By now, you have likely heard about the Congressional hearings on antisemitism.
Congresswoman Elise Stefanik, who is often treated as a dunce because she is a female Republican, absolutely slaughtered.
By now, you have likely heard about the Congressional hearings on antisemitism.
Congresswoman Elise Stefanik, who is often treated as a dunce because she is a female Republican, absolutely slaughtered the presidents of Harvard, Penn, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in the hearing. While the Harvard grad (yes, this purported dunce is a Harvard graduate and currently enrolled at the Kennedy School getting a Masters in Defense and Strategic Studies) pressed these college presidents to clarify their policies on bullying and harassment of Jews, they smirked and squirmed their way into a rhetorical kill box.
Stefanik: „Does calling for the genocide of Jews violate Penn’s rules or code of conduct?“
Magill: „It is a context dependent decision.“
Stefanik: „Does calling for the genocide of Jews violate Harvard’s rules of bullying and harassment?“
Gay: „It can be depending on the… pic.twitter.com/DshHkDrkdt
Terri Green (@TerriGreenUSA) December 7, 2023
The entire hearing presented a bad look for the presidents of these universities for several reasons. The first and most obvious one is that these presidents have embraced some of the most restrictive speech policies on US campuses and suddenly and inexplicably discovered a free speech loophole when it comes to antisemitism. Had these universities been consistent protectors of free speech, even despicable speech, I would reluctantly applaud their defense of free speech principles in the face of grandstanding politicians.
(With that said, some of these demonstrations clearly crossed the line between speech and conduct, including harassment).
As it is, screw them. They are hypocrites and should be made to live by the rules they created for others: goose, gander, and all that.
As somebody who has been involved in a lot of meetings with politicians about how to communicate a point of view, I recognize the imprints of a preparation done by lawyers, not crisis communications specialists. These presidents came into the hearing with the strategy of getting a “Not Guilty” verdict in a courtroom, not one of winning a PR battle where they were already well behind on points.
