Sunday, October 22

Submission: UCLA campus must take action to address anti-Semitism


A foul odor is in the air. Lest we have any doubt about it, The New York Times has caught a whiff of it, reporting in its Thursday edition on the Rachel Beyda case at UCLA. Simply put, we are in the throes of another version of the infamous Jewish Question here on campus.

From the time of the 18th-century Enlightenment, European society has posed the Jewish Question in various guises: Do the Jews, the classic “other” in medieval Christendom, belong in our domain? Do they owe loyalties to their home countries, or rather to their narrow group interests? The question has arisen in this country as well, though in recent decades, many had come to conclude that Jews could operate in American society without aspersions cast on their loyalty.

Not so fast. Sadly and remarkably, the Jewish Question is resurfacing in the most progressive of venues: college campuses. Last week at the University of Chicago, anonymous postings on the secret-sharing site Yik Yak and a “UChicago Secrets” Facebook page were riddled with anti-Semitism. One posting claims that “a bunch of butthurt Jews cry and scream ‘anti-Semitism’ to their media mogul daddies.” The most shocking of posts expressed the wish that the “final solution had worked.”

And of course, we have our own local outbreak of the Jewish Question: the case of Rachel Beyda, whose qualifications for a position on the Undergraduate Students Association Council Judicial Board were challenged by a number of councilmembers because of her Jewish religious background. Fortunately, USAC reversed its earlier decision to deny Ms. Beyda a spot, and the four board members who voted against Ms. Beyda in the first round have issued an apology for suggesting that the candidate’s religion might incline her to bias.

Their contrition is welcome, but these cases are wake-up calls. As much as we assumed it to be dead, the Jewish Question lives on. At UCLA, it took the form of the myth that Jews are beholden only to their own and incapable of unbiased participation in society. At the University of Chicago, it took on a more blatant form of hatred.

Animating the two cases is a dynamic that has emerged on university campuses in the wake of the Israeli-Palestinian controversy. As the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions Movement has gained traction, sharp divisions among students have boiled over, blurring the line between political attitudes, religious affiliation and cultural tastes. Alexandra Tashman gave this development eloquent and poignant testimony in a recent Daily Bruin op-ed. She describes how, rather than choose between two undesirable positions on Israel politics, she simply ceased to identify herself as Jewish.

How have we gotten ourselves into this mess? It is true that many Jews strongly identify with the state of Israel. It is also true that that some Jews are strongly critical of the state of Israel – or have relatively little connection to it. The danger of the current discourse about Israel-Palestine is that it sweeps in all Jews, branding them as monolithic, biased and incapable of sound judgment. Moreover, Jews have come to be regarded as the vanguard of the oppressive, white majority establishment.

Only 70 years ago, Jews were as disempowered a group as could be imagined. In today’s world, intimations about Jewish power are not openly discussed in polite company, at least not in this country, as distinct from Europe. But they are whispered conspiratorially in some circles, and sometimes leak out into the public as anti-Semitism, as they did at the USAC meeting several weeks ago.

We must not ignore the signs that the Jewish Question, with its unique ability to impute clannishness and self-interest to Jews, is hovering. Its context has evolved, as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict continues to unravel complicated and charged associations between identity and politics on American campuses. But its potentially toxic effects remain.

In light of this volatile situation, we urge the campus to take the following steps:

  • Survey campus attitudes regarding Jews, Muslims and other groups on campus.
  • Sponsor a series of high-profile public programs and research initiatives to examine anti-Semitism in the past and present.
  • Conduct facilitated conversations among student groups invested in the Israeli-Palestinian issue.
  • Add courses on Jewish identity and anti-Semitism to the proposed new diversity requirements.
  • Undertake a concerted campaign to raise awareness about anti-Semitism and its perils among all elements of our campus community, just as we affirm that it is intolerable to stigmatize or discriminate against other groups.

Ferdman is a graduate student in Latin American studies and a former Daily Bruin opinion columnist. Myers is a professor and chair of the UCLA Department of History. Rabbi Seidler-Feller is the executive director of Hillel at UCLA.

