If there is Free Speech for Gender Critical Feminists why does this not apply to critics of Zionism and Apartheid Israel?
Kathleen
Stock is a gender critical feminist. She believes that there are fundamentally
two sexes – male and female – and that gender cannot change biological facts. She
believes that someone who possesses male genitalia cannot be a woman or have
access to women’s only spaces such as womens’ refuges, toilets and prisons.
Kathleen’s
views can be seen here
alongside other feminist philosophers and writers. My own views on the subject
are irrelevant in so far as I’m neither a woman nor trans! For what it is worth
I find it difficult to accept that a man can simply declare he’s a woman for
that to be an accepted fact. I have little doubt that some men will self-declare
in order to gain access to vulnerable women.
On
the other hand I have considerable doubt that one can simply declare that there
are 2 sexes and nothing in between. But the point is that there is a debate to
be had. The attempt by some students at Sussex University to harass or
intimidate Kathleen off campus and to demand her sacking is reprehensible.
As
Kathleen says
‘Universities aren't places where students should just expect
to hear their own thoughts reflected back at them. Arguments should be met by
arguments and evidence by evidence, not intimidation or aggression’.
That must be right. Identity politics students who
expect to be comforted in their views, whether it be support of Israel and Zionism
or Gender politics must expect to be challenged and if they are not up to it
then they should not be at university.
To those trans activists who claim that Kathleen is a
threat
to their safety one is tempted to say that she is a threat to their
intellect. There is no credible argument that the slight figure of Kathleen
Stock poses a physical threat to any student.
However the contrast with David Miller is
remarkable. The stench of hypocrisy is overpowering. There is a united
front of the establishment press that Kathleen Stock has been the subject
of bullying.
However when it comes to Professor David Miller of
Bristol University the opposite is the case. The All Party Parliamentary Group wrote
to Bristol University alleging that David Miller was a threat to Jewish students
no less than 4 times. It beggars belief that David’s slight figure is a threat
to anyone let alone the Jewish American Princesses and Divas of Bristol University.
Still less Bristol J-Soc’s racist liar of a Chair David Isaacs.
For once the BBC got it right when it reported that
Bristol
University: Professor David Miller sacked over Israel comments. This is what is
so outrageous. David was sacked for his political opinions which were twisted
into an attack on Jewish students because Israel calls itself a ‘Jewish state’.
David called for an ‘end
to Zionism’ not an end to Jews, at a meeting of the Labour Campaign for Free
Speech. He also criticized the Israeli funded Union of Jewish Students. How was
this interpreted? According to
the BBC again this was
"inciting hatred against Jewish
students". Why? Israel is a
foreign state. If Jewish students want to support this cesspit of racism it is
up to them, but why did David’s comments threaten the ‘safety’ of Jewish students
any more than Kathleen Stock threatened the safety of trans students?
This is the obvious question - how does David Miller threaten the safety of Jewish or any other students?
Indeed according
to The Tab, Bristol University’s student newspaper .
‘Bristol
Uni’s Professor David Miller is under police investigation following remarks
allegedly made during his lectures.’
In a statement Avon and Somerset Police
confirmed the investigation into “a hate
crime or hate incident taking place during lectures at the University of
Bristol.” The allegation of hate speech against Kathleen Stock is exactly
what trans activists are alleging yet are Sussex Police investigating Ms Stock? Quite the contrary. They are investigating
those who threatened Kathleen Stock.
What were the trans activists burning? Witches?
The double standards are so obvious you
would need to be blind and stupid not to notice them. Yet the reasons are clear enough. What Kathleen Stock has said is an example of
what might be called identity politics and poses no threat to the system we
live under. David Miller by way of
contrast, by challenging Zionism, the ideology of Apartheid Israel, threatens
our and the United States’s relationship with Israel. That and that alone
explains the difference in treatment.
Jewish students are therefore wheeled
out, or rather Jewish Zionist students are paraded, as a soft rationalization for
what is a political position – support for Israel, right or wrong.
