bin Laden–so yesterday’s news!
Only New Yorkers could care about this, so the rest of you don’t have to read it. Tony Kushner, award-winning playwright, etc., was voted unworthy by CUNY to receive an honorary degree because his views on Israel were said to be unacceptable to one of the board members. The rest of the board voted to table his nomination thus killing it. Another flap in the Big Apple?
Jim Dwyer, indefatigable NYTimes columnist called up Jeffrey Wiesenfeld the complainant in the case who revealed that he is a political hack who didn’t really expect the board to vote with him–probably another bunch of hacks.
Outrage has ensued and everyone who is anyone is returning their honorary degrees to CUNY.
Stephen Walt has weighed in raising the metaphysical level of the controversy to international proportions.
Thank goodness everything has returned to normal–at least in NYC.
UPDATE: Let’s have a re-do: “Under mounting pressure, the City University of New York board of trustees moved on Friday to reverse its decision earlier this week to withhold an honorary degree from the Pulitzer Prize-winning playwright Tony Kushner because of one trustee’s concerns about Mr. Kushner’s views regarding Israel.”
May 9 Update: More redo by Clyde Haberman …”Then there is a fundamental question that Mr. Schmidt and his colleagues have yet to answer: If free expression is such a “bedrock” principle, how come it didn’t occur to any of them to make that point while Mr. Wiesenfeld was holding forth on Mr. Kushner — with statements, by the way, that the playwright has called utter distortions of his views on Israel?” BUT is it a bedrock principle of universities? There’s a good question.
Au contraire: Stanley Fish says it may have been a dumb decision but it was not a violation of acadmeic freedom.
I am of two minds about this one. I agree with everything said against Jeffrey Wiesenfeld and the rest of the board, but on the other hand, I don’t see that Wiesenfeld should be dismissed from the board (as Ed Koch has suggested) or that Kushner deserves an apology. Wiesenfeld is just as free to speak his mind as Koch or Kushner or anyone else. And an honorary degree is not something a person is entitled to, even if his or her name has been submitted for it.
Those who despise Israel, but never admit what they hope its fate and the fate of the Jews who live there will be, have a right to their opinion.
But graduation is for graduates (and their proud parents), imho, and should not be occasions for haters to beat their drums/chests. With CUNY’s long tradition of providing an excellent education to any and all, including, in the old days, Jewish students restricted from attending Ivy League schools, etc., it’s understandable that some would not want to share the happy day with someone whose opinion is so different from their own. He is not lacking for platforms/stages from which to express his hurtful views.
(Fontbonne University in St. Louis withdrew their invitation to Greg Mortenson.)
http://blogs.riverfronttimes.com/dailyrft/2011/04/greg_mortenson_fontbonne_speech_cancelled.php
Thanks goodness there standing up to Kushner on this issue. Here is a collection of Kushner quotations that make clear why he is not a worthy recipient of this award:
[site deleted]
Those who despise Israel, but never admit what they hope its fate and the fate of the Jews who live there will be, have a right to their opinion.
Gerelyn,
Are you saying that Kushner is to be counted among such people? It does not seem clear at all to me that he is. The following is from The Jewish Weekly:
“[site deleted]”
Are you kidding me? What a joke of a blog.
One lesson here is, if you’re not willing to do a lot of hard work and undertake a lot of preparation, don’t agree to serve on a board. In the case at hand, one guy had a strong opinion and the other members seemed to say, “Huh? Who?”
David N., Tony doesn’t need me to defend him.
Here’s his letter to the board:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/54643560/Letter-to-CUNY-Trustees-05-04-11
Here are some comments about the issue at Salon.
http://letters.salon.com/politics/war_room/2011/05/05/cuny_kushner_honorary_degree_update/view/?show=all
PF: Don’t post propaganda sites.
This is one of many times that Mr. Wiesenfeld has used his position on the CUNY board in such a way. He takes an extreme view that more moderate Jewish groups do not support. It’s well known. That makes me wonder how it was possible for four other CUNY board members to join him in his opposition to Tony Kushner’s honorary degree.
They weren’t paying attention? They wanted the meeting to end? He would call them anti-Semites? They decided it wasn’t worth arguing with him? They don’t like Tony Kushner? The possibilities are legion.
