And the beat just goes on and on - how Jew-hate on campus goes unabated 50 years on

A BBC documentary has caught a considerable number of students on US campuses still celebrating the 7 October Hamas attacks on innocent civilians and chanting support for what they referred to as “the resistance”, and using the antisemitic comparison that Zionism is the same as Nazism.

The second episode of Speechless, recently broadcast as part of the BBC Storyville series examined how the war has reverberated across American universities, focusing on protests, encampments and, in particular the documentary centred on clashes between pro-Israel and pro-"Palestinian" students.

The documentary demonstrated how, in less than 24 hours of the 7 October attacks, a joint statement by Harvard student groups declared: “We… hold the Israeli regime entirely responsible for all unfolding violence ... the apartheid regime is the only one to blame.”

Pro-Palestinian protest at Cornell University, as featured in Speechless: Part 2 – The Pendulum, with demonstrators holding anti-Zionism banners and Palestinian flags. Credit: BBC Storyville / Good Soup Productions

In footage from on campus demonstrations, activists were heard chanting: “Glory to the martyrs. Glory to the resistance. We will liberate the land. By any means necessary.”

In further footage in the documentary, one protester, addressed the rabble and asked: “Do you guys remember the photos of the bulldozer breaking through the Nazi border?” before describing 7 October as producing “joyful and powerful images”.

Another "student" tried to defend the use of Nazi imagery associated with the attacks, saying: “We are so horrible for showing a paraglider. What about their jets? Israeli jets have killed thousands and thousands of Palestinians, but that’s okay?”

At one point, the documentary showed how a message was distributed throughout the campus encampment advising students that a documentary crew was on site and telling them to “be wary of what you say” and describing the director as a “Zionist”.

The film later showed how the crew were prevented from accessing the illegal student encampment.

In the documentary a Jewish student who called herself "Maya", described being confronted by other students after she identified herself as a Zionist.

"The term “intifada” is debated within the film, with one student described it as “the breaking off of chains”, while another says the phrase “intifada revolution” constitutes “a genocidal chant”.

The documentary also highlighted the experiences of Jewish students on campus. One student says: “There is a defence of everyone’s rights but Jewish people’s rights,” while another added: “I’ve had much more difficulty being Jewish than I have trans.”

Bienstock, the director of the documentary who is Jewish, reflected on the reaction to 7 October, saying: “Watching 7 October described as ‘exhilarating’ was hard to process”. Indeed, when students at Cornell University learn Bienstock is Jewish, they brand her a Zionist without engaging with her to learn her views. Later, many of them shy away from her altogether. 

Regrettably in some ways, rather than centering on the Jewish experience of campus life, it argues that while antisemitism on campus is a genuine concern, it has become intertwined with wider ideological and political battles over free speech, protest and academic freedom - in effect minimising the Jewish student experience of hate, bullying, direct antisemitism and pro-Pally intimidation.

Political comment

About fifty years ago I returned to university, first as a student then later as an academic member of staff. Prior to my arrival, I would have described myself as largely Jewish in name only - I didn't attend shul and my knowledge of Jewish history and culture was little more than perfunctory, but that was all about to change.

This was the era of the rise of the far right in Britain and while they were never to achieve the success of the British Union of Fascists, they were extremely vocal and becoming increasingly popular. What I experienced in those early days at university stunned me and totally changed my life, because I knew to expect antisemitism from declared fascists, but what I had not expected was the bitterness and hatred of 'supposed' leftists and anti-racists.

At a national level, the National Union of Students (NUS) who were responsible for protecting student affairs at a national and local level had an across the board policy of 'no platform for Zionism', which effectively meant no Jewish student society could discuss issues about Israel of invite Zionist speakers. So when I fist approached my local Union president indicating a desire to set up a local Jewish society I was firmly advised that they thought it a bad idea, but if I chose to proceed, I would have to agree to uphold NUS policy.

Now I apologise to American readers for this somewhat long biographical titbit, but I use it to explain a key and extremely important point - In over 50 years and across the world nothing has changed - the oldest hate still festers in our colleges and universities unabated.

