Last December, 66 percent of the American Studies Association (ASA) voted to endorse a boycott of Israeli academic institutions, according to a statement on the ASA website. The ASA, an organization dedicated to the interdisciplinary study of American culture and history, launched the boycott to protest Israeli treatment of Palestinians. According to the statement, the boycott “is in solidarity with scholars and students deprived of their academic freedom, and it aspires to enlarge that freedom for all, including Palestinians.” The ASA further cites Israel’s violations of international law and human rights crimes as reason for the boycott.

Although we take accusations of human rights violations very seriously, we do not feel that a boycott of academic institutions is the best avenue to take to address Israeli politics and action. By boycotting Israeli academic institutions, the ASA is not opening academic dialogue for more people but instead shutting down existing dialogue and preventing Israeli academic scholars, many of whom have played no role in policy making or human rights violations, from continuing international academic exploration.

We understand the motive for ASA’s actions; however, we do not feel an academic boycott is the best means for the ASA to accomplish its goals. We challenge the ASA and other academic institutions supporting the boycott to find alternative routes: for example, publicly endorsing a human rights advocacy group that opposes Israel’s treatment of Palestinians. We feel that suppressing and limiting any academic institutions will do more harm than good.

In addition, we strongly support University President James W. Wagner’s opposition to the boycott. Wagner released a statement on Emory’s behalf opposing the boycott, explaining that such actions violate the right of University faculty to engage in academic freedom. Emory is not the only American institution speaking out against the ASA’s action. So far, the presidents of more than 80 U.S. colleges have denounced the boycott.

After the ASA’s boycott made national news, Emory Hillel Program Director Meira Kreuter sent an email to Hillel’s listserv rightfully decrying the boycott. In the email, she called the boycott “misguided at best, and anti-Semitic at worst.” The email also detailed a list of 18 Georgia professors and graduate students who supposedly voted in favor of the ASA boycott. This information was sent to Hillel by an outside source. However, when the Wheel  contacted the names on the list, many denied being affiliated with the ASA. Anna Julia Cooper, a renowned black scholar mentioned in the email, died in 1964. Additionally, Hillel wrote in the email that it wanted students to be aware of the views of Georgia professors and graduate students, encouraging students to “be vigilant when choosing what classes to take and whose presence to enjoy.”

While we understand Hillel’s impulse to send out an email decrying the ASA boycott, we are disappointed by some of the tactics employed. When disseminating information about individuals, it is essential to fact check. Although Emory Hillel Director Russ Shulkes said Hillel is happy to retract any wrongly named professor, it is upsetting that these names were not verified before the email was sent. Additionally, the ASA’s voting records are not available to the public, making the need for source-vetting imperative.

Hillel is an important and influential organization on Emory’s campus. It is therefore troubling that it would implicate certain professors as aligning themselves with a campaign that is “anti-Semitic at worst,” as the email says, without first double-checking. To accuse academic scholars of voting in favor of a boycott that Hillel deems potentially anti-Semitic is a heavy accusation to levy, and one that should not be done without extreme caution and diligent fact-checking.

Furthermore, by cautioning students against taking classes with certain professors, Hillel is retaliating against a boycott with a quasi-boycott of its own. We at the Wheel feel that this is not an effective course of action. We encourage Hillel to find a more productive way to speak out against the boycott.

Given that we attend a liberal arts institution that values academic freedom and exploration, it is important to learn and debate with those that do not necessarily share one’s viewpoint. The open flow of information and ideas is an essential component of the academy. And we at the Wheel feel that the ASA’s misguided attack on academic freedom is a stance that should be contested. Regardless of one’s political views, the open flow of information should not be hindered. We hope that the Emory community, and all organizations within it, will continue to wrestle with these ideas and contemplate and discuss appropriate versus inappropriate avenues for protest.

The above staff editorial represents the majority opinion of the Wheel.

Emory Wheel
+ posts

The Emory Wheel was founded in 1919 and is currently the only independent, student-run newspaper of Emory University. The Wheel publishes weekly on Wednesdays during the academic year, except during University holidays and scheduled publication intermissions.

The Wheel is financially and editorially independent from the University. All of its content is generated by the Wheel’s more than 100 student staff members and contributing writers, and its printing costs are covered by profits from self-generated advertising sales.