Over the last several months, I’ve seen and read about demonstrations on our campus by the pro-Palestinian group Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP), which apparently has roughly 200 campus branches in the U.S., Canada, and New Zealand.
SJP has been particularly active since last year’s October 7 massacre of Israelis and others, which they defended in a long letter (2,471 words!) in the Chicago Maroon, our student newspaper. Click below to read this hate-filled diatribe, or find it archived here. It was written a few days after the massacre but was updated and published in the Maroon on December 1. The instant I saw this justification for butchery (just read the bit below), I felt that I somehow had to respond.
The beginning of the SJP’s “explanation”:
The events of the past week have been historic and unprecedented by all measures. Last Saturday, for the first time in history, Palestinian resistance groups broke out of Gaza, reclaimed land from the Israeli occupation, and seized control of numerous Israeli military posts. Scrambling to recover from this humiliation and collectively punish Palestine’s population for the accompanying violence inflicted on Israeli soldiers, settlers, and civilians, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has—predictably—resorted to openly genocidal tactics.
How euphemistic can you get? But even before this letter appeared, the SJP engaged in several loud demonstrations (conducted with another non-student organization)—demonstrations that were almost frightening in their anger, hatred and calls for genocide (“from the river to the sea”, etc.) . It was simply scary to listen to these people, and for the first time in decades I felt a bit frightened to be a Jew, although a secular one. Of course, their behavior is intended to frighten us, and many Jewish students have become intimidated.
And it doesn’t matter that I’m a secular Jew. SJP’s hatred of Jews doesn’t depend on whether or not they subscribe to the tenets of Judaism. As with the Nazis, secular Jews also count as targets.
On October 19, a peaceful demonstration by Jewish students in the Quad was disrupted by SJP, who had promised not to do so. This deplatforming, which canceled the demonstration (it involved a lecture by a rabbi, which is what Jews call a “demonstration”) violated several campus rules, which you can see in my post at WEIT on the incident, and it caused two Jewish students to write a heartfelt letter to the administration, which was never acknowledged, much less answered. The “dean on call” was summoned to quash the deplatforming, but she did nothing.
A group of faculty, including myself, also wrote to the administration, and eventually President Paul Alivisatos wrote a good letter to the University community explaining that University policy doesn’t allow the disruption of speakers. It didn’t give specifics, but at least to many of us it seemed prompted by the behavior of SJP. An excerpt:
In any venue, no member of our community may shout down or seek to prevent the protected expression of those with whom they disagree. You may not tear down a poster. You may not seek to intimidate or threaten another person, or prevent them from hearing an invited speaker. These are egregious offenses against our community. We have policies and processes for guiding community norms, reporting instances that require investigation, and disciplinary action when needed. Our Dean of Students in the University will share more about those policies and processes with students later today.
Good for the President! This is a clear expression of University policy, though I don’t think that any SJP students were warned or discipline for violating it.
Three days before the SJP letter appeared, on November 28, a Maroon “reporter,” actually a pro-Palestinian student activist who participates in SJP demonstrations, wrote a very long article (4,077 words) in a section of the Maroon called The Grey City. It’s really a puff piece for the SJP, describing a week of the group’s activities. Click below to read that account or find it archived here.
There’s an “editor’s note” appearing at the beginning:
Editor’s note: Kelly X. Hui attended the quad protests and documented them as a protester with Students for Justice in Palestine UChicago and as an organizer with #CareNotCops and UChicago United for Palestine. The identities of protesters and organizers were kept anonymous.
This is hardly the objective reporting one expects from a news report! In effect, the Maroon did (and still does) harbor about 6,500 words of pro-Hamas “reportage” on its front page.
Was there any reporting on the other side—by those who are more pro-Israel? Not that I’ve seen. At the end of Hui’s piece there’s yet another editor’s note:
Editor’s note: As The Maroon’s long-form and narrative features section, Grey City seeks to produce coverage that gives students a direct voice in reporting. As a separate report, Grey City will soon be publishing a story written by pro-Israel student organizer [sic] who has been active in recent campus demonstrations.
