The UC Student Association is struggling to abide by its own words.
The first sentence of a resolution passed by the UCSA board at a meeting at UC Berkeley last weekend states that “a marketplace of ideas where no political speech is suppressed is crucial to a healthy democratic process.” Yet when the board voted on that resolution, it did so without allowing the political speech of a significant stakeholder group to factor into its discussion, thereby tarnishing any hint of democratic procedure.
UCSA’s board displayed a stunning lack of transparency in its vote on the resolution, which is contentious for two main reasons. First, it condemns a state Assembly resolution, HR 35, that aims to quell anti-Semitism on college campuses. HR 35 has drawn criticism from opponents who say it goes too far and restricts freedom of speech.
Second, the UCSA resolution calls for higher education institutions to “cleanse their investment portfolios of unethical investments in companies implicated in or profiting from violations of international human rights law, without making special exemptions for any one country.” Though the resolution does not specifically mention Israel in that language, there should be little doubt that it is referring to the Jewish state at least in part.
Despite the resolution’s politically charged subject matter, the board did not allow for an open debate with many students, namely members of the Jewish community, that would likely oppose the resolution. One excuse offered for the exclusive nature of the meeting was to avoid “intimidation tactics.” Yet seeking input from the diverse student body UCSA is charged with representing hardly qualifies as such. Because the resolution touches on an issue about which many students disagree, it would have undoubtedly elicited an intense discussion, but that is no excuse to avoid encouraging thorough student input.
UC Berkeley students have been down this road before. In 2010, the ASUC Senate voted on a bill that encouraged the university to divest from companies associated with alleged Israeli war crimes. Meetings to consider the bill lasted up to nine hours, and though the senate passed the bill, a veto from the ASUC president was never overturned.
But last weekend’s vote was held without any regard for the opposition. It was not publicized prior to the meeting, so the Jewish community didn’t become aware of the UCSA resolution until it was too late. The fact that the vote occurred on the Jewish Sabbath and the day before the start of Rosh Hashana, the Jewish new year, certainly didn’t help.
Furthermore, the exact location of the board meeting was not available on the UCSA’s website — only the fact that it was taking place somewhere on the UC Berkeley campus. Coupled with the board’s unwillingness to spread the word about its agenda — which was only posted online following the meeting — the average student would have been hard-pressed to find details about the UCSA board meeting ahead of time.
Public participation is especially paramount when UCSA considers divisive issues. Last weekend, students deserved the opportunity to address the board prior to its vote, even if it meant a long and crowded meeting. That’s not scare tactics. That’s democracy.
Comment Policy
Comments should remain on topic, concerning the article or blog post to which they are connected. Brevity is encouraged. Posting under a pseudonym is discouraged, but permitted. The Daily Cal encourages readers to voice their opinions respectfully in regard to the readers, writers and contributors of The Daily Californian. Comments are not pre-moderated, but may be removed if deemed to be in violation of this policy. Click here to read the full comment policy.
This article grossly misrepresents HR 35. The resolution does not merely aim “to quell anti-Semitism on college campuses” but REDEFINES anti-Semitism as including criticism of the state of Israel and its policies. As a Jew I am against all anti-Semitism, but I am equally against equating legitimate political speech with hate speech. Secondly, the article also misrepresents the “intimidation” tactics that UCSA feared. They did not fear legitimate debate or discussion, but rather the threats and heavy-handed tactics of AIPAC, the national lobbying powerhouse. I would say that the editorial staff should do more research, but really all they need to do is read their own newspaper: Luma Haddad outlines the facts quite accurately (http://www.dailycal.org/2012/09/21/we-should-not-tolerate-human-rights-violations/).
exactly. DailyCal editorial staff sucks. Time and time again. Last week they were pissed that our asuc supported a revenue generating measue that will garner millions for public education and our school. This week they are not down with standing up for human rights advocates who some in the state are trying to censor (also apparently not principled enough to be down not profiting off of human rights abuses). What a lame bunch of people who think they are imprtant.
sara b., as always you stand for Islamofascist Palesinians w/o any measure of criticizing them. As a woman, do you appreciate the second class citizenry your Pali Pals impose upon their women? Or the honor murder of their daughters? Or their brutalization of homosexuals and dissidents?
