As expected, 66% of the members of the American Studies Association voted to boycott Israel. (See yesterday’s post on the topic.)
Thereby the ASA has proved that they have become a radical advocacy group, a group that, incidentally hates America.
Jonathan Marks wrote in the Wall Street Journal today:
Over a decade ago, the sociologist Alan Wolfe wrote about the rise of a cohort of American Studies scholars who had "developed a hatred for America so visceral that it [made] one wonder why they [bothered] studying America at all."
Marks continued to explain what the boycott was about:
Make no mistake: Supporting the U.S. boycott campaign is not merely a way of criticizing Israel or expressing solidarity with Palestinians. The campaign calls for boycotting "Palestinian/Arab-Israeli collaborative research projects or events." In other words, it actively discourages opportunities for cooperation and mutual understanding. And while the campaign does not condone a blacklist of Israeli academics, it does warn that "all academic exchanges with Israeli academics do have the effect of normalizing Israel and its politics of occupation and apartheid."
Obviously, the boycotters are far more radical than progressive Democratic politicians.
The Debka File reports:
New York Rep. Eliot Engel, the most senior Democratic member on the House Foreign Relations Committee, said: "I simply fail to see how cutting off ties to Israeli universities furthers the interests of peace and coexistence," he said. "Ironically, many within the Israeli academic community are strong and vocal proponents of peace -- and are simply being boycotted due to their nationality and academic affiliation."
"I would note that Israel is the first country to be boycotted by this academic organization, which has chosen to stay silent on the slaughter in Syria, the continued imprisonment of democracy activists in Iran, or the scores of other dictatorships around the world," the congressman said. "Yet once again we see this unfair double standard applied to Israel.”
What do members of the ASA have to say about that?
One member ASA member replied: "You have to start somewhere."
Anyone who believes that the ASA will now launch a boycott of the real enemies of freedom in this world should go back on his meds.
If you are going to start somewhere, wouldn’t it make sense to start at the top of the list of worst human-rights offenders, rather than at the middle? Suppose you were to, say, try to get your co-worker fired for tardiness, it would seem important to establish that this co-worker has arrived late more often than others. If you are campaigning to fire the cubicle-mate who arrived fifteen minutes late twice last week, rather than the other co-worker who missed the entire previous month of work for no reason, one might suspect an agenda is at work.]