Discussing the campus dynamics in isolation from the external factors influencing our experiences would be a glaring oversight. Hence, as of November 13, 2023, let's delve into the crude statistics projecting a continuing rise in fatalities, as reported by the Washington Post:
• 11,100 Palestinians
• 1,400 Israelis
Since my last article, a lot has happened on campus, and the conflict has gotten more serious. Some people are now calling it a genocide, especially those supporting the Palestinians. The school's official channels and events organized by the school have been criticized for not using specific words to describe what's happening.
Events put together by different parts of the campus have seen many students feeling uneasy and tense. But the most significant problem affecting our campus is how the war has caused division, leading to hate speech and threats among students.
This story needs to be shared, especially considering the emails sent by President Baren, who is the highest authority on campus. If you've been busy with homework and missed the intense atmosphere on campus, I've spoken to some people about what's going on. Even though they said it's okay to use their names, I've decided to keep them anonymous considering the unfolding situation.
President Baren's initial email, as noted by a pro-Palestine student, has been characterized as impartial, steering clear of aligning with any particular side. This neutrality, in my view, aligns with the expected stance of an institution, avoiding explicit positions on geopolitical matters. Instead, the emphasis remains on providing support and conveying concern for the welfare of the college community.
The second email, however, has sparked more controversy on campus and, in my view, stands as the primary reason for the heightened polarization. Some students perceive it as biased, as it presents a one-sided view, primarily focusing on the actions of Hamas and incidents of antisemitism on campus. A pro-Palestinian student remarked, "Her email is choosing to take a side. Her first email was very neutral. With the second email, it just felt it's no longer going to be safe for protesting. That's what I felt. And that was one of my biggest concerns at that moment.” It portrays Hamas as solely responsible for acts of violence, without mentioning the broader context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict or potential human rights concerns. While addressing incidents of antisemitism is important, the email was seen as lacking a balanced perspective and not acknowledging the complexity of the situation.
This second email was evidently a response to an act of antisemitism and hate on campus. The sense of an unsafe environment extends to some Jewish and Israeli students, marking an equally troubling issue. One Israeli student shared, "Some Jewish students have reached out to me and told me that some people are looking at them in a weird way. A few times, they vocally said some stuff, nothing severe, but some things that I wish wouldn't happen." The same student emphasizes that they don't feel unsafe on campus, stating, "I'm not afraid. I'm afraid of one thing. I'm afraid of what would happen if I sat aside and do nothing," referring to the need to publicly express their voice at the campus protests.
In response to the controversial second email, a collective open letter was dispatched to the president, outlining specific demands. Among these was a request for an apology, with critics arguing that the email appeared to take a side in the ongoing discourse. This catalyzed the issuance of a third email by the president, wherein she acknowledged the emotional and concerned sentiments expressed by members of the college community regarding what she referred to as the "Israel-Gaza war" (a terminology disputed within the LFC community, with some advocating for the use of "Israel-Palestine").
The email unequivocally condemned violence, hate, and discrimination against all individuals, underscoring a commitment to actively address any such behavior on campus. Additionally, it emphasized the importance of reporting incidents of hate or discrimination, assuring a swift and thorough investigation into each report. The president also pledged sanctions for individuals found in violation of college policies.
Clarifying the terms "sanctions" and "incidents," it's essential to consider available information within the framework of privacy policies. The Lake Forest College CrimeLog page contains pertinent details:
Several reported incidents align with the perceived threats experienced by both sides involved in the conflict. Notably, a specific entry dated October 20, 2023, is categorized as "Harassment and Intimidation." Additionally, another entry on October 22 corresponds to an incident described by a pro-Palestinian student. The CrimeLog labels it as "Burglary," involving the theft of a prayer rug. This incident likely correlates with what the student shared:
“I had to call Public Safety again because my room's door was open. They checked the door and said it's getting worse. They assured me they would take care of it. The next day, around 9:30 pm, I left for the cafe to get a sandwich. I locked the door; I know because the key got stuck. When I returned, the door was halfway open, my shirts hanging on the wall were all off, and my prayer mat under the bed was missing.
The student mentioned that the school, especially the president, claimed that some cases had been resolved. “In her third email, she talked about what they do when incidents occur on campus. One of them was my incident, and she stated that it had been completely and thoroughly investigated, with the investigation concluded. That's not true. When I read that in the morning, I thought there's no way because, as a victim, I should be notified first. This is not true because they are still interviewing people right now. They're nowhere near completion. So that was a false statement, and that's not okay. You can't put out a false statement to the entire student body.”
Perhaps the president was referring to a different incident? It's unclear. I attempted to inquire about an incident with the Israeli student to see if it aligned with their experiences. However, they chose not to make a statement on this matter, mentioning that the school has addressed the threat he received.
In a subsequent email, the president clarified the process for reporting incidents and acknowledged the frustration some may feel due to the school's limited information disclosure on investigations. This restraint is attributed to the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA).
Is it entirely the president's fault? Well, not entirely. It's true that she made a mistake by taking a side in her first email and not providing context. Her identity as a Jewish woman doesn't help in appearing impartial. The school's initial response and the subsequent clarification emails were delayed (though still necessary and appropriate). However, instances of Islamophobia and antisemitism are actions carried out by students, illustrating the daily intolerance present in our world.
Public Safety officials making statements that label pro-Palestine students as wrong or seeking to be targets, as testified by a pro-Palestine student during our interview, or accusing them of supporting terrorism, represents a form of intolerance. Similarly, calling professors “white supremacists” during a tech-in panel because of a comment made by a pro-Israel student, unrelated to the professor's opinions, is also condemnable.
It's problematic to be unable to listen to the other side and, despite disagreeing, to sit down next to them and challenge their ideas, not their humanity. In our small community, we have the choice to either mirror the outside world, allowing hate, misinformation, and indifference to dominate our emotions and reasoning. Alternatively, I propose we become an example of dialogue and small think tanks, coming together to hear the other side, educate the community, and, in an idealistic world (acknowledging it might be a lot to ask), make members more aware of how both sides perceive the issue. If they choose, they can take a side and advocate for what they believe is the right thing to do.
Comments