By Kelly Rayburn
DAILY BRUIN SENIOR STAFF
krayburn@media.ucla.edu University of California class
descriptions, law enforcement tactics and demonstration policies
are all under review, after Gov. Gray Davis last week called for a
crackdown on campus anti-Semitism. Citing a U.S. Department of
Justice Study that said “there is no place where hate crimes
are occurring with increasing frequency, more visibility and
hostility than in institutions of higher education,” Davis
sent a letter to UC President Richard Atkinson and CSU Chancellor
Charles Reed, urging their help in putting a stop to trends of
anti-Semitic “violence, harassment, and abuse.” Davis
cited an attack on two Orthodox Jewish men near UC Berkeley, and a
pro-Palestinian protest on the same campus that turned into an
administration building takeover as evidence of developing
anti-Semitic trends. “In this country political disagreements
should always be resolved peacefully and without rancor. That is
what makes our democracy envied the world over,” Davis wrote
in his letter. At UCLA, the Center for Student Programming,
university police and Chancellor Albert Carnesale all expressed
similar sentiments. Thankfully, they said, UCLA has not experienced
more than its share of hate crimes or ethnicity-based abuse,
anti-Semitic or otherwise. Some UCLA faculty members and students,
meanwhile, expressed concern about their personal freedoms if the
governor should crack down what he considers to be anti-Semitic
action or speech. The letter asked the UC and CSU heads to take the
following actions: • Undertake a review of all anti-Semitic
incidents on or near campuses and report them. • Assess steps
to prevent such incidents in the future. • Review campus
policies and guidelines governing demonstrations to ensure they
don't escalate into violence or unlawful acts. • Ensure
orientation programs inform students that hate crimes will be
punished and that only civil discourse will be tolerated. •
Review official university activities including course descriptions
to ensure classes are forums for inquiry and not vehicles of
discrimination or hate. Davis sent out the letter – which
alternates between concern with anti-Semitism specifically and hate
crimes in general – early in the week of July 22. Michael
Reese, a UC spokesman, said the UC Office of the President shares
Davis’ concerns. “We are taking this very
seriously,” he said. The UC contacted the chancellors of the
nine UC campuses, asking them to respond to the governor’s
concerns in about a week.
Examining UCLA By the middle of last week, at UCLA, the UCPD, the CSP, the Dean of Students, and the chair of UCLA’s Academic Senate, among others, were collecting data and preparing analyses of UCLA’s current state regarding anti-Semitism. As of July 26, the UCPD had not yet collected data for 2002, said spokeswoman Nancy Greenstein. She added that in 2001 there was just one anti-Semitic crime reported since Sept. 11 – an assault allegation, which occurred between two non-students. Anti-Semitic crime “doesn’t appear to be an issue on our campus,” she said. “People seem to keep their differences focused around dialogue,” she added. Besides the anti-Semitic crime, Greenstein noted reports of racial slurs against people of various races and ethnicities and many incidents of anti-American slurs. Addressing whether one particular ethnic group seemed targeted, Greenstein said: “It’s pretty mixed.” Greenstein is confident in the department’s current policies. Officers receive training from the District Attorney regarding hate crimes, and attend seminars at the Museum of Tolerance. Additionally, the UCPD publishes information about hate crimes on its Web site and has a hotline where students can anonymously report any hurtful act done to them, even if they aren’t sure if it qualifies as a crime. Berky Nelson, the director of the Center for Student Programming, is also confident in his entity's ability to combat violence on campus and said UCLA has “not had great incidents of anti-Semitism.” Nelson credits students for acting responsibly and working with the administration to go about demonstrating appropriately. He recalled a pro-Palestinian “speak-out” and a simultaneous pro-Israeli counter rally early in spring quarter. While tensions ran high, the UCPD reported no violent incidents or vandalism. When demonstrations do get out of hand, it is usually the responsibility of outsiders, who are not familiar with UCLA’s rules and do not face punishment from the administration, Nelson said. As for recommendations for the future on how to avoid violence, Nelson said there’s always room for improvement and if the CSP realizes there are holes in its policies, they will be amended. The chancellor, apparently collecting input from various campus entities, wrote back to the UC on July 26. Echoing what Greenstein and Nelson said, Carnesale wrote that UCLA has experienced no increase in hate-related activity since Sept. 11. UCLA has a zero-tolerance policy on hate crimes and is “a model for other institutions,” he wrote. But even though university officials are happy to say UCLA is not a bastion of anti-Semitism, they are not complacent. Nelson, Greenstein and Carnesale all expressed the need for UCLA to strive to remain a beacon of tolerance in the future. “We will continue our diligent efforts to prevent hate crimes,” Carnesale wrote to end his letter. A popular Jewish leader in the UCLA community, Rabbi Chaim Seidler-Feller, meanwhile, said some anti-Semitic incidents at UC Berkeley and San Francisco State University are of an “extreme and frightening variety.” Though he does not think anti-Semitism is universal, he said everyone must distinguish between free speech, academic freedom and “the need to condemn bigotry.”