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterEmail this to someoneShare on Google+Share on Reddit

Comments are supposed to create a forum for thoughtful, respectful community discussion. Please be nice. View our full comments policy here.

  • hypocrisy

    I urge the campus to take the following steps:

    - UC Muslim regent Sadia Saifuddin was actively opposed by Jewish groups base on her religion. By the same Jewish groups the Hillel associates with. Lets talk about that.

    - I thought the Hillel was a religious organization. Then how does that comport with its collaboration with Islamophobic organizations like StandWithUs.

    - The Hillel wants the university “facilitate conversations”. And some of those conversations include Palestinians students who want to discuss their lack of equal rights in Israel. The Hillel bans those conversations on its facilities.

    - Why should courses be limited to anti-semitism. How about courses on Palestinian identity and Islamophobia.

    - How is it the Hillel wants to actively promote certain activities to promote its cause, while it actively censors such activities when promoted by students of Palestinian origin.

    As i predict the responses to this post will highlight the extent of Islamophobia promoted by certain organizations. And the Hillel wants a one sided conversation. As usual.

    • Bill Wilson

      wow – you missed the point, try understanding the article and the issue instead of spouting your anti semitic and uninformed points

    • Think for yourself

      How about you write an article and include some facts about the issue you’re mentioning and the audience can read it and take action if they think there is a problem to be addressed. I don’t see the need to conflate one issue with another just because you want to see one party punished. That’s how you’re coming off and I think you should remember “2 wrongs don’t make a right.” It’s like the argument that the war in Gaza wasn’t fair only because the same number of people didn’t die in Israel as did in Gaza. So what, if another 2000 people died in Israel you would all of a sudden be fine with 2000 dead palestinians? If that’s the case, I would seriously consider you to be disingenuous.

      • A.L.L.

        Parity in the number of dead would indicate a fair fight was had.

      • McMullans

        While I agree Hypocrisy could have included some facts, I think he or she is just speaking to the hypocrisy in general. While Hypocricy speaks of Hillel, I can’t help but think of the fear-mongering ADL. This groups donations have a direct correlation to fear. This group pushes for diversity and multiculturalism here in the US (for us), but says nothing about Israel’s push for homogeneity, which I think is hypocritical.

        • Cal1234

          Shame on you McMullans. How many countries surrounding Israel have kicked out all Jewish inhabitants over the last many decades? Try…all of them. And how many countries have in their charter their wish for the destruction of the “jewish state”…try..many of them. Yet, you are thinking that an organization like ADL and Hillel are the same as what we are discussing? Wow….your anti-Semitic nature has come through.

          • McMullans

            Shame on me, for what exactly?

            The word antisemitism, always make me think of the former Israeli Minister Shulamit Aloni’s admission…
            www. youtube .com/watch?v=D0kWAqZxJVE

          • Jane Howard Blitz

            It sounds like you make up your own history. Shulamit Aloni was involved in Israeli politics and did have several portfolios (i.e. minister of education, minister of communications, but was never the Prime Minister of Israel.

          • McMullans

            Where did I state she was “Prime” Minister? If you look at the video I posted, this is where it lists her as “Minister”. Her title is semantics. You miss my point, I said the word antisemitism made me think of this woman. And in particular her video. I realize it’s unpleasant, but curiously did you watch her video before your defenses kicked in? Or did your defenses kick in after?

            It is in black and white, that it is you Jbruin21 “making things up”. I think what you just did is classical projection. Psychological projection is a theory in psychology in which humans defend themselves against unpleasant impulses by denying their existence in themselves, while attributing them to others. For example, a person who is rude may constantly accuse other people of being rude.

          • Jbruin21

            You are right. When I first read your message, I read the word Prime in between Israeli and Minister. I realized that I made that mistake after I sent my reply. I’m sorry. My defenses kicked in when I first misread your message.

