University’s intolerance declaration raises concerns

Lozano, chairwoman of the university system’s Board of Regents, chose not to even discuss the wording of a proposed “statement of principles against intolerance” brought before the board by system administrators, instead announcing plans to have a panel of system and campus officials, faculty members, and students come up with a new document articulating the system’s position on the issue. The goal was to allow for a prompt and effective response to reports of intolerant behavior.

Recent incidents on U.C. campuses include swastikas drawn on a Jewish fraternity house at Davis and the questioning of a candidate for student judiciary board about her Jewishness and Jewish affiliations at UCLA. They applauded Napolitano’s office for sending the regents a statement that makes no explicit mention of anti-Semitism.

UC student regent Abraham “Avi” Oved, who is from an Israeli American family, delivered a passionate and personal statement.

He urged the regents to adopt policies so that no students feel they have to hide their ethnic, racial, religious or sexual identity. UC President Janet Napolitano in a radio interview in May expressed support for adopting the State Department’s definition of anti-Semitism, which includes demonizing Israel or denying the Jewish state’s right to exist.

Regent Richard Blum, husband of U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), believe that students who behave in racist, anti-Semitic or other biased ways should face penalties such as suspension or expulsion.

But that drew fire from free-speech advocates and groups critical of Israel’s treatment of Palestinians.

UC officials said the statement is intended as a declaration of the school’s beliefs and that disciplinary measures would still be guided by existing policies and federal laws.

The statement also had been widely denounced by national experts on free speech and academic freedom, who argued that, in an attempt to broadly promote tolerance for all campus constituencies, it ended up containing language that threatened the free exchange of ideas.

The policy defines intolerance as being “unwelcome conduct motivated by discrimination against, or hatred toward, other individuals or groups”, and includes “acts of violence or intimidation, threats, harassment, hate speech, derogatory language reflecting stereotypes or prejudice, or inflammatory or derogatory use of culturally recognized symbols of hate, prejudice, or discrimination”. They said they hope a new statement will address a rash of anti-Semitic incidents. “Those who care about protecting Jewish students and improving the entire campus climate are outraged”, said Tammi Rossman-Benjamin, a Jewish Studies lecturer on leave from UC Santa Cruz to lead a coalition of groups combatting campus anti-Semitism.

“If that is not a political situation you can talk about, then you cannot talk about any political situation anywhere or about any government in the world”, he said.

Other speakers said anti-Semitism often is masked as only criticism of the state of Israel.

A number of Jewish people and groups also oppose a definition of anti-Semitism at UC on the same grounds, as does the very author of the anti-Semitism definition on which the State Department’s is based.

Last year, UC Berkeley commemorated the 50th anniversary of the start of the Free Speech Movement on the campus, pioneering protests against restrictions on student activism that attracted worldwide attention.