British university boycott

How about being a man of principle that does what he can, when he can?

 

Yeah the Springboks are the rugby team and at the time they were a very pale rugby team if you get what I'm saying.

as for Israeli academia being complicit in the curtailing of palestinians academic freedom, we can start off with this http://education.guardian.co.uk/higher/worldwide/story/0,,2091528,00.html and whilst written from an obviously biased viewpoint this senior Palestinian academic does a good job of countering Israeli spin http://education.guardian.co.uk/higher/comment/story/0,,2087130,00.html

 

Of course that is an ideal, but not really that relavent. If you agree that it is right that British universities boycott Isreali universities, it should not matter if that is the precedent. Should people not give money to one charity if not all?

Even if there is prejudice in this case, that is another issue altogether. It still doesn't show that the Universities shouldn't be doing this, but only that they should also be doing it at other places. People get too caught up in the idea of fair and forget what really matters.

 

http://education.guardian.co.uk/higher/worldwide/story/0,,2088442,00.html
another little editorial type piece arguing for the boycott (I particularly like the comparisons to apartheid) and this http://education.guardian.co.uk/higher/worldwide/story/0,,2087280,00.html is a piece arguing against it. I find it interesting that rather than argue that the boycott is unjustified he chooses to highlight problems in other countries that he sees as more serious and the lack of action being taken against those nations. Pretty much as we are seeing here.

So could it be that the boycott is justified? There seems to be few mentions of the curtailing of palestinian academic freedom from the pro-Israeli camp, which I find oh so strange seeing as they are the main issues under debate

 

Once again, the Israeli Universities asked the government to change it's policy. They didn't ask the government to restrict people.


An economic boycott would be far more effective than to boycott the universities.

 

considering the academias silence is being used as evidence against them I would be interested in seeing such a statement from the Israeli Universities.

As for boycotting the economy, how would you suggest a COLLEGE union go about that?

 

Is a boycott justifiable? Perhaps so. But this one, at least, is barking up up the