I'm not aware of any blog or website that manages to offer commentary on every issue and story which happens to be in the news at any given moment. To then presume the absence of commentary on a particular issue implies a position is both lazy and disingenuous as a means of critiquing.
Moreover, in order to make a convincing charge of hypocrisy, one would need to demonstrate two conflicting views on the part of the accused. Silence can be damning, but often it's best to see if the presumed double-standard actually exists.
For example, on the question of Campus Pro-Life and its dispute with the U of C, I've been very firm in my belief that freedom of expression should prevail and that that freedom must flourish on university campuses.
So if I were to suddenly support censorship on campus, then yes, I suppose that would make me a hypocrite. But my silence on such a matter might be just be because I was unaware of the story.
Lefty blogger Dr. Dawg is mocking the "Silence of the Speech Warriors", after he came across a story about an offensive (the whole "baby-killer" thing has dark overtones) anti-Israel poster (pictured above) being banned at Carleton University.
I suppose I could make assumptions about Dr. Dawg's position on this matter and on the U of C matter and call him a hypocrite, but I'll simply give him credit for highlighting the matter.
This is the first I've heard of the story, and the source for Dr. Dawg is an obscure source, indeed.
To me, the whole concept of "Israeli Apartheid Week" is ridiculous and offensive, but the answer is not to censor it. Clearly, then, Carelton is in the wrong.
In the case of Campus Pro-Life at the U of C, we are talking about a display set up by a registered group on campus. It would appear as though the Carleton posters are the produce of a legitimate campus group for a sanctioned event.
I think it's fair to say that in the context of a university campus, it would be reasonable to place restrictions on non-students and non-campus groups. Some random anti-abortion group would not be as free to simply show up on a university campus, set up a display, put up posters, hold protests, etc.
But yes, among the student body, a free and vibrant dialogue should be encouraged. If sensible people object to this poster or Israeli Apartheid Week then they should respond with their own posters and rallies (as outlined here).
Those who would censor pro-life groups and those who would censor anti-Israel groups are both being short-sighted. It might be tempting to have that which offends you censored, but you're setting the stage for that to come back and bite you in the form of censorship of something near and dear to you.
International Israeli Apartheid Week is one of many symptoms of the unjust double standard that the international community has applied to Israel since its birth. Critics target Israel's Law of Return for Jews as an "apartheid" policy while almost identical citizenship laws in countries like Germany and Ireland go unnoticed.
Almost no one criticizes Jordan for its law barring Jews from becoming citizens. And can anyone remember the last time that the United Nations passed a resolution condemning blatant human rights abuses in Saudi Arabia or Syria? No? That is fascinating, considering the fact that the UN has issued over 300 condemnations of Israel in the last 40 years. This double standard can only be explained by outrageous ignorance or bigotry.
The Israeli apartheid label is a fallacious and offensive attempt to delegitimize Israel. This irresponsible use of "apartheid" dilutes the power of the word, hinders efforts at peace, and leads to ignorance of other glaring cases of injustice, both in the Middle East and worldwide.
See also here, here, and here. I would hope that certain finger-pointing lefties are as supportive of freedom of speech if and when pro-Israel campus groups face obstacles in organizing events or inviting pro-Israel speakers.
Almost no one criticizes Jordan for its law barring Jews from becoming citizens. And can anyone remember the last time that the United Nations passed a resolution condemning blatant human rights abuses in Saudi Arabia or Syria? No? That is fascinating, considering the fact that the UN has issued over 300 condemnations of Israel in the last 40 years. This double standard can only be explained by outrageous ignorance or bigotry.
The Israeli apartheid label is a fallacious and offensive attempt to delegitimize Israel. This irresponsible use of "apartheid" dilutes the power of the word, hinders efforts at peace, and leads to ignorance of other glaring cases of injustice, both in the Middle East and worldwide.
See also here, here, and here. I would hope that certain finger-pointing lefties are as supportive of freedom of speech if and when pro-Israel campus groups face obstacles in organizing events or inviting pro-Israel speakers.
UPDATE: See this, too. I could add that certain bloggers have been awfully silent on the recent ugliness at York, but I won't go there...
No comments:
Post a Comment