Written by Matthijs Glynn
A member of the administration at Syracuse University reprimanded a group of students for displaying signs bearing a phrase commonly associated with calls for genocide against Jews, decorated in Hamas colors, as colleges across the country have been criticized recently for what critics say are weak responses to the rise of anti-Semitism on campus. .
A group of students, seen in a video posted on social media, were displaying signs reading “Globalization of Uprising” at a “Study In” demonstration at the university’s Sheen Student Center, when they were approached by Vice President for Student Experience Rob Hradsky who told them that The university “has defined this term as advocating genocide, which we consider harassment and a violation of university policy.” So I want you to remove that, non-compliance can result in charges against the student code.
When students began to question Hradski about the term, trying to rationalize its use by citing its literal definition – “uprising”, the director replied that he would not enter into a debate with them, and that the university considered the term inappropriate. And it must be removed.
Pro-Palestinian protesters often use the term “intifada” in demonstrations against Israel. In the context of Israeli-Palestinian history, this term has been used to refer to the targeting of Israeli civilians in two series of deadly terrorist attacks; The first and second intifadas, which lasted in 1987-1993 and 2000-2005, respectively.
Palestinian terrorists killed more than 1,400 Jews during these uprisings. The use of this term is widely seen as a call for the repetition of these terrorist attacks, especially by Jews and Israelis familiar with the horrors of those massacres.
This term, along with the phrase “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free”, is another slogan frequently quoted by pro-Palestinian protesters, and which has been used by Hamas and other terrorist groups as a call to destroy the state that has become the State of Israel (which lies between the Mediterranean The Jordan River) was the focus of a congressional hearing two weeks ago, where lawmakers repeatedly questioned the presidents of some of the country’s top universities about whether the terminology — or calls for the genocide of Jews in general — would violate the school’s rules.
After what critics described as a lukewarm response from the presidents of MIT, the University of Pennsylvania, and Harvard, all of whom essentially said the school would have to examine “context,” but would generally allow calls for genocide unless they crossed a line. Due to behaviors such as bullying, calls for presidents’ resignations began to grow, leading UPenn President Liz Magill to announce a few days after the hearing that she would be leaving her position.
Critics pointed to a perceived double standard regarding anti-Semitism, as it emerged at the hearing that hate speech against other groups was not tolerated on these campuses regardless of context.
Columbia, Harvard, the University of Pennsylvania and Cooper Union are among 28 universities under investigation by the Department of Energy for alleged violations of Title VI, a federal law prohibiting discrimination based on common descent, which includes anti-Semitism. The New York City Department of Education is also being investigated.
Syracuse University is not currently under investigation.
New York Governor Kathy Hochul issued a letter on December 9 to the presidents of the state’s universities, stating that she was “shocked” by the answers given at the congressional hearing. It instructed the presidents of the State University of New York and the City University of New York to ensure that calls for genocide against Jews will not be tolerated on the state’s university campuses.
“The ethical lapses demonstrated by the disgraceful answers to the questions asked during
“This week’s congressional hearing cannot and will not be tolerated here in New York State,” she wrote.
Hochul also wrote that schools that do not adequately address anti-Semitism will face repercussions. “Failure to address such activity would constitute a violation of the New York State Human Rights Law as well as Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Under Title VI, any recipient of federal funds is responsible for keeping students free from a hostile environment based on their race.” Or their national origin – a criterion that has been applied to anti-Semitism.
“I assure you that if any school in New York State is found to be violating the law, I will take action
The state Department of Human Rights will take aggressive enforcement action and refer the potential address
Sixth Violations of the Federal Government.”
During the incident in Syracuse, students defied the order to remove banners from view, and repeatedly tried to engage Hradski in a discussion about the literal meaning of the word “uprising.” The students accused the official of believing that all Arabic words called for genocide, and claimed he was targeting the group because the students were black. At another point during the meeting, a student asked Hradski to point out the word “uprising” on the sign, but he became angry when Hradski removed the poster.
In a statement to the Daily Orange, Syracuse University’s independent student newspaper, a university spokesperson wrote that the college respects students’ right to peacefully assemble and protest “to the extent that speech or behavior threatens the well-being of our students and violates university policies.”
The university said that students at the center were afraid for their safety.
“Only when other students reported feeling threatened by displayed fliers saying ‘Globalization of Uprising’ was the university required by its policies and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to participate,” the university spokesperson wrote.
The spokesman continued that Hradski “respectfully instructed the students who were present to remove these specific posts (and only these), and they refused.”
In a controversial move, a Syracuse University official has implemented a ban on the use of “insurrection” language by students. The decision has sparked heated debate among the student body and faculty members, with some arguing that it stifles freedom of speech and expression, while others support the initiative as a means of promoting a safe and inclusive campus environment. The ban has raised important questions about the balance between protecting civil discourse and upholding First Amendment rights on college campuses.