            I’d like to hear your comments about my other comments of history. Are you going to say that Jews born in Jerusalem, Tel Aviv or any other part of Palestine prior to the partition of the state are not true Palestinians? Aren’t these same people entitled to live in their place of birth? From the time that the British decided to partition the area and leave, the Arabs (both in “Palestine” and throughout the Mideast), wanted to drive the Jews into the sea. They didn’t believe that the Jews should have their homeland or even their own country…just think if the Hawaiian Islands had been declared “Israel”. Would that have been alright with the Arabs? Of course not.

            And, if you really know so much about Antisemitism, why have Jews been so discriminated against in the United States? I’m not speaking about the recent issues at UCLA, but in the first half of the 20th century. Are you even aware that there were quotas for Jewish students at American universities? My father, a world war II vet, graduated from UCLA, passed the CPA exam and couldn’t get a job because the “Big 8″ in accounting at that time wouldn’t hire Jews. He ended up changing his last name, so that he could “pass” and get a job. In the early 1960′s, my mother tried making a reservation for our family to go to a ranch in the Santa Barbara area. As they were finishing up getting all of her information, they asked if by any chance was she of the “Hebrew Persuasion”, when she asked why, she was told that they didn’t permit Hebrews at the resort/ranch. Look at all of the clubs in Los Angeles that until recently wouldn’t allow Jews, Blacks, women to be members. If you even question this, just “Google” the Jonathan Club, Los Angeles Country Club, Wilshire Boulevard Country Club. I can go on and on to point out that Antisemitism has been ongoing since before the holocaust and continues today.

            I have no idea who you are or where you were educated, but when I read things like your posts, I have to question your lack of education. When I attended (and graduated) from UCLA, we were taught to be critical thinkers. It really seems that many current students or recent grads (not all) are not being taught to be critical thinkers, to be open minded and most importantly they are more prejudiced than ever.

          • McMullans

            Hi Jbruin21, I truly appreciate your apology. And for what it’s worth, my defenses kick in too, we’re human, it happens. I was simply making the point that while many people hate Jews AND Blacks, AND Whites, AND Hispanics, et. al. Jews are the only subgroup that uses “a term” (antisemitism) that I think has evolved to be both self-serving and stifling of dialogue, which is why I don’t like it. I think anti-Jewish makes the point just fine. I find the term to be as repugnant as the n-word and I think has the effect, at least on me, to see the user, especially if Jewish, to be both less credible and manipulative. It’s my opinion and this is how it makes me feel. I think the term is similar to the boy who cried wolf or in this case who cried antisemitism (i.e., it’s has been over used). And then when Israeli “Ministers” offer their opinion that it’s a “trick”, which I found on her wikipedia page as well, well it has the effect of eliciting loathing and an apathy in me.

            To answer your question, well first I am truly sorry for what your mom and dad have experienced. I too have been on the side of experiencing prejudice and it’s a disgusting human trait. I think WASP’s at one point in time, didn’t like anyone except their own kind. I think all human-beings should be treated with respect and dignity so long as they too are respectful. I can’t speak to Israel history and who’s right and who’s wrong. All I know is that the current treatment of Palestinian’s is mortifying or should be to US taxpayers with a conscience. I don’t like the idea that my tax dollars pay for weapons like White Phosphorous to be used on innocents. But there are problems all around the world, that my government spends my tax dollars on, that I don’t appreciate. Israel (a foreign nation, that won’t allow me to settle there, based on my blood or lack of the “right” blood) get’s my attention for being the biggest benefactor of my tax dollars and simultaneously saying I’m not welcome.

    • idrive405

      Sadia Saifuddin has used her position as a student regent to push for a boycott of Israel (which is not why she was appointed to the Board) and to demand that Berkeley prevent Bill Maher from speaking. Are you suggesting that every Muslim would do the same?

      Hillel is a religious institution, and does not work with organizations that seek to eliminate the Jewish state. It’s hard to see how you can support Hamas’ efforts and complain about a lack of free speech. How many pro-Israel activities and cosponsors do Muslim groups have?

