Smart activism needed in campus Israeli-Palestinian dialogue
Julia Reed
Issue date: 3/5/09 Section: Opinions
Is it better to be apathetic or passionate but ignorant? This was the question I posed while attending the recent faculty panel "Peace in Our Time? War and Conflict Resolution in the Middle East." I once declared in the Sophian that the activist Smithie was dead. I can now say with honesty that she has risen again, but not in the way I had hoped.
Judging by the attendance at the panel and at other Middle East-related events on campus, student interest in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is very high. People are agitating and protesting, holding vigils and attending lectures, but what they do not seem to be doing is getting very far or learning very much. And in a conflict that has been plagued by more misunderstanding than any other, it is essential that we are intelligent activists.
Students asking questions at the "Peace in Our Time?" panel did not seem swayed or even interested in the lengthy, in-depth conversation presented by the professors who had given of their own time to this cause. I was disturbed that many people had not attended the panel in order to learn something new, but rather because it was the latest opportunity to publicly air their emotional grievances.
With questions such as why there cannot be just a single unitary Israeli/Palestinian state, or by snapping at professors about the imprisonment of the Palestinian population by the Israeli government, students proved that while their outrage may be deep, their knowledge of the problem is superficial. Gazans are indeed imprisoned, but from the Egyptian as well as the Israeli borders. Unitary state solutions have long since been set aside as demographic and political impossibilities by even the most optimistic of peacemakers.
While the panelists patiently responded to these questions, I could not help but become more frustrated and embarrassed at student behavior. Students were rude, aggressive and petulant, rather than reasoned and thought-provoking. I was also not in agreement with everything the panelists said, but I could not understand the simmering resentment that seemed to fill the room. When I dreamed of a Smith again populated with activists, this was not what I meant.
Judging by the attendance at the panel and at other Middle East-related events on campus, student interest in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is very high. People are agitating and protesting, holding vigils and attending lectures, but what they do not seem to be doing is getting very far or learning very much. And in a conflict that has been plagued by more misunderstanding than any other, it is essential that we are intelligent activists.
Students asking questions at the "Peace in Our Time?" panel did not seem swayed or even interested in the lengthy, in-depth conversation presented by the professors who had given of their own time to this cause. I was disturbed that many people had not attended the panel in order to learn something new, but rather because it was the latest opportunity to publicly air their emotional grievances.
With questions such as why there cannot be just a single unitary Israeli/Palestinian state, or by snapping at professors about the imprisonment of the Palestinian population by the Israeli government, students proved that while their outrage may be deep, their knowledge of the problem is superficial. Gazans are indeed imprisoned, but from the Egyptian as well as the Israeli borders. Unitary state solutions have long since been set aside as demographic and political impossibilities by even the most optimistic of peacemakers.
While the panelists patiently responded to these questions, I could not help but become more frustrated and embarrassed at student behavior. Students were rude, aggressive and petulant, rather than reasoned and thought-provoking. I was also not in agreement with everything the panelists said, but I could not understand the simmering resentment that seemed to fill the room. When I dreamed of a Smith again populated with activists, this was not what I meant.
Viewing Comments 1 - 3 of 3
Georges Makhtouf
posted 3/05/09 @ 5:25 PM EST
Peace in our time?
What an appropriate title for this conference! The same phrase exactly used by Neville Chamberlain to describe his Munich agreement of 1938 with Adolf Hitler, which forced Checoslovakia to give up its Sudeten mountain region and leave itself open to German attack. (Continued…)
K2K2
K2K2
posted 3/05/09 @ 8:45 PM EST
Thank you for noting the "simmering resentment" of many of the students in Weinstein Auditorium's audience, and your call for more knowledgeable reason (and I would add critical thinking) for anyone who engages in activism on this issue. (Continued…)
Rachel Besserman
posted 3/06/09 @ 2:41 PM EST
Thank you for this thoughtful piece . . . may we also connect as individual souls and people seeking peace, here on campus, so that we may reflect this peace we wish for. (Continued…)
Post a Comment