Did David Miller threaten to go round
to visit any individual student? Did he
threaten any individual students? Of
course not. The threat to their personal safety is entirely in their minds. When over 100 MPs and peers, including
shamefully Caroline Lucas, wrote
to Bristol University’s cowardly Vice Chancellor Sir Hugh Brady saying that
David Miller had been ‘inciting hatred
against Jewish students on your campus’ they were lying. David Miller was no more inciting hatred than
Kathleen Stock.
David’s dismissal is a clear and
obvious attack on freedom of speech yet Bristol University has complied with
the demands of the political establishment with the press and police doing
their best to heighten the animosity towards David.
The Jewish Chronicle Makes It Clear that David Miller is Just the Start
This is not fanciful. The Jewish Chronicle as is to be expected was crowing this week about the dismissal but it made it clear in its Leader ‘Miller’s sacking should be the beginning, not the end’ that this was never about the safety of Jewish students but the politics of anti-Zionist lecturers.
The
dismissal of David Miller matters not because it is the end of the affair, but
because (irrespective of whether he chooses to fight) it should mark a
beginning — the point at which cranks like him start to notice that the tide is
turning and their universities will no longer be able to offer them a safe
space from which to spread their toxic poison.
What the Jewish Chronicle under
its Islamaphobic Editor Stephen Pollard means by ‘crank’ is anyone who opposes
the racism inherent in a Jew settler colonial state.
In a front page article the Jewish
Chronicle claimed that ‘Miller is gone but he is only tip of the iceberg’ and
that ‘Analysis of the signatories to a letter supporting the disgraced
professor reveals academics in 74 separate British institutions’ The implication
is obvious. David Miller’s sacking is the beginning of a process whereby
socialist and left-wing. Lecturers, in particular anti-Zionists, will be under
threat of dismissal if they open their mouths too widely.
But what is missing at the moment is
any response from David’s trade union, the University College Union. It has
been totally silent on this threat to academic freedom despite having policy on
Boycott of Israel. The position of UCU, which appears to be to have no
position, is utterly shameful.
I am pleased to say that Scottish UCU
has passed
policy on David Miller which:
Condemns the attack on Professor David Miller by Zionist
lobby groups and the call for his dismissal from Bristol University
following his address to the online conference held by the Labour Campaign
for Free Speech on 13 February;
Calls on Bristol University to defend Professor Miller, his
academic freedom and right to free speech;
Mandates UCU officers, in liaison with the Bristol UCU branch
and UK officers, to write to the vice chancellor of Bristol University
expressing our outrage at the treatment of Professor Miller and the inadequate
response so far in his defence;
Agrees to promote campaign material to members to encourage
support for David Miller.
It
is to be hoped that UCU nationally comes off the fence and defends, not just
David Miller, but the principle of free speech and academic freedom.
The difference is that Scottish Palestine
Solidarity Campaign is supporting David whilst the Socialist Action controlled
PSC has nothing to say.
Tony Greenstein
Our nation has become a haven for unprincipled hypocrites. Nobody obliges them to go along with the cynical manoeuvres and bullying by lobby groups.
ReplyDelete"On the other hand I have considerable doubt that one can simply declare that there are 2 sexes and nothing in between"
ReplyDeleteIt would be interesting to know what this "considerable doubt" is based on!
I had wondered about David's union not to mention the NUS, campus students and his fellow academics? Why are they silent, disagreement or fear?
ReplyDeleteI agree with the thinking behind this articule, but regret the sexist and possibly racist use of the terms Jewish Americano Princesses and Divas. The argument would be stronger without sinking to this level.
ReplyDeleteI don't think the use of the term JAP is racist still less sexist. It refers to young Jewish women who are arrogant and entitled who have the gall to think they are oppressed too.
DeleteI agree with unknown. I would have shared the article but think the stereotypes are off. Why not refer to "Jewish American Princes" too... because that's not a thing. Why pick on women at all and bring gender in here.
DeleteAnd I stand with Tony on this.
DeleteWhat started with the antisemitism smears has continued with the transphobia witch hunt, given that Owen Jones and Novara Media have heavily engaged in both...
ReplyDelete