After attending a lecture co-sponsored by Kol Israel and others in the last week, we, as representatives of the Students for a Free Palestine(SFP), would like to share some thoughts on what some have claimed to be an “educational dialogue” on the conflict in the Middle East.
Walid Shaobat, “a reformed terrorist” was introduced last week by a member of Kol Israel as someone who could offer us valuable historical insights on the current crisis. Under the guise of promoting a constructive dialogue, Walid proceeded to offer his lived experiences as a former Muslim growing up in Palestine. Far from offering an academically valuable account of the conflict, Walid gave a rhetoric laden diatribe that, if anything, stifled dialogue by intimidating those who, in the Q & A session, dared to question his conclusions. As members of the Wesleyan community, we should all keep in mind that University funds helped support this event, even when it failed to provide an educationally valuable forum. His personal narrative aside, we have reservations about academic departments financing events that fail to provide an opportunity for productive discourse, including the toleration of dissenting views.
In contrast, when SFP sponsored the Activism 102 conference earlier this year, before a word was spoken, came under fire from the extremist elements of the University, who tried to shut down the event. Even after the conference—which included a question and answer session that was not hostile to opposing perspectives— proved innocuous, these factions continued to condemn it without even having attended. This double-standard serves only to suppress certain political voices and discourage meaningful debate on this complicated issue. If we are serious about even-handedness and productive dialogue, we must, as a community, hold to higher standards the faculty and staff who seek to skew campus discourse about the Middle East conflict to fit their own personal political agendas.
Leave a Reply