    • M2000

      Let me guess your religion’s first word is an “I” right?

    • DogOfDooM

      Can you explain how any of your points relate to Article VI of the U.S. Constitution?

      You’re an expert at conflating and deflecting from the issue.

  • Exit Pursued By A Bear

    It’s like the damn Alexandra Wallace crap all over again, only this time with important consequences beyond just the lunacy of a single xenophobe.

  • Jenny Librero

    Sadly, I think students of Jewish faith should pick their battles and realize that unfortunately they obviously are not welcome at UCLA. Don’t worry, it isn’t their loss, rather it is the colossal failure of the university and it’s administration to respond to an increasingly escalating hostile atmosphere on campus. There are many other schools who will certainly feel differently and communicate to their student body in no uncertain terms that bigotry and racism will not be tolerated or enabled via some warped hierarchy of cultural victimization that will forever exclude Jews. A great example of how an institution who actually cares would be responding is the immediate and unequivocal response of the University of Oklahoma’s president to a 9 second video that showed students engaging in bigoted behavior regarding people of color. That won’t happen at UCLA; rather the evidence will be buried (like the Rachel Beyda video), the same anti-Semitic characters will continue to foster and spread intolerance beneath their thin veil of ultra PC rhetoric, and the general climate of openness and diversity will continue to degrade until this school takes it’s rightful place in the lower echelons of academia. For alumni and potential donors, put your money where your mouth is and refuse to forward one more penny to university coffers until they change their policies and take action to protect targeted student groups, even if those groups are “lowly” Jews. They won’t, but why support an education experience in which some groups are more equal then others? Lets be honest, any school in this nation would be lucky to have Rachel Beyda and her ilk as a member of their student body. Why try to convince someone/something that simply does not value you that you are worth supporting? In the end, no matter what you do “haters gonna hate” and the University administration is clearly fine with that. Much better to abandon them to rot away their own self imposed cesspool, and take your spirit, brains, creativity and strengths elsewhere where they will actually be encouraged to flourish and prosper.

    • daized79

      Like to Christian universities! :)

  • Frank Montgomery

    Children! (that includes rednecks) quit picking on the Jews.

  • orientstar

    How about courses on Catholic identity and anti-Catholicism as well to the new diversity requirements? Highly relevant in California and especially San Francisco right now!

  • Jenny Librero

    Take a moment to contrast the recent responses of University of Oklahoma & UCLA in two different but similar instances of outright student bigotry. This weekend, a vile 9 second video surfaced of OU fraternity students singing gleefully on a bus “There’ll NEVER be (N-word)’s in SAE [fraternity]“. Once it was determined they were actual students and the video was authentic, university response was immediate and decisive. The president severed all ties with the SAE fraternity, revoked their charter and ordered all member’s to be packed and moved out of the building within 24 hours. “We do not provide student services to bigots,” the school’s president said.

    Switch over to a the similar case at UCLA of Rachel Beyda, where the student government council was captured on a 40 minute video attempting to deny a clearly qualified student an influential position on the judicial board for the sole reason that she was Jewish. Considering the considerable cultural difference between an Oklahoma frat house and the west coast hyper-PC student government body at the US’s top #23rd ranked public school in the nation, they may as well have thrown their arms around each other and howled out loud, “There’ll never be Jews in charge at UCLA”. For 40 minutes. On video.

    UCLA’s reaction to this disturbing video was a general letter sent out by the chancellor, scolding all students to respect diversity race/religion/creed/ etc, etc. The letter did not mention the word anti-Semitism, nor did any of the 4 students receive any specific condemnation or face any consequences at all for their actions. In fact, the only action that has resulted from the outcry that followed was that an exception was made regarding transparency and the uncut video was removed from the UCLA site altogether out of concern for the 4 perpetrators. (it being the digital age, the original uncut video is of course still available online, but the school has done what they could has made it a bit more difficult for interested people to find and witness).

