Just to clarify: this is an op-ed by Saree Makdisi, a UCLA professor,
not a LAT editorial.
It's nice of the author to acknowledge that "a Palestinian student
claiming the right to return to her homeland could be considered to be
"denying Israel's right to exist," given the demographic implications
of the Palestinian right of return for the Jewish state."
Even so, I have to agree with the general thrust of the opinion -
anti-Zionism is not anti-semitism per se, as far as Zionism can be
defined as a policy. Said another professor:
"I’m ethnically Jewish (I say “ethnically” because I’m not religious),
and I support Israel. It’s the one democracy among its neighbors, and
for all its flaws it’s doing a pretty good job faced with very
difficult circumstances. Whatever one might say about whether Israel
should have been created in 1948, it’s there, and undoing that
decision would be a disaster in many ways. And I do think that a good
deal of anti-Zionism is indeed anti-Semitic.
"But I think the regents are flat wrong to say that “anti-Zionism” has
“no place at the University of California.” Even though they’re not
outright banning anti-Zionist speech, but rather trying to sharply
condemn it, I think such statements by the regents chill debate,
especially by university employees and students who (unlike me) lack
tenure. (For more on that, see here.) And this debate must remain
free, regardless of what the regents or I think is the right position
in the debate."
Full article at
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2016/03/16/university-of-california-board-of-regents-is-wrong-about-anti-zionism-on-campus/
--
Yisroel "Godwrestler Warriorson" Markov - Boston, MA Member
www.reason.com -- for a sober analysis of the world DNRC
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"Judge, and be prepared to be judged" -- Ayn Rand