And where is your criticism of the scores of Palestinians who demanded just yesterday that the participants of the anti-Islamic film be killed? Or, for that matter, the hundreds of Palestinians who danced in the streets following the 9/11 destruction of the Twin Towers?
Yes, you say you care about human rights and freedom of expression. Except, that is, when Palestinian Islamofascists and their co-religionists around the globe respond to said freedom with homicidal savagery.
By the way, sara b, I suspect that the “b” stands for bigot.
UCSA feared AIPAC, which has never killed anyone, yet did not fear Muslim groups? It just goes to show UCSA is only pretending to fear a vocal minority in order to stifle participation and free speech from that minority.
actually, your comment grossly misrepresents HR 35; please read the bill first.
“Resolved, That the Assembly recognizes recent actions by officials
of public postsecondary educational institutions in California and
calls upon those institutions to increase their efforts to swiftly
and unequivocally condemn acts of anti-Semitism on their campuses and
to utilize existing resources, such as the European Union Agency for
Fundamental Rights’ working definition of anti-Semitism, to help
guide campus discussion about, and promote, as appropriate,
educational programs for combating anti-Semitism on their campuses;”
You can read the EU definition online– it does not redefine any criticism of Israel as anti-Semitic, but notes that claims that the existence of Israel as the state of the Jewish people is a racist endeavor, or false comparisons of Israel to Nazi Germany, ARE indeed anti-Semitic.
And Luma Haddad provides no facts or citations, merely makes unverified and unverifiable assertions that ASUC senators were pressured. She does not quote any of the senators involved. Sure, the tactic of taking student government back from the MSU and similar groups that have already taken it over is a worthy goal; but what’s immoral about making sure that ASUC fairly represents the student body?
I
So why didn’t the Daily Cal write an editorial criticizing the California State Assembly for not inviting student groups to hearings about HR 35? Or Muslim groups? Or Students for Justice in Palestine? Talk about chutzpah.
The California State Assembly Committee on Higher Education is completely open about their planned hearings and meeting agendas and does not try to hide the location of meeting rooms, unlike the UCSA which seems to have been taken over by Hamas sympathizers.
http://ahed.assembly.ca.gov/committeehearingschedule
Democracy? Why is it this seems to conflict with Muslim activities so often?
I mean let’s get real. While we exercise freedom fo speech, they respond with violent protest, destruction of property and even murder. While we fight for their “Arab Spring” it results in brutal theocracies with nothing resembling democracy whatsoever.
If one studies Islam one discovers that Islam means “submission” not peace. It means submitting to Allah, not questioning, not being curious. Becoming part of group think.
If one studies Islam one discovers that Mohammed ruled all walks of life and he did so mercilessly. There was no “Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s and unto God that which is God’s ” when it came to Mohammed. He ruled the religious, the political, the legal (Sharia), the personal and everything in between.
Is it any surprise that democracy and Islam are so far apart AND that events like we are discussin right now – events where true democratic principles are ignored, events where stacking the deck are typical – are so commonly experienced in Islam.
In Pakistan, a government-declared “special day of love” for the Prophet Muhammad has seen violent clashes and at least one death in the northern city of Peshawar, and clashes elsewhere.
Protesters attacked and ransacked two cinema buildings. A driver for a Pakistani TV station was killed when police opened fire to disperse protesters, seven of whom were reported wounded all in the name of “love for Muhammad.”
Clashes between police and protesters are also being reported from the cities of Rawalpindi, Lahore and Karachi with many reported hurt all in the name of “love for Muhammad.”
Evidently the Effing Obama administration’s scapegoating of free speech, appeasement tweets and apology ads on Pakistani television did nothing to calm the wacko muslim mob on this heart-warming “special day of love.”
Are Cal kiddies taking their cue from the empty suit in the White House?
I can feeeel the luv!
But that’s all beside the point. Let’s focus on the only country in the Middle East where individual rights, personal expression, respect for civil law is allowed, i.e., Israel.
I mean, let’s be honest, even though 30,000 Syrians have been massacred It’s obvious the Mossad is behind it, right? We all know Muslims are never to blame for anything. Right? Right? Right?