    The Oklahoma incident made front page, nationwide headlines, the UCLA incident generated a few concerned articles, albeit some in prestigious journals such as the New York Times and The Atlantic. Still, though the incidents are not exactly the same, they are close enough that the startling difference in response to each of them is nothing less then significant.

    I write all this as an American currently living in France, where Jews worship in synagogs that from the outside look like fortified prisons, where Jewish grade schools are guarded by special forces looking military soldiers armed with machine guns, where it’s routine to hear openly shouted slurs hurled at Jews as they walk down the street in certain suburban neighborhoods, and where the constant threat of violent antisemitic attack is a palpable presence in daily life. I’m not Jewish but I’m horrified, and as I follow the news back home it seems very clear to me that there is an unsettling trend in this direction. It must be stopped.

    • Adam OnWeb

      Well done. Thanks for writing this.

    • BklynBirny

      Jenny, your post is perfect, and horribly sad. Couldn’t have said it better.

  • Adam OnWeb

    After reading the apology from the 4 offending students – and seeing how UCLA’s administration has failed to put out an adequate response of their own, I’m deeply disappointed in UCLA.

    Had these students issued a statement that demonstrated at least some recognition of what they did, I might consider reciprocating with some compassion. But their empty apology only serves to further insult and deepen the wound.

    They’ve apologized for “words” and “remarks” as if their thoughts had no connection to their actions. These four haven’t acknowledged that you can’t possibly – continuously – relentlessly – utter such “words” and “remarks” throughout a 40 minute deliberation without harboring the sentiments of true anti-Semites.

    To make matters far worse, their “words” weren’t detached from their intentions and deeds. They actually defended their anti Semitic position for a full 40 minutes and then acted on their bigotry; They denied a highly qualified candidate a position solely because she was a Jew.

    Last I checked, that’s a very serious crime.

    This runs much deeper than mere “words” and neither the students and the UCLA administration seems to acknowledged this in the slightest. Their inaction speaks volumes.

    Perhaps in the future, these students will be more careful with they say publicly, but I have no doubt that they’ll continue to harbor the same ugly, unjustified discrimination against Jews.

    They’re clearly unsuitable to sit in judgement of other students.

    After their insincere apology, the UCLA administration should – at the very least – demand their immediate resignations.

    And shame – SHAME – on the UCLA administration and faculty for not acknowledging their sickening role in this affair. Through their silence, denial and even encouragement by some of their faculty, they’ve produced this disgusting environment where antisemitism is so obviously festering and thriving.

    Ironically , the ignorance behind racism has found a home in the halls of higher learning. We should all wonder what’s actually being taught in UCLA.

    Leadership – and it’s failings – come from the top.

  • M2000

    I find it hypocritical, we can all go after a racist fraternity in a Oklahoma university but not student governments on all the college campuses that promote this same behavior. Well it’s because the perps are white.

  • BklynBirny

    Here’s another action that UCLA should undertake–take a page from their peers at Oklahoma University and run the 4 bigots that still sit on the Judicial Council out on a rail.

  • Sheryl Friedner Strich

    It’s incredible that SAE fraternity was kicked off University of Oklahoma overnight for a vile song that was sung. But at UCLA the administration does not address blatant anti-semitism by student leaders in an official position. It’s not okay.

  • Dave

    UO boots a fraternity overnight and expels two students for racial intolerance.

    UCLA does nothing.

    What if someone were questioned for their inability to do a job based on sexual orientation? How about if the person were of a difference race (than white)? How about gender? Or if the person is pregnant? All inappropriate. There are laws preventing employers from doing this in job interviews. A public university, its students, and its leaders should be aware of this.

    It’s easy to excuse this one because many Jews are considered “white” (when convenient). But if this were asked of any other student labeled like the aforementioned examples, then it would have been struck down immediately. This is not acceptable and not partial, and should be recognized as such.

    Prior to their election to the council, were Muslim students asked, “You identify as a Muslim; Will you make impartial judgments regarding Israel and Palestine?” I don’t know. I certainly hope not. If they were, then again, shame on that council for asking such stupid questions. And shame on my alma mater that begs me for money twice a week for not taking definitive action then either.