Back in 2009 I posted about an article Tony Kushner wrote with Alisa Solomon for The Nation, defending Caryl Churchill’s controversial Seven Jewish Children: A Play for Gaza. In their article, they wrote:
“PF: Don’t post propaganda sites.”
They used Kushner’s OWN WORDS to convict him. You are just afraid of the truth: THAT’S propaganda. Kushner’s own words about Israel. Afraid for people to read them, eh?
Should I give back my (non-honorary) law degree to Queens College? I never really use it anyway. But how does one give back a degree? Is your name struck off a list somewhere? Or do you just ceremonially burn your diploma?
PF: From SourceWatch:
“The Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA) is a powerful Boston-based lobby group that tries to curb criticism of Israel in U.S. media.
“Founded by Charles Jacobs in the wake of Israel’s 1982 invasion of Lebanon, CAMERA claims to be “a media-monitoring, research and membership organization devoted to promoting accurate and balanced coverage of Israel and the Middle East”. According to its website, it “systematically monitors, documents, reviews and archives Middle East coverage” and its staffers “directly contact reporters, editors, producers and publishers concerning distorted or inaccurate coverage, offering factual information to refute errors.” [1]….
“CAMERA is widely regarded as a pro-Israeli lobby group that as put by Journalist and author Robert I. Friedman – “CAMERA, the A.D.L., AIPAC and the rest of the lobby don’t want fairness, but bias in their favor. And they are prepared to use McCarthyite tactics, as well as the power and money of pro-Israel PACs, to get whatever Israel wants.”[1]”
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=CAMERA
MS: they simply quoted Kushner’s own words. So your pathetic ad hominem rings even more falsely. The fact that you are afraid to have readers here read Kushner’s words for themselves is in itself a shattering refutation of your post.
You really should consider some quiet time reflection on your evident blind-deafness to anyone who does not hate Israel.
The fact that you are afraid to have readers here read Kushner’s words for themselves is in itself a shattering refutation of your post.
P Flanagan,
Anyone here who wants to can find what I presume is the site you wanted to link to. I have read some of what they had to say, along with the Kushner quotes, and I don’t think most of the Jews I know would be all that offended (if they were offended at all). Some would commend Kushner for speaking the truth.
Here is one of the quotes they object to: “Israel is a foreign country. I am no more represented by Israel than I am by Italy.” I think a lot of American Jews, even if they are concerned about Israel’s safety and existence, feel exactly the same.
It is not anti-Semitic to “hate Israel.” It is a country that has done some terrible things, and just because it has had terrible things done to it does not neutralize the wrong it has done.
David Nickol (05/06/2011 – 9:13 pm) writes:
“Anyone here who wants to can find what I presume is the site you wanted to link to. I have read some of what they had to say, along with the Kushner quotes, and I don’t think most of the Jews I know would be all that offended (if they were offended at all).”
I don’t know what site Margaret deleted, but here’s an interesting comment from a review of “Munich”:
“Briefly, the movie presents, via pulse-pounding scenes of kidnaping, death, stalking and more death, the message that Israel was brutal, bungling and immoral in its reaction to the massacre. True, the hostage-takers were also brutal; but dispossessing Palestinians, we soon learn, lies at the root.”
camera.org
Oops, darn. I really didn’t know that camera.org was the offensive site. When I commented at 11:22 pm I hadn’t yet read Margaret’s comment at 5:23 pm. My apologies. I suppose my link will be deleted, too. Sigh.
Why is it, though, that in academia in the West, it’s become fashionable to declare Israel a pariah and the Palestinian leaders saints and martyrs? Isn’t it at least slightly possible that we’re dealing here with a recrudescence of Anti-Semitism?
Here’s a short piece from Commentary – which, I confess, is a neoconservative magazine. I hope this doesn’t get deleted, but if it does, so be it:
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/05/05/cuny-tells-tony-kushner-there%E2%80%99s-no-honor-for-israel-bashers/
Nobody on this site has declared Israel a pariah. But there are several who suppose that any criticism of policies by the Netanyahu government makes the critic a pariah. And over the years the Palestinians have been made pariahs. As the incident at CUNY shows, trying to cut off any criticism of Israeli policies is no benefit to Israel. The existence of Israel is not in question. Can it co-exist with its Palestinian neighbors?
Mr. Smith, you seem to be eager to be deleted. I guess it must be quite a thrill.
