It has been over 200 days since the terrorist attacks in Israel. To respond, Israel launched a full-scale invasion of the Gaza Strip, with the goals being to destroy Hamas, the terrorist group responsible for the attack on Israel, and free the remaining hostages. As of today, Hamas claims to possess 133 hostages, and Israel’s war effort is still ongoing.
Although the conflict is on the other side of the world, repercussions are felt locally Over thirty colleges and universities host “solidarity encampments,” which are student-led demonstrations that intend to force the college to succumb to their demands.
I found that the word “demand” was often used without more information—it is difficult to find information about student-protester demands, even if you look for it.
From my understanding, the protesters want their respective universities to “divest” from any company profiting from connections to Israel or from the war in general. Then, the universities would be required to redirect that money to support educational efforts in Palestine. While this may seem straightforward, it is difficult to understand; the convoluted concept may even fuel the sentiment that the encampments have no direction or purpose.
The most prevailing issue with the protests is the danger they pose to Jewish students, who often fear for their safety while walking to class. It might even cause them to take a particular route to avoid being targeted for their religious beliefs.
Colombia alumnus Robert Kraft, who attended the University on a full scholarship, stated that “principles have been sacrificed by professors keen to use the classroom and the campus as a bullying pulpit to promote their personal political viewpoints as opposed to fostering critical thinking.”
The difference between expressing your opinion and blatant antisemitism is clear, and while many protestors remain peaceful, antisemitism is never acceptable.
When students chant “Go back to Poland,” insinuating a return to the Holocaust, a university must do everything in its power to de-platform and remove those people from their campus. The “mob mentality” (or existing in unison) has allowed people to feel comfortable with expressing their hatred—the entire mob must be destroyed.
These issues have recently expanded to our local community, with students at Haverford College and Bryn Mawr College making solidarity encampments.
I attempted to gather a unique perspective by interviewing an encampment member at Bryn Mawr College. When I arrived at their campus, I asked a student for directions. When she heard we were going to the encampment, she looked shocked and warned that I might be labeled as “Islamophobic” just due to my presence.
When I found the circle of tents, I asked to speak with an encamped student. She directed us to one of the “directors.” I began introducing myself as a member of the Haverford School newspaper before asking if she would answer a few questions.
“We are not speaking at this moment,” she condescendingly remarked.
Confused, I respected their wish and walked away.
Still unsatisfied, we asked a seemingly everyday student, on her way to class, if she had a minute for an interview about how she felt around the encampment. She agreed and consented to being recorded. As we were about to start the interview, the student director of the encampment stormed over.
“Do not talk to them,” she yelled.
I left.
I understand the image of Haverford Students approaching an all-girls school encampment may be triggering. However, if the protesters were genuinely passionate about their beliefs, why wouldn’t they want to spread their messages and demands? It seems contradictory and additionally supports why many don’t understand the encampments and believe they are simply designed to grab attention. If protesters are unwilling to explain what they are protesting, what is the point?