This promised story hasn’t yet appeared, even though two months have lapsed. I might have missed it, but I don’t think so. I suspect that they couldn’t find anybody to write it. But if that’s the case the Maroon should have commissioned a piece. The newspaper owes its audience a more balanced view of the controversy.
At any rate, I felt that the paper needed a voice that argued against the discomfiting pro-Palestinian stand of these two long pieces, particularly the SJP’s screed justifying Hamas’s attacks of October 7. And if there wasn’t such a piece, I had to write one. So I produced an op-ed for the paper that came out yesterday. You can see it by clicking below, and I’ve put the text of my letter below the fold at the bottom.
I am under no illusions about the pushback I’ll get for what I wrote. SJP is aggressive if it’s anything, and standing up against the organization, and for Israel, is not the most popular thing to do on campus these days. But the laws of physics—instantiated in SJP’s writings, violations of campus policies (see photo below), and chants that, to many, are calls for the elimination of Israel (and probably not peacefully!), compelled me to write the letter. In the absence of the promised pro-Israel article, my letter shows that at least shows that one member of the University community abhors the violence and hatred embodied in SJP. And I hope what I wrote gives a bit of succor to our intimidated Jewish students.
********
Click “read more” to see the text of my letter, which isn’t long. The photo that accompanies it is of an SJP demonstration, and below is an Instagram post from SJP that testifies to their blocking of the administration building (Levi Hall), a violation of University policy. Note that they’ve covered their faces with hearts, showing their cowardice at the same time. their failure to recognize a wildly inappropriate symbol.
Should Students for Justice in Palestine Be a Recognized Student Organization?
SJP’s disruptive behavior and violation of University rules raises questions regarding the organization’s place on our campus.
Has the time come to ask whether the activism of Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) belongs on our campus? It’s not the morally reprehensible things they say that brings this question to the fore, as their speech is protected, but how they behave: in a way that violates campus rules and disrupts the University’s mission.
One thing I’ve absorbed in my 37 years at this University is that no matter how detestable speech can be, it should never be banned or suppressed. Even if discourse tests one’s limits of tolerance, a university functions best when all ideas can be expressed. Take, for example, SJP’s long op-ed in The Maroon—updated from a piece written on October 11—justifying the butchery of Israelis by Hamas on October 7. In a breathtakingly obtuse and euphemistic statement, SJP claims that “the events of the past week have been historic and unprecedented by all measures. Last Saturday, for the first time in history, Palestinian resistance groups broke out of Gaza, reclaimed land from the Israeli occupation, and seized control of numerous Israeli military posts.” The “breaking out of Gaza,” as they call it, included the slaughter and torture of around 1,200 civilians, mass rapes of women, and abduction of about 240 hostages, most of them still in captivity. And, of course, no land was reclaimed. This statement alone, in line with the national organization’s similar pronouncement (complete with the logo of an armed Hamas paraglider), renders SJP morally reprehensible, odious, and hateful, seemingly promoting terrorism. But although I believe any moral person should be sickened by these words, they constitute protected free speech, don’t violate University regulations, and should be discussed openly—as I just did. What should make us question whether SJP belongs on campus is not because it says loathsome things like this, but because of the actions it takes.
At the end of last year, the organization and its umbrella group, UChicago United for Palestine (the latter not a recognized student organization), have repeatedly violated the University’s Protest and Demonstrations Policy, including by engaging in demonstrations during prohibited hours without permits, deplatforming a group of peacefully assembled Jewish students, sitting-in in campus buildings, disrupting classes using loud megaphones, and blocking access to buildings. While these actions have led to some arrests, the legal charges have been dropped. This still leaves the possibility of institutional punishment, but whether the University will pursue the charges, or what the punishments will be—if any—are never disclosed to the University community. Unless punishments for such violations become public (names need not be given), there is no deterrent to illegally disrupting University activities. Punishments for other prohibited behaviors, like sexual harassment and assault, are publicized in a yearly report, so why not trespassing?
SJP does not aim to further campus discourse about the Israel–Hamas war, but rather to bully the rest of us into accepting their ideological views through verbal intimidation and interference with our mission to teach, learn, and do research. Violation of university policies has led to SJP being banned on other campuses, including Columbia University and The George Washington University.