    Everyone has biases. We are human beings. But to imply that someone has biases based on their religion is stereotyping and wrong. And to prevent democratic participation from differing views is even more despicable.

    Dave, Infuriated Alum ’04

  • Sanych

    I would also add to the list:

    Teaching facts, including

    - Jews are a religious, cultural and ethnic group.
    - Zionism is a national liberation movement of Jewish people, and, as any other people, they are entitled to their own homeland.
    - Part of the area known for less than 70 years as “West Bank” was named for over 3,000 years as “Judea” and another part was known for 2,500 years as “Samaria”.

    … and so on.

    • Jbruin21

      Zionism is also the belief in a Jewish homeland.

      • Sanych

        Yes, on their ancestral land.

  • Adam OnWeb

    I’ve read a few posts comparing what happened at UO and UCLA.

    There is an important difference.

    The bigots at UO were not just aware of their bigotry, they were actually proud of it.

    At UCLA, antisemitism is so insidious and pervasive that they don’t even realize they’re bigots. Openly and quite comfortable, these four UCLA students discussed the disloyalty and dishonesty of Jews as if it were common knowledge – as if the dishonesty of Jews was an established fact.

    They weren’t ashamed of their bigotry. If you read their apology, you can see that they still don’t get it. They think that they simply didn’t “phrase” things properly.

    They completely ignore the fact that they defended their erroneous, bigoted beliefs for a full 40 minutes! They see nothing wrong with what they thought – and judging from their apology, they still think it.

    Unlike U of O, the culture at UCLA – and the administrators who establish that culture – are actually the ones to blame and you can see that from their response.

    Chancellor Block said that this incident was a “teaching moment”. He accepted their hollow apology and saw nothing wrong with it. He issued his own statement condemning “discrimination”, but didn’t even use the word “antisemitism” anywhere in the statement. Very telling.

    Both he and the four students didn’t learn a thing.

    • Jenny Librero

      excellent point. CNN is now running a piece on Rachel’s story, it mentions both the chancelors (legal) responsibility and something about France that I found very interesting, here is a paste:

      “Apparently it’s necessary for the university to teach its student leadership that the U.S. Constitution bans religious tests for public office. While they are at it, they also can inform them that the Bill
      of Rights assures freedom of religion, speech and assembly to all citizens. California’s university administrators might need to be reminded that Title 6 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 applies to all
      Americans, and they have an obligation to ensure equal educational opportunity for all students. This includes, among other things, promptly and effectively addressing certain hostile environments.

      The situation in France today demonstrates the price of failing to nip youthful extremism in the bud. Twenty years ago, complaints by Jewish students in Paris that they were subject to anti-Semitism from a strange coalition of Marxist, fascist and Islamist groups were ignored by complacent university and government officials.

      The dangerous streets of Paris are witness to what results when a country ignores problems and
      panders to extremist opinions. The army is currently deployed across France to protect synagogues and Jewish community buildings. But history has taught us what begins with the Jews doesn’t end with the Jews.”

  • Jenny Librero

    As i watched the full student council video, i couldn’t help but imagine myself in her place, what she was thinking, how it felt. Here is this beautiful young woman, a high achiever, very qualified for the prestigious position; an almost perfect candidate who had been interviewed and vetted and then formally recommended for the position. It ‘s the sort of rote confirmation process that usually takes 5 minutes, that’s kind of an anticlimactic formality, the real work having been done earlier in recommendation process.

    She’s really charismatic, when she wants something she doesn’t fail a lot. And she WANTS this, it’s a big deal and will make a real difference in her future academic career. She’s been a serious student, worked hard and maybe now she’s about to take a big leap forward in her academic path.

    She steps in the room,

    introduces herself: hi, I’m Rachel Beyda, sophomore, studying economics with the goal of attending law school. Her words turn up just a tiny bit at the end in a way that lets you know that while she seems polished, she’s a little nervous. She clasps her hands together so she won’t fidget. She hopes they like her. She hopes she sounds knowledgeable and calm and competent.