Without wishing to offend my namesake, Margaret O’Brien Steinfels (whom I have had the pleasure of meeting, but who is not related to me), I’m surprised that a link has been deleted on this thread on the ground that it leads to a “propaganda” site. I’m especially surprised that this has happened on a thread on the blog of Commonweal, and I’m especially concerned about this kind of editorial activism inasmuch as I was banned for life (no kidding) from Catholic Answers Forums after having opposed–respectfully and non-schismatically–the beatification and canonization of Pope John Paul II. (That’s one reason why I greatly appreciate being able to hang out on this blog, without feeling obliged to agree with everything on the blog or in the pages of Commonweal.)
I hope that it won’t be regarded as inappropriate for me to ask Mrs. Steinfels and the management of Commonweal to review their policies concerning these kinds of editorial decisions, and to invite readers to participate in that review.
Mr. O’Brien…I did it with my own delete button–do not hold the CWL editors responsible. Camera is a propaganda site. The deleted post contributed nothing to the discussion at hand. While it may have quoted Kushner’s own words as p. flanagan claims (I did not track the quotes down and verify that), it showed no interest in discussing Kusner’s position or indeed any position that does not follow the line of the Israeli government. If you want to know what they said you can google it. The so-called p. flanagan has no interest in discussing these issues, but in vilification and name-calling. If I could bar him/her/them from my posts I would.
Indeed, Mr. O’Brien, we have met for lunch and you, as a long-time CWL reader, know that magazine does not publish every item that arrives in the mail. I think bloggers have the same responsibility as an editor to edit, to delete, and to try to keep the discussion focused on the subject. Of course, it is much more difficult on a blog than in a magazine office (where the circular file fits so prominently in editorial decisions).
I think the moderator of the thread has the right to edit/delete (and ban) any posters they choose. This website is more tolerant than most of dissenting opinions, I think, (in that they permit the posts- not that the dissenting comments are necessarily warmly received) I’ve noticed,though, there are a few people who never, ever, agree with any thread, ever, yet never seem to miss an opportunity to comment, and sometimes they do so inappropriately.
Margaret writes (8:55 am):
“As the incident at CUNY shows, trying to cut off any criticism of Israeli policies is no benefit to Israel. The existence of Israel is not in question. Can it co-exist with its Palestinian neighbors?”
It’s one thing to welcome criticism and dialogue; it’s a very different thing to present a public award to someone who’s offended a substantial number of your supporters.
The existence of Israel as a Jewish state is in question. Can it co-exist with the refugees if the refugees stop attacking it militarily and are set up with a state of their own? I can’t imagine that that’s not the case. Does anyone seriously expect Israel to attack anyone who’s not attacking them?
.
“Mr. Smith, you seem to be eager to be deleted. I guess it must be quite a thrill.”
Not a bit of it. If I’d read down the page, I wouldn’t have posted anything here from that site, knowing how you felt. I assure you, it wasn’t a deliberate provocation.
David Smith @ 4:19: “The existence of Israel as a Jewish state is in question. Can it co-exist with the refugees if the refugees stop attacking it militarily and are set up with a state of their own? I can’t imagine that that’s not the case. Does anyone seriously expect Israel to attack anyone who’s not attacking them?”
Perhaps this is where we differ. I don’t think, nor do I see any evidence that the existence of Israel as a Jewish state is in question. It is a prosperous, well-defended, robust democracy. Its chief alley is the strongest military power in the world. It has a large stockpile of nuclear weapons, which certainly serves as a deterrent to its non-nuclear neighbors.
Ultimately it must co-exist (with refugees???) with Palestinians who inhabited the land before it became Gaza, the West Bank, and Israel. Co-existence is a two-way street, of course, and the Palestinians as well as the Israelis must be able to manage this complex task. Both groups will have to give ground to the other for this to happen–Israelis as much as Palestinians.
And I think the honorary degree custom should be abolished everywhere. It’s silly. In the meantime, let us scan the lists this year. Previous scannings lead me to predict that there will be many recipients far more controversial than Kushner–depending on what you controvert.
Fr Robert Barron has a heartfelt discussion about Bin Laden — I think Fr Barron could become a bridge between the two sides of the Catholic culture wars.
http://vox-nova.com/2011/05/07/robert-barron-even-osama-bin-laden-is-our-brother/