In the US, Students for Justice in Palestine continue to hold a large sway in student politics, including intimidating Jewish students unabated. Polls undertaken during the height of the campus protests showed 8% of the entire national student population had participated with 45% supporting them. In response, and in an attempt to protect our Jewish students a substantial number of law suits were filed in an effort to silence the pro-Palestine bullies but most have failed, arguing speech and slogans at the heart of the controversy are protected by the first amendment. But sadly the courts have failed to see the point. If you are Jewish and you need to walk from point A to point B and that means traversing an area filled with dozens, if not hundreds of students calling for a global Intifada, or the death of every Jew in Israel then you are not safe.

Fifty years ago I was told I would be physically hurt if I set up a Jewish society and it is still the same today.

We have failed to support our Jewish students and we continue to do so today - and more importantly, no-one seems to care. So my question is - what will it take for politicians to realise campus antisemitism is rampant and pretty words and investigative committees are no longer enough.

Clegg’s phoney war on social immobility

by Susanna Bellino (vice-chair of Kingston and Surbiton CLP and chair of Labour Friends of Italy

David Cameron’s comments a few weeks ago about Oxford university’s lack of black students might have annoyed its dons and PR team but he made a valid point. Granted he skewed the statistics but the truth remains that only 27 black undergraduates – approximately 1% – made its undergraduate intake that year.

The results of a freedom of information request by David Lammy MP revealed, among other startling facts, that Merton College, Oxford, had not admitted a single black student for five years. And although it pains me to say it, my own alma mater doesn’t fair much better – despite its more liberal reputation, white students were more likely to be successful than black applicants at every Cambridge college except one.

These figures are in stark contrast to Oxbridge’s American counterpart, Harvard, where 11% of students were black. Affirmative action no doubt plays a large part in this but Oxbridge does run its own access programmes although – if rumours are to be believed – aiming these schemes at a comprehensive school in Hackney might better achieve social mobility than running them at Marlborough College.

For once, we can’t blame the coalition for something. Oxbridge’s unrepresentative undergraduate intake and the general trend of the lack of upward social mobility in the UK has long been an issue. When I went up to Cambridge in 2007, 57% of the student body were state school educated – a decent enough figure perhaps but we need to consider that in 1997, 55% of the student body were state school educated – hardly an improvement.
So, who’s to blame for this gaping inequality? Social scientists will point to a number of factors including economic circumstances and an entrenched class system that is forever perpetuated. Whatever the cause, surely policy must be formulated to achieve equality of opportunity since it can’t be left up to institutions to serve as engines for social justice. They’ve got enough on their plates trying to keep up with their American equivalents in achieving academic brilliance on the international stage.

The coalition, Nick Clegg in particular, seems keen to eradicate social immobility. In August last year, Clegg articulated his plans to “promote social mobility and the next steps” his government would undertake to overcome them. He declared his vision of good government :

“governing for the long-term means thinking not only about the next year or two, or even the next parliamentary term. Governing for the long-term means recognising that the decisions of one generation profoundly influence the lives and life chances of the next”.

And in early April, he launched the government’s social mobility strategy, a move which was overshadowed by the internship row.

So does coalition policy match the rhetoric?

Raising tuition fees, abolishing the education maintenance allowance (despite a half-hearted u-turn) and cutting Sure Start suggest that instead of encouraging social mobility, the coalition is placing more obstacles.

Tripling tuition fees to a maximum of £9,000 doesn’t increase social mobility – it doesn’t even stagnate it. Granted universities that charge £9,000 are required to spend 10% of this income on access schemes for poorer students. But there is a real worry that pupils from the poorest backgrounds will be discouraged from applying. I left university with a £12,000 debt still largely unpaid. But a debt of £27k+ – who needs that hanging over their heads as well as the possibility that a degree – even an Oxbridge one – doesn’t guarantee you a job?

When the fees legislation was passed in December, we were promised that universities would charge £9,000 only in “exceptional circumstances”. But of the 50 or so universities that have announced their intentions, 35 intend to charge top fees, including a number of former polytechnics, and the rest will charge £6,000+.

So, if Clegg was as committed to improving social mobility as he would have us believe, maybe he shouldn’t have voted for an increase in tuition fees. Good intentions and positive rhetoric can only go so far and education has always been key in breaking through class barriers.

Maybe he now regrets entering into a coalition that has made it harder in an ever competitive world for a state schooled student to even dream of gaining a place at one of the world’s leading institutions. He should do, if he doesn’t already.