Concern about speech rights Davis wrote in his letter he has the utmost respect for the First Amendment of the Constitution, but some are already concerned that a review of classes and demonstration policies may lead to infringements on freedom of speech. The Anti-Defamation League reports more than 100 anti-Semitic incidents have occurred on U.S. campuses since January, Davis wrote in his letter. In fact, the ADL’s Web site reports 63 anti-Semitic incidents on U.S. college campuses in the first five months of the year. On a page summarizing anti-Semitic and anti-Israeli events on campuses, incidents range from clearly anti-Semitic – a report that a UC Santa Barbara construction site was defaced with graffiti including the phrases: “Nuke Israel,” “God Hates Jews,” and “Burn the Torah” – to what many would call anti-Israeli, but not anti-Semitic – a report, for example, that the UC Riverside Muslim Student Union sponsored a rally for Palestine, concluding with a march to Riverside's City Hall. And there lies the problem. What composes hate speech and what composes appropriate means of protest? For instance, while some do not separate anti-Zionism from anti-Semitism, others do. While Davis cited the demonstration which led to a takeover of an administration building at Berkeley as unacceptable, over 100 UCLA students and faculty signed a petition saying demonstrators’ free speech rights had been violated when they were arrested and demanding the UC Berkeley administration not punish them. Now, students and faculty, hearing of Davis’ letter, are wary of what may come in the future. If Davis or the UC start to try to limit what people can say or how they can say it then “it is a straight up violation of free speech,” said Sofia Mazgarova, a fourth-year cognitive science student and Muslim Student Association member. Former Jewish Student Union president Justin Levi said free speech at UCLA is and will continue to be well-protected compared to other universities in California; individual schools will ultimately be responsible for ensuring free speech. “They have to manage a good level of security for all students,” Levi said. Professor Gabriel Piterberg, who is open in his condemnation of Israeli policy regarding Palestinians, was not happy to hear of Davis’ call to review all course descriptions. “It’s completely inappropriate,” he said. “ ... It’s quite outrageous, to be honest.” Piterberg said only a professor’s peers should critique one another’s performance. Though the UC assigned the system-wide Academic Senate to review course descriptions, Piterberg viewed the governor’s call for the UC to do so in the first place as “dangerous.” “The stench of politics is clear,” Piterberg said. John Edmonds, the chair of UCLA’s Academic Senate, on the other hand, is not as concerned. He said academic freedom principles will be considered when the faculty reviews course descriptions. “The governor has every right to pursue this,” he said. “He doesn’t want anything inflammatory to appear on any literature at the university that would cause distress on various parties on campus.” A spokesman said Davis is not concerned that many may view his letter as a possible infringement on their right to free speech. “Why should he be?” said Byron Tucker, Davis’ deputy press secretary. Individual rights of free speech are of the “utmost importance to the governor,” but “breaking the law is unacceptable behavior.” “Nothing,” Davis wrote, “justifies ... acts of violence, harassment and abuse.” With reports from Robert Salonga, Daily Bruin Senior Staff.