    She finishes her brief introduction, and the president asks in that semi disinterested way (so you can tell he doubts there will be a response) if anyone on the council has any questions for Rachel. Oh wait, there is a sudden stir in the room. In fact, there’s no real pause at all, a hand immediately shoots up. Rachel stands before them, the seated UCLA student council, her hands folded, and focuses on the blond girl, seated halfway down the large conference table on the right, and waits for the question. And then, and then….

    “Given that you are a Jewish student and very active in the Jewish community, how do you see yourself being able to maintain an unbiased view …?”

    How her heart must have dropped.

    How does a hopeful 19 or 20 year old young person respond to that? Not just the surface question, “how can you, Rachel…..” but the other, ugly question lurking beneath it….how can JEWS truly be unbiased, be
    trusted to be honest? Oh but she wants the position, her adrenalin is flowing, she must find the right words – she probably doesn’t even have time to think about the question being antisemitic or inappropriate. Rather
    she’s frantically focusing on what she can say to reassure them she can be unbiased. That she, Rachel, is not a duplicitous person with a hidden agenda, a shifty manipulator out to profit from their system, but a student eager to get valuable experience and credentials for soon to come law school applications.

    What does she say? These people don’t know her. This question isn’t about her, about Rachel. What can
    she tell them, what are the words? They only know that she is a Jew. This is an ancient question that millions before her have failed to satisfactorily answer; this is a test that can only be failed.

    She is asked to leave the room.

    For 40 minutes,she paces back and fourth in front of the door that separates her from the other students. They are discussing her possibilities, the possibilities that can safely be allowed to Jews. A few times she hears muffled shouts, “conflict”, and she knows that despite her attempts to reassure them she knows what conflicts are, and understands the nature of applying regulations instead of opinions, she must have somehow failed to reassure them about her….well….her Jewishness. With each passing minute it’s worse, the sour-roller-coaster-drop-feeling that flooded her stomach when that girl, the small blond one with the malicious chin, had lifted her eyebrows and launched her question. Then the others, the ones that didn’t quite meet her eyes….

    Jew. Jewish. Given that you are Jewish…..

    • McMullans

      So dramatic Jenny! Fact is blacks, latinos, short people, fat people, even white people experience discrimination all the time.

  • Adam OnWeb

    No doubt, there are those who at UCLA who will say that when Ms. Beyda defended her integrity, she used “excessive force”.

  • liteacher

    Sadly, there have been many incidents of antisemitism occurring on several UC campuses of late and yet there have been no concerted efforts by any of the administrative leaders to stop or curtail them. In fact, they seem to have been played down with merely a statement or two issued in response. This sharply contrasts to the strong and decisive actions taken by the president of the University of Oklahoma, regarding the offensive and vile frat boys’ video. What are we to make of this lack of resolve on the part of the UC administrators, except to think that they are not really interested in disciplining certain individuals who have anti-Jewish agendas in order to make an example of their disgusting and egregious behavior, but would rather merely point out the “teachable moments” that such situations create. I call this a lack of leadership and a great failing on the part of one of the most prestigious public university systems in our nation. http://www.cnsnews.com/blog/michael-morris/uc-davis-jewish-frat-targeted-swastikas-another-example-rise-anti-semitism

  • robman012

    Is this from the same man that said this about our students, “Campus politics have been hijacked by a group of students who are intent to conquer. The coalition of Arab, Muslim, Latino, Asian, Black and gay students. They’re all oppressed minorities.” By yours truly, Rabbi Seidler Feller.

  • ThisIsPalestine

    What a shocking surprise, supporters of an anti-Semitic organization (BDS) turn out to be anti-Semites themselves. And no one in the administration does a thing about it because the anti-Semites are “minorities.”

    • McMullans

      You can thank The Frankfurt School for this push of “minorities”. Seems it’s coming full circle to bite them in the butt.