Spring Break
LETTER TO THE EDITOR:Attempts to force 'Jewishness' misunderstand what it means to
Letters to the Editor | 3/13/07
Posted online at 11:58 PM EST on 3/12/07
/ Last updated at 3:00 AM EST on 3/12/07
To the Editor:
As a recent graduate of Brandeis, I feel obliged to reflect on the ongoing debate concerning the "Jewish nature" of the University. This debate began before my time at the institution and continues-epitomized by the recent Carter-Dershowitz-Pipes imbroglio-now that I have departed. At its most basic, the debate about what it means to be a "Jewish institution" centers on the question of whether one can be Jewish without supporting the state of Israel.
The former speaks to a web of culture, whereas the latter is a fundamentally political question endowed with religious connotations. While it may well be true that all Jews may become citizens of Israel, it is equally true that not all Israelis are Jewish, and that to be Jewish does not make one Israeli. Legally and culturally, the two are separate identities.
Questioning the "Jewish nature" of Brandeis by attacking the University's discourse on Middle Eastern politics is thus an artificial and dangerous development. More significantly, it is dangerous because those seeking to force Brandeis to maintain its "Jewishness," by renouncing any attempts at incorporating Arab, Muslim and other viewpoints into campus Middle Eastern discourse, undermine the ability of the University to produce insightful and learned students.
Attempting to constrain the presence of other viewpoints is tantamount to offering institutionalized propaganda. Above all, it expresses a profound distrust for the students of the University: Assuming that more information will somehow cause students to "turn against Israel" or otherwise condition them against "Jewish causes" presumes that students are unable to reach decisions based on an evaluation of the evidence at hand; a direct affront to the University's creed, "Truth: even unto its innermost parts."
To those seeking to limit alternative viewpoints available to our students, I ask: Since when has the accumulation of knowledge in all its forms been contrary to the fundamental tenets of Brandeis University? Accordingly, I can only thank those at the school with the clarity, foresight and integrity to stand against such polarization and ignorance while keeping the University focused on its knowledge-oriented mission.
-Joshua Itzkowitz Shifrinson, '06
Somerville, Mass.
As a recent graduate of Brandeis, I feel obliged to reflect on the ongoing debate concerning the "Jewish nature" of the University. This debate began before my time at the institution and continues-epitomized by the recent Carter-Dershowitz-Pipes imbroglio-now that I have departed. At its most basic, the debate about what it means to be a "Jewish institution" centers on the question of whether one can be Jewish without supporting the state of Israel.
The former speaks to a web of culture, whereas the latter is a fundamentally political question endowed with religious connotations. While it may well be true that all Jews may become citizens of Israel, it is equally true that not all Israelis are Jewish, and that to be Jewish does not make one Israeli. Legally and culturally, the two are separate identities.
Questioning the "Jewish nature" of Brandeis by attacking the University's discourse on Middle Eastern politics is thus an artificial and dangerous development. More significantly, it is dangerous because those seeking to force Brandeis to maintain its "Jewishness," by renouncing any attempts at incorporating Arab, Muslim and other viewpoints into campus Middle Eastern discourse, undermine the ability of the University to produce insightful and learned students.
Attempting to constrain the presence of other viewpoints is tantamount to offering institutionalized propaganda. Above all, it expresses a profound distrust for the students of the University: Assuming that more information will somehow cause students to "turn against Israel" or otherwise condition them against "Jewish causes" presumes that students are unable to reach decisions based on an evaluation of the evidence at hand; a direct affront to the University's creed, "Truth: even unto its innermost parts."
To those seeking to limit alternative viewpoints available to our students, I ask: Since when has the accumulation of knowledge in all its forms been contrary to the fundamental tenets of Brandeis University? Accordingly, I can only thank those at the school with the clarity, foresight and integrity to stand against such polarization and ignorance while keeping the University focused on its knowledge-oriented mission.
-Joshua Itzkowitz Shifrinson, '06
Somerville, Mass.
Be the first to comment on this story