51 of 54 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Takes a stand against academic anti-Israeli bias, December 19, 2007
This review is from: Academics Against Israel and the Jews (Paperback)
This is an excellent book which discusses instances academic bias against Israel and Jews. Much of it involves clear violations of academic standards, and the substitution of propaganda for what is supposed to be scholarly work.
There is a foreward by Natan Sharansky, who points out the significance of the fact that mass murders of the Jews in World War Two occurred only after many universities became permeated with the attitude that Jews were dangerous and inferior beings.
Following the foreward, there is a roughly 60-page essay by Manfred Gerstenfeld. This addresses boycotts, demonization and stereotyping of Jews, Jewish "self-hatred," shouting down of Israeli speakers, Holocaust denial, anti-Israeli actions (including violence) on campuses, the relationship of anti-Israeli actions to anti-Semitism, specific discussions of situations in a variety of nations, and speculations on future developments.
Rebecca Leibowitz then discusses Rutgers University, which did manage to refuse to allow the hosting of an anti-Israeli conference in 2003. After this is an article by Noah Liben not on Columbia University's Middle East and Asian Languages and Cultures department (MEALAC) per se, but on the highly flawed report prepared by an ad hoc committee which claimed to investigate complaints about that department. To put it mildly, the committee was extremely biased and its report was a travesty. In fact, most reasonable observers can see that Columbia University's MEALAC is one of the most biased and counterproductive departments in the nation. However, the report makes it appear that the worst thing it has ever done is a single incident where a professor may have said something mildly improper to a student! I agree with the implication that the report, as well as MEALAC itself, condemns Columbia as being unwilling to enforce minimal academic standards. Martin Kramer adds an article which looks at Columbia as a test case for Middle Eastern studies in this country. The David Project is quite properly praised for its work in producing the short movie, "Columbia Unbecoming." That movie "put a human face on the dysfunction of Middle Eastern studies." It is a shame that things have become so bad that a movie of this sort has become necessary.
Jonathan Jaffit has an article on the fight against Sheikh Zayed's funding of Islamic studies at Harvard Divinity school. Harvard wound up turning down a 2.5 million dollar endowment by this Sheikh.
We then see a little of what has been happening in California. Leila Beckwith has an article on anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism at the University of California-Irvine. Beckwith, along with Tammi Rossman-Benjamin and Ilan Benjamin, then have an article about the University of California-Santa Cruz. Edward Beck discusses Scholars for Peace in the Middle East (SPME), which was founded in part as a reaction to anti-Semitic events at San Francisco State University. And Roz Rothstein describes Stand With Us, a very useful watchdog of coverage of Israel. The catalyst for Stand With Us, which has a main office in Los Angeles, was the murder of two Israeli teens, Koby Mandell and Yosef Ishran.
The next stop is Canada. Alain Goldschlager's article reviews the Canadian campus scene, while Corrine Berzon discusses anti-Israeli activities at Concordia University specifically.
After this, we cross the Atlantic Ocean. Aryeh Green talks about European universities and the new anti-semitism in general, including a mention of problems in Ukraine. Ruth Contreras' article is about the situation in Austrian universities. And then we get to specific articles about the United Kingdom. Ronnie Fraser attempts to show why there was an academic boycott of Israel by an association of university teachers in Great Britain. Manfred Gerstenfeld discusses the May, 2007 University and College Union boycott and its aftermath. And Gavin Gross has an article about anti-Israeli activity at the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS), which is part of the University of London. Gross quotes Linda Grant, who made the excellent point that there appear to be two countries of Israel. One of these is the real Israel, with real people, real streets, real houses, real cats and dogs, and real newspapers. The other is a fantasy, described to be a "criminal" and "illegitimate" state and a "cancer" that has to be eradicated. She wonders which of these will win, reality or fantasy.
The final three contributions are interesting as well. The first of these, by Gerstenfeld, discusses fear of political incorrectness at Utrecht University. The next, by Itamar Marcus and Barbara Crook, describes anti-Semitism among Arab academics in the Levant. This includes the fabrication of an entire Levantine Arab history, which attempts to erase Jewish history from the region. And it includes "denying the Holocaust while demanding a new one." The final article, by Ted Lapkin, tells us about academic anti-Zionism in Australia.
I highly recommend this book. Academics could have done (and still can do) a great deal to ameliorate hostilities in the Middle East. Instead, many academics have made the situation worse.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
26 of 31 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
An invaluable document in support of the freedom of academic inquiry, December 25, 2007
This review is from: Academics Against Israel and the Jews (Paperback)
Jill Malter has written an outstanding and detailed review of this book on this Amazon Site. She has described clearly each of the essays of the volume. I recommed it highly.
Instead of reiterating her descriptions of the individual essays I would like to say a word about the subject in general.
The book provides well- documented information on Anti- Semitic actions taken against the state of Israel by a wide variety of academics. These actions include efforts to boycott Israelis from participating in academic conferences, to cut off all contact with Israeli universities, to condemn Israel politically by accusing it of a wide variety of crimes.
The refutations provided by the essays here take individual claims one by one and refute them. This is the central strength of the work.
But a no less important strength of the work is in the general claims involved. The absurdity of boycotting Israeli academic institutions is multiple. First of all Israel's universites are real universities in which first- rate contributions are made to academic work in a variety of fields. They are not in other words like the religious academies in the Arab world which have as their name University- but which are in fact closed off from real historical and scientific inquiry. Secondly, Israel is a democracy , an open - society. If one were to take to task societies in the world and try to boycott and blame them one might begin one would think with precisely those backward terror- states that deny the existence of Israel. Thirdly. The academic world relies on dialogue and discussion, open criticism and debate. Freedom of inquiry is its most sacred value. The attempts to subvert scholarly inquiry,(And here I would especially point to Martin Kramer's work describing how Middle East Studies Departments have obstructed academic discourse, in favor of supporting a formula anti- Western line) are shameful fallings off from the true academic spirit.
Many political critics of Israel from the academy realizing a boycott of Israel and its scholars and scientists- violates the fundamental value of academic freedom- have drawn back from supporting any boycott effort.
This present work provides detailed evidence of iniquity done by a large number of academics not only against Israel but against the fundamental values of the academic world itself.
It is an invaluable document which every university department in the world should have a copy of it.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
1 of 13 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
Dishonest book!, June 15, 2010
This review is from: Academics Against Israel and the Jews (Paperback)
This book greatly distorts reality and sets out to defend the indefensible. Being against Israel is presented as being against the Jews from the title onward, which is totally dishonest. Beings against Israel does not mean antisemitism.Some Jews oppose the state: Are they Antisemitic?
Israel is founded on Zionism, a brand of extremist nationalism. Antisemitism consists in being biased against Jews and Arabs. Therefore, criticizing Zionist Israel is not Antisemitism.
Israeli academics like Uri Strauss and many Jewish thinkers have defined Israel as an Apartheid State and condemned its policies. The book is flatly dishonest!
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
