Antisemitism finally having consequences

The spate of antisemitism, especially on campus, at last seems to be having some serious, at-the-top consequences. When three university presidents actually said that calls for killing all Jews needed a context to be actionable, they gave some the distinct impression that America was like Weimar Germany in its ambivalence toward enforcement of a rule of law. But now at least two of those presidents are suffering embarrassment as more people refuse to accept their platitudes. Not only that, but Members of Congress are starting to re-examine the proposition that higher education is sacrosanct and therefore is, and by right ought to be, exempt from taxation.

Latest word on antisemitism

Victor Davis Hanson, on Monday (December 4), openly wrote of “Weimar America.” He discussed several incidents, at university and in high school, some of which CNAV has mentioned before. They include:

1. A teacher barricading herself in her office after someone saw her social-media post supporting Israel,
2. Instructors at Stanford and the University of California at Davis singling out their Jewish students for ridicule,
3. A university professor committing manslaughter against a pro-Israel demonstrator,
4. Jewish students barricaded inside a library at Cooper Union University, and
5. Jewish students at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) told to stay away from certain areas of campus.

The next day, of course, came the antisemitism hearings before the House Education and Workforce Committee. As mentioned, the presidents of Harvard, MIT and the University of Pennsylvania all refused to condemn unequivocally the anti-Jewish riots on their own campuses.

Worth mentioning, by the way, is that the Israel Defense Forces continue to turn up evidence that the Islamic Resistance Movement (Arabic Harakah al-Muqāwamah al-Islāmiyyah, abbreviated HAMAS) have turned Gaza into a staging area for a war of elimination against Israel. This extends to the Al-Azhar University in Gaza City – which had American and European Union funding.

Al-Azhar University is the main training facility of Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood in Gaza. It was funded with $10,000 by the US government in 2019, and with €5 million by the EU 2015-2020. Now IDF troops have reached the campus and found extensive military infrastructure and armaments.

Said “infrastructure” includes tunnels leading off campus – and several rockets, explosives, and small arms, according to Arutz-7.This is why the Israeli Air Force had to blow it up.

But of course the legacy media won’t report any of this.

Now the consequences of antisemitism

But actions have consequences, and so do weasel words. Margaret Flavin at The Gateway Pundit reports that Rabbi David Wolpe has resigned from Harvard’s antisemitism board. He cited as his reason the “painfully inadequate testimony” of President Claudine Gay before the Education Committee. He left a three-post thread on X, explaining his reasons.

In reply, someone suggested that Harvard accepts Arab donations, and that could explain the weasel words.

Meanwhile, UPenn President Liz Magill clearly thought better of her weasel words and tried to take them back. She made this post, and The Daily Pennsylvanian carried a partial transcript.

But that might not be good enough. Jim Hoft reported that Ross Stevens, head of Stone Ridge Asset Management, canceled a $100 million donation to UPenn.

Axios has more details, and a copy of a letter by Stevens’ attorneys not only announcing the withdrawal, but also appearing to demand that President Liz Magill resign.

Late this morning, Hoft reported that the university’s Board of Trustees met in emergency session last night. They then passed a resolution asking for Magill’s resignation.

Hoft cited the New York Post, which confirmed the report. They also quoted Bill Ackman, head of Pershing Square Fund, as reposing 95 percent confidence in her resigning. Even the Governor of Pennsylvania joined the chorus.

Harvard’s President Gay also tried to apologize. She said so to The Harvard Crumson, as The Washington Examiner reported. But the Education Committee is still investigating antisemitism at Harvard.

Donor’s revolt – and now a taxpayers’ revolt

These episodes are the most striking examples to date of the Donors’ Revolt that CNAV has mentioned before. (In addition, two officials of the American Council of Trustees and Alumni called for that very thing last month.)

Katie Pavlich at Town Hall sent in a rather confused report, which speaks of a proposal to tax university endowments. But Rep. Eli Crane (R-Ariz.) said he proposed to defund any university having an endowment greater than $5 billion. That’s actually more to the point and would be easier to defend. Rep. Crane has chosen to eliminate certain direct subsidies that universities presently enjoy.

Rep. Mike Waltz (R-Fla.), on the morning before the contentious Education Department hearing, did propose an actual tax.

Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) announced his support for that idea.

A week ago, Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.) had mentioned some legislation of his own.

Sen. Scott was talking about his Changing Our Learning, Loans, Endowments and Graduation Expectations (COLLEGE) Act. Its main thrust is to require any college or university, taking part in federal financial aid programs, to pay a per-student tax, the size of said tax to depend on its endowment. That bill died last year – but Sen. Scott reintroduced it last month. In his announcement he criticized colleges for taking taxpayers’ money for scholarships

while sitting on massive endowments & doing nothing to combat disgusting anti-Semitism on their campuses.

Summary

Antisemitism has now become an embarrassment to university administrations and an outrage to Members of Congress. Sadly, it does not limit itself to the left, though Darrell L. Castle predicted it would start from there. Some voices on the right seem to think the Education and Workforce Committee treated those three university presidents unfairly. One can correctly say that their platitudes about respecting freedom of speech ring totally hollow, since they don’t respect freedom of speech in any other context. The spectacle of university faculty joining in inflammatory rhetoric – and even violent acts – is yet more shame to their pride.

If this episode will also make us reexamine the tangled relationship between university and government, that’s all to the good. But many other relationships need reexamination, and already those that have supported the university community begin to know it. And act upon it.