On Feb. 28, the Berkeley Beacon published a “Letter to the Editor” from Anna Feder, Emerson’s head of Film Exhibition and Festival Programs, in which she asks: “Why is it so hard to talk about Palestine?” Feder’s question has been on the minds of many of us—students, staff, and faculty—and echoes an ongoing concern with freedom of speech and academic freedom at university campuses nationwide.
In the months before the publication of Feder’s article, Emerson College imposed limits on the use of classroom space by students associated with the group Students for Justice in Palestine, allegedly because SJP is an “unaffiliated organization,” according to an undisclosed source. Was it a coincidence that pro-Palestine speech was also at the center of that episode?
We write in support of Feder’s courageous letter to the Beacon, and in solidarity with our students at SJP. We are a democratic, multi-ethnic, and multi-racial collective of Muslims, Christians, Jews, and atheists at Emerson College. We are faculty, staff, and graduate students. We want to raise awareness about settler colonialism, ethnic cleansing, genocidal policies and actions, and everyday violence against Palestinians.
Like Feder, we are alarmed by ongoing efforts to silence pro-Palestine voices at university campuses throughout the country. In particular, we are concerned about potential risks to academic freedom and freedom of speech at Emerson. Several of us are directly involved in efforts to promote justice and inclusivity at the college. We engage in discussions about racial, ethnic, gender, and sexual diversity, inside and outside the classroom; we teach courses on postcolonial studies, critical race theory, and media of the Global South; we organize cultural and educational events that honor Emerson’s values.
We also believe in open, respectful, and candid conversations about Palestine. We expect the events and activities we organize to receive the same respect and consideration as any other academic and cultural event on campus. And we expect the students who are willing to organize around their common belief in justice in Palestine to be able to do so without impediments or intimidation.
We are deeply troubled by the suggestion that our voices represent a threat to a safe learning environment—or a potential incitement to violence. As Feder mentions in her letter, at the beginning of this semester, Emerson Today published a “Presidential Statement on Campus Speech and Rhetoric,” affirming that “calls for physical violence against people or groups based on their religious, national, or other protected identities are not consistent with our values or community standards.”
All of this is commendable, and none of it is new. We should all be familiar with Emerson’s policies. Why, then, release a statement at the beginning of the semester? That statement must be read in the context of a growing nationwide movement against what the International Court of Justice has found to be a plausible genocide in Gaza. Could this movement grow on our campus, too?
The college also explicitly dissociated itself from the screening of the film “Israelism”—a documentary made by young American Jews about young American Jews, which is critical of Israel’s policies and actions. The screening took place on campus on Feb. 1. On that occasion, Emerson Today announced “the screening of films in [the Bright Lights] series does not connote endorsement or support of the film’s content by Emerson College or the Visual and Media Arts Department,” adding that “Emerson prides itself on … protecting our community from bias, threats, and intimidation.”
The screening of “Israelism” was not just “a resounding success,” as Feder notes in her article; it was also an inspiring example of how to engage in a civil, mature, and profoundly relevant conversation about issues that can be challenging and uncomfortable. Nothing could be further from “threats and intimidation.”
The aforementioned presidential statement on rhetoric reaffirms the college’s commitment to offering “a safe environment for students and other community members.” Who could disagree with that? The statement, however, stops short of identifying potential risks to our safety. In the absence of such examples, we would like to offer our own. We cannot have a safe environment when students feel intimidated and are denied access to Emerson’s spaces and infrastructure; we cannot have a safe environment when staff are reportedly scared to talk about Palestine; and we cannot have a safe environment when faculty are reluctant to discuss issues that are considered sensitive—relevant and academically pertinent as they may be.
Ultimately, what motivates any effort to silence pro-Palestine voices is not a concern with conduct or etiquette but a fear of knowledge and an anxiety about what it can unleash. Knowledge is powerful. When paired with a call for justice, it can be infectious. And when joined to action, it can be transformative. For all these reasons, knowledge may seem unsettling sometimes. Yet to look away from its transformative potential is to betray our faith in education and forgo our commitment to the betterment of society, neither of which should be an option.
Faculty and Staff for Justice in Palestine (FSJP) is a democratic, multi-ethnic, and multi-racial collective created at Emerson College in October 2023. It is part of a national coalition at universities and colleges that supports Palestinians’ right to self-determination. It views the Palestinian struggle as part of a global movement that includes Black and indigenous liberations, LGBTQ+ struggles, feminist and environmental movements.
