Among the many issues with this article: 1) It lumps the J-Board trial and the “Joint Statement on USAC Ethics” together, when in reality they were two separate things: the JBoard trial was about proving that student council-members had a conflict of interest when they voted on a divestment resolution after having received all-expense paid trips from organizations that are explicitly anti-divestment. The ethics statement is about asking student leaders to give their word that they will refrain from taking trips or receiving any other benefit from organizations with a proven track record of discriminatory or marginalizing behavior while in office. It is rooted in--and explicitly states--this general principle, and though it lists three groups, it also calls for the addition of any other lobbying organizations that participate in bigoted, discriminatory and/or marginalizing behavior while also offering gifts to student politicians. It should go without saying that the statement is not legally binding. 2) It gives no real example(s) of the bullying it so adamantly decries. The only identifiable instances it lists are the ethics statement and the JBoard trial, both of which, it must be stressed, show students responsibly resorting to appropriate, university-sanctioned outlets to voice their disagreement with their elected representatives’ behavior. Which begs the question: how exactly would Blumenfield (or any other critic of the ethics statement) have us voice our concerns about organizations with a track record of bigotry influencing student politics? It is hard to imagine a more civil, legitimate, or officially sound way we could have gone about this. 3) The article falsely charges that the groups referenced in the ethics statement were mentioned because of their support for Israel, when in reality these groups were named due to their hosting of Islamaphobic speakers, production and dissemination of Islamaphobic materials, and lobbying efforts against U.S. recognition of the Armenian genocide. Which brings me to the final point: 4) While Blumenfield attempts to refute the charge that AIPAC, the ADL and Hasbara Fellowships engage in Islamaphobic practice, there is no reference to the first two organizations lobbying against U.S. recognition of the Armenian genocide and hosting anti-Armenian speakers.
Posted on: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 04:57:25 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015