed the current situation to spread to so many American campuses, there are many questions to be asked.

Since 2004, $24 billion has been invested in pro-Islamic, pro-Palestinian organizations in higher education institutions. One Harvard has about 12 pro-Palestinian organizations. Nearly the entire system is set up to brainwash young minds. Despite the desire to instill a critical thinking in students, the advantage goes to those who are “closer to the ear.”

The question arises sharply as to whether the higher education system in a democratic country can instill left-radical views in students. Any radical views, as a result of which critical thinking gives way to intolerance.

We well remember how still relatively recently this same system used to instill ultraconservative values in young people, from which American society long and painfully refused in favor of liberal ideas and inclusivity. In the 1960s, this process was also accompanied by turbulent unrest and clashes with the police. In the end, a certain balance was achieved: universities were desegregated and defended their right to freedom of speech and self-expression.

60 years have passed since then, and the pendulum has swung in the other direction. Keeping the balance turned out to be the most difficult task.

«Righteous» terror

Where yesterday white students reached out to their black peers, asserting equal rights for minorities, today there are overt calls for violence and discrimination based on nationality.

It has been revealed that, within the context of advocating an anti-war stance, bullying, threats of physical harm, and even outright violence are all considered acceptable. It is directed towards peaceful students who happen to have “unfortunate” nationalities, or “wrong” points of view.

Jewish students are denied passage, especially if they are also Israeli citizens. And this applies not only to students, but also to faculty members. Calls for ethnic cleansing, physical attacks on Jews, and theft of their property are heard, as well as slogans supporting terrorism.

Position of university authorities

The President of Columbia University, Minouche Shafik, issued an ultimatum to protesting students who set up a tent camp on campus. She called for the dismantling of the camp, otherwise “there will be consequences.”

Shafik wrote a letter to pro-Palestinian students and faculty:

Not all faculty members agree with Shafik, and many were outraged when she resorted to the help of the police, resulting in the arrest of about a hundred protesters.

Taking measures to disperse aggressive protesters may be sufficient, but to quell aggression in the student environment, it is not. Obviously, radical students are aware of their power, feel the support of some faculty members, and are inspired by the spirit of impunity. In a fight, the winner is not the one on whose side the truth is, but the one who is not afraid to use violence.

It is obvious that years of encouragement of pro-Palestinian and extreme left organizations with their bloodthirsty rhetoric and open propaganda of hatred towards Jews and Israel have borne abundant fruit.

The point is that the moment was missed. Representatives of the administration of American universities should have clearly and unequivocally stated their position back in October, immediately after slogans justifying the horrific terrorist attack on peaceful Israelis began to be heard in educational institutions. It was then that the only right position needed to be taken. Then they had to stand up for all students regardless of their race, religion, and political views. It was necessary to show that no ideological deviations or political preferences give you the right to justify terror, let alone act with terrorist methods. Only such an ultimatum could change the situation in American campuses.

The President’s reaction

US President Joe Biden sharply condemned manifestations of anti-Semitism by activists supporting Palestine during protests at Columbia University. He emphasized that such behavior is unacceptable not only on university campuses but throughout the country. Biden called on the public not to remain indifferent to such actions, emphasizing their danger and reprehensibility.

These are undoubtedly the right words, but words alone cannot extinguish the fire. Obviously, in the run-up to the elections, the authorities do not want to lose the support of the left electorate, therefore they are behaving indecisively. This is similar to a situation where someone wants to separate fighting parties, but at the same time, does not want to wrinkle their suit.

Leonid Shkolnik

How Harvard was bought, At Penn, Vacancies in Leadership, and Anguish on Campus, BORIS JOHNSON — OPEN LETTER, Dina Rubina — OPEN LETTER., The “Tail Wags The Dog” Principle: How It Works In Politics