Thank you for your honesty and for inspiring comment and conversation.
The Beacon has properly provided a desired conduit for talking about Palestine. In my experience, supporters of Hamas and Gazans, such as the FSJP, have a voice, loud and clear, in the streets and in venues all over the country. Several months ago, just outside our campus buildings, I witnessed a large, well-organized and peaceful protest and thought, “I don’t agree but I do support this right”. I admired students for getting involved. This admiration for one’s opponent is necessary for future peace.
That support has since been challenged by continuous disturbing incidents. Absent from conversation about Palestine here has been talk about what is happening to Jews. As the mother of a son with a vicious cancer, I was sickened by the mobbing of Sloan Kettering, a safe haven in NYC for people and children with cancer from all over the world. I am frightened by young pro-Hamas students physically assaulting Jews on campuses all over the country. Kefiyehs abound, but our sons can no longer safely wear kippot in public. No lasting peace, no real empowerment for the suffering of the Palestinian people will come from this ancient Judaeophobic hatred.
Where are pro-Palestine voices silenced? You who want to end their pain are a everywhere. You have power in numbers. Jews are too tiny a population to stand alone and match in kind. Anna Feder was free to screen her “resounding success” and voice her concerns in these pages.
Are you upset because some Universities try to minimize destruction of property, mob mentality, silencing of civil opposition, physical threats and assaults on students who want to get the education for which they worked and paid? Is it not enough that you shut down Jewish prayers, tiny concerts, and holidays?
Every day brings new violence to Jews in America and Europe, all fueled by, and couched in, the “pro-Palestine” effort.
The college is in an unprecedented, most difficult position and members of the administration continue to work hard to be compassionate to all sides.
Our community can do better. We led in successfully embracing people beyond the binary in gender and sex. So why insist on a binary approach to this most existential situation?
If the vitriol continues to grow, someone in our Emerson community is going to get seriously hurt. Please help prevent this. Let us disagree with understanding and listening. Let us all work hard to see the good in our opponents, and the beauty in all people.
May there be peace for all in our lifetime.
While valid criticism of Israeli policies isn’t antisemitic by any definition, including the IHRA definition adopted by the majority of states, including Massachusetts, calling for the destruction of the world’s only Jewish state and our ancestral homeland has nothing to do with criticism. Chanting “from the river to the sea” and falsely accusing Israel of genocide and apartheid only perpetuates the most vile forms of antisemitism.
The use of these buzzwords by pro-Hamas “activists” is not just ignorant, it’s malicious. Over twenty percent of Israeli citizens are Arab. They enjoy the same rights and protections as the Jewish citizens do. Palestinians in the West Bank aren’t governed by the Israeli government, but by the Palestinian Authority, and while episodes of settler violence are unacceptable, the entity ultimately responsible for the well-being of Palestinians is the PA. We can argue about the validity of military occupation of Zones A and B, but we can’t argue about the Jewish people’s right to self-determination. The situation in the West Bank also has nothing to do with Gaza, from which Israel disengaged almost two decades ago. The blockade, imposed by Israel and Egypt, was a mere response to Hamas, an internationally recognized terrorist organization, assuming power in the Strip.
As for the genocide allegations, there’s no credible evidence to support them. Despite what the article alleged, the ICJ did not find Israel guilty of this crime. It merely warned of the worsening humanitarian crisis and tasked Israel with taking proactive steps to make sure genocide doesn’t happen in the future. And no Zionist wants genocide. We simply want self-determination in our indigenous land.
Having compassion for Palestinians should not involve distortion of facts and history.
Tokenizing Jews who weaponize their identity against their own people does nothing to advance the Palestinian cause, it only erases the majority of us, who are in touch with our heritage and recognize our history in the region.
Half of the world’s Jews live in Israel. Why is that I wonder? Every major religious text refers to Israel as the homeland of the Jewish people. There’s also plenty of archeological and historical evidence that proves our indigeneity and continued presence in the region.
In the name of freedom of expression, we can express opposing views. However, false statements, libel, and calls to destroy Israel aren’t by any means examples of protected speech.
We are witnessing one of the worst spikes of antisemitism in modern history, and pro-Hamas anti-zionists have played a big part in triggering it. We can’t move forward and hold honest and productive conversations until we grapple with that.