The continual disruption of our campus and violation of University regulations raises the question of whether SJP as a campus group is involved in these actions. If so, we should ponder whether that group should be a recognized student organization. At the very least, student organizations should enrich the mission of the University: promoting discourse and enriching our intellectual life. SJP does none of this, for their mission seems to be purely ideological: to promote Hamas and whitewash its terrorism—as well as to erase the state of Israel—all through disrupting campus activity. If it is to remain, it should at least desist from violating University regulations.
Finally, to deter organizations from such violations, it’s imperative that our administration not only warn and then punish violators, but also let us know that punishments have been levied. If University regulations of conduct aren’t enforced, they become toothless. And that simply encourages further disruption.
Jerry A. Coyne is professor emeritus in the Department of Ecology and Evolution.
Bravo
I agree: Bravo!
For years, I have worried about the steady increase of antisemitism in North America, but the outburst of Jew-hatred that was unleashed after October 7 has been terrifying. I am becoming, against my so-called free will, a one-issue political activist: Support Israel.
am yisrael chai
Bravissimo!
Right on!
Thank you.
Excellent letter, Jerry. Thank you! The final paragraph is of particular importance and any administration reaction or response to it will tell us whether President Alivisatos is serious about supporting the Chicago Principles or just providing platitudes. Clarifying the rules is important, but, once made clear to the community, they must be enforced through clear action by the administration, or, as Jerry points out, they are toothless, and, I would add, that people whose morality excuses and even extols as virtuous, the Hamas slaughter of October 7, cannot be expected to voluntarily behave within the civilized guidance provided by a reading of the university policies. The appointed dean-on-call must have organizational gravitas AND be committed to enforcing university policy, even through use of police if necessary.
+1
Great letter!
Excellent.
Excellent letter! These sentiments needed to be shared. It is sickening what groups like these are doing to the climate of universities and colleges and it is important that people loudly oppose their conduct
Excellent letter!
Yes, as per others above. it’s a straight-forward, polite letter. I could not be so restrained. Students for ?Justice? in Palestine? Postmodern something something irony.
As others have said. And also it is highly admirable that you stuck to the main point here, which is about whether the group should remain recognized. I don’t think I could have stayed on track like that.
Thank you for writing this. I hope that the response is positive—and that the letter is picked up by other news outlets—but I acknowledge the risk you’re taking. It’s no fun receiving responses that are less than charitable or even less than civil. Please keep us informed.
I think you make an excellent point that punitive action taken by the university needs to be public; otherwise the deterrent effect goes no further than the original perpetrators.
Finally, I note that you are very careful in your penultimate paragraph, calling on the University to consider nullifying its recognition of SJP on campus if it is responsible for the violations you cite:
“The continual disruption of our campus and violation of University regulations raises the question of whether SJP as a campus group is involved in these actions.”
I think you are being very generous here in giving SJP the benefit of the doubt. I wonder if SJP members would afford you the same courtesy.
Of course they wouldn’t “afford you the same courtesy” They aren’t as bad as the brown shirts yet, but they are related.
Thank you, Jerry Coyne, for voicing what is a widespread opinion among the silent majority of faculty and students. The chaos spread by SJP and others demonstrating for Hamas is intolerable and needs to be responded to with firm punitive actions. Here at UChicago this would includes response by our campus Deans and police, which has so far been tepid. Nationally, it would include arrests and clearing the demonstrators disrupting airports and highways around the United States.
Three cheers for PCC(e)! The case for enforcing university regulations against ideologues’ thuggish behavior has rarely been put so well. It is about time that
universities did something real to deter such behavior, beyond merely issuing the usual vague, content-free public statements.
I wonder, on the other hand, whether groups like SJP could be undermining their own influence. Elsewhere, their tactic of creating disruption and inconvenience by blocking public streets and highways— the Interstateifada—probably makes their cause about as popular with the public as the Houthis are with the shipping industry.
Well done on putting your head above the parapet with such a clear and to the point letter.
One caveat with the article (not the letter) is that you describe the SJP as “pro-palestinian”.
I would argue that they are in fact “pro the palestinian ruling class” which pretty much by definition makes them “anti the palestinian people”.
Good point!
I’ll try to sum up the James Lindsay angle :
To understand the “actions” – or, by their cult’s (yes, an actual cult) terminology, praxis, of any such group, consider the following publications which are literally instruction manuals for communist revolution, operating by the dialectic :
Rules for Radicals
Saul Alinsky
Random House
1971
Beautiful Trouble: A Toolbox for Revolution
Andrew Boyd
OR books
2012
Evaluating any given protest (not every one) as dialectical political warfare can reveal the game – or more accurately, trap. Things start to make sense (demystify) when this is done. The trap is designed by this principle :
Your target’s reaction is your real action
Here, we have – justifiably – civil debate and discussion of a number of important factors. I am 100% supportive of it. The confusing thing is :
the radicalized protesters and their directors do not care about the issue
Or, as Lindsay says:
The issue is never the issue – the issue is the Revolution
Perhaps some of the protesters that truly care will eventually realize the cult’s destructive nature and leave. But the objective is to get the mid-level provocation (etc.) into camera lenses and blogs – to the audience. The ostensibly disparate groups BLM, SJP, and even Greta Thunberg sharing the same goals suggests this link.
OK I’ll truncate here – again, I am only filling in background from Lindsay’s expositions, what I wrote is not original. Check out Lindsay’s expositions which always cites literature to look up, so the cult of Woke Marxism can be beaten by knowing its Rules for Radicals.
Just to add, transparency relating to discipline also helps ensure that all campus groups are being treated fairly. I dare say other groups, less associated with violence or holding unpopular views, might be more aggressively disciplined.
Well said Dr Coyne.
I hope your letter receives the attention and response it requires from the Administration of the University of Chicago.
I doubt they’ll even see it. I did send a copy to the dean in charge of communications, as I really do want them to publicize any university action taken against protestors who violate the rules. I suggested that they do this, but the response was, “Hey, we hadn’t thought of that.” I think pointed out that they regularly publicize that people have been punished for other transgressions.
Brave, eloquent and persuasive. A great letter; thank you for sharing it with this community. This website is more influential than you might think: I hope this initiative gets the publicity it deserves.
One needn’t wear a uniform to serve honorably in a just war.
Bravo, Jerry! You are a good writer, but then we already knew that.
Excellent letter. They should simply enforce the rules, in a manner that’s predictable to everyone before the fact and reported to everyone after the fact.
Might be of interest Jerry, but I tried to post the following under your letter and have seemingly had it declined (twice) by their moderation.
I also note that only the same two comments are present that were there eight hours ago, in which time the one supporting you has garnered many more “likes”. I suspect mine is not the only one not getting posted.
Here’s what I said:
Brilliant Jerry. Very well said.
Your points, to any rational mind, should be obvious and applauded.
You defend SJP’s right to speech, even given the abhorrent nature of their speech, and then simply state that they should obey the university’s code of conduct and allow others that same right.
Disruptive behaviour and de-platforming are absolutely antithetical to a university’s mission, especially when that mission is as enshrined as it is at UoC, and cannot be tolerated.
If SJP cannot abide by that very simple mission then they have to go. I suspect at no great loss.
It takes them some time to moderate the comments, apparently, but I’ve emailed the editorial group and asked them to put up the comments as soon as possible. There are others from friends and colleagues, and they’re stewing in the queue. I want people to know that there is support for enforcing the conduct rules!
Well done!
Excellent letter Jerry, and thank you for sticking your head above the parapet. Few academics have the guts and integrity to do so on this topic. Well done.
That was a really good letter. There was something creepily nasty about one of the comments that has appeared. Not just the ad hominems but the whole smirking tone is something I’ve seen before from activists, as if it came from one of the agitprop manuals that ThyroidPlanet cites.
Excellent letter Prof JC. As others here have mentioned, balanced, polite and sticking to topic. All the best.
These worldwide protests are becoming tiresome and vulgar. It’s time somebody protested.
Thank you for writing an excellent letter.
Comments on Jerry’s letter have now appeared on the Maroon’s website, accessible by clicking on the article. One long tendentious piece by someone called Iacovetti makes me realize we are living in two different worlds. He is obviously articulate and intelligent but comes from a very dark place. He manages to miss the point of Jerry’s focused letter while claiming to be challenging facts and not ideology.