Antizionism vs antisemitism
=
milkshake vs. ice cream
Just as milkshakes depend on ice cream, antizionism structurally depends on antisemitic infrastructure to thrive. My latest in @JPost:
@SJPidiots@nytimes They ran a story showing X rays of children’s skulls with bullets in the center but lacking bullet holes. Not sure whether that’s medically plausible
I designed a logo for Jerusalem’s public transport system.
At its core is a symbol that is almost 100 years old: the sign used for bus stops. It first appeared in the city in the 1930s and over time spread across the country.
Eventually, this sign disappeared from the streets, replaced by standard yellow and blue route information signs.
I felt it was important to bring back this simple and precise symbol, a sign that was directly associated with public transport for decades.
I used it as the foundation for a new identity: not just a logo, but a visual language that can unify the entire transport system, buses, light rail, and future modes of transport.
Sometimes simple forms work best for complex systems.
Special thanks to the Jerusalem transport team for their trust in this project, and to Daniel Baev (@the500th_) for his extensive archival research and contribution to the idea.
The DOJ just sued Harvard for antisemitism. The media-academic complex called it retaliation.
They’re wrong, and Harvard’s own Presidential Task Force proves it.
Harvard’s bureaucrats built entire offices to protect “every protected group.”
But when Jewish students were spat on, jeered with “Heil Hitler,” and told to leave classrooms because of their nationality, those same bureaucrats locked their doors and hid.
Harvard didn’t just fail its Jewish students. It chose to.
That’s not a political argument, it’s a legal one - and it’s a strong cause of action.
My piece in @TimesofIsrael: https://t.co/49pmziMgeG
#Harvard #civilrights @HarmeetKDhillon@TheLeoTerrell
The 3 accusations:
1. genocide
2. apartheid
3. settler colonialism - don't need evidence. They activate blood libel frameworks, conspiracy theories about Jewish power, and dual loyalty tropes. The infrastructure does the work.
https://t.co/dFdAM1uLNX
Antizionism vs antisemitism
=
milkshake vs. ice cream
Just as milkshakes depend on ice cream, antizionism structurally depends on antisemitic infrastructure to thrive. My latest in @JPost:
The Harvard Crimson is engaging in an ancient tradition of villain construction. Because Jew hatred is a virtuous hatred, and always was, the fact that the question is framed as an ethical dilemma exposes the central lie: the only ethics at stake are the ethics of maintaining Jew-hatred as a public virtue. Antizionism gives the hatred its alibi. The dilemma is not how to think about Jews; it is how to continue vilifying them while appearing righteous.
Harvard ended a program w a Palestinian university that bars Jews from campus
More Harvard faculty DISAGREE than agree w this decision. Are they okay w banning Jews from a Harvard program?
Who’s surprised Harvard faculty fails to observe anti-Jew hatred at Harvard?
My op-ed 👇
For the second year in a row, a majority of respondents to The Crimson’s annual Faculty of Arts and Sciences survey said they did not observe “systemic antisemitism” at Harvard.
@williamcmao and @VeronicaHPaulus report.
https://t.co/MmDRnDjtqw
A rocket fired from Gaza toward Israel instead landed in the center of the strip, killing a 14-year-old. The Hamas-affiliated Quds News Network couldn't figure out if they should blame it on an Israeli sniper or an unexploded Zionist bomb.
@dieworkwear Hey Derek, I refer people to you when they ask for a menswear version of my Instagram, https://t.co/na1qFB5Fuj
You inspired me to consider construction & cultural traditions as a thing for social media as opposed to obsessive thoughts in my head. You da best, and thank you!
Harvard's Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences (FAS) just sent out an email (full text below) addressing recent comments made by Lawrence Bobo (Dean of Social Science) in the Harvard Crimson. Bobo argued that "it is outside the bounds of acceptable professional conduct for a faculty member to excoriate University leadership, faculty, staff, or students with the intent to arouse external intervention into University business," and that "the broad publication of such views cross[es} a line into sanctionable violations of professional conduct."
In her email, Hoekstra made clear that Bobo is wrong: faculty members should not, and can not, be sanctioned for such public statements. 👇🏽
"Dear faculty colleagues,
In recent days, I’ve heard from a number of you who have expressed sincere concerns about whether FAS faculty can be sanctioned for criticizing the institution or its leadership. My unequivocal answer is no.
The Faculty of Arts and Sciences (FAS) Free Speech Guidelines and the University Statement on Rights and Responsibilities describe core University policies, including the FAS commitment to freedom of speech and academic freedom. These policies codify some of the FAS', as well as my own, most deeply held values.
Constructively engaging with criticism makes our community wiser and stronger and, when appropriate, informs changes to policy. Such engagement advances our shared mission of education, research, and service.
Best,
Hopi"
Among the concessions - a discussion about a Palestinian Study center. The Center for Middle East Studies is already full of classes & dissertations on “Israel’s land grab.” “From the Nakba to the New Millenium” etc. HU needs another Israel bashing dept? https://t.co/2AjbbvuIKt
you can fix this in the early stages by wrapping the candle in foil and creating a narrow tunnel that traps the heat, forcing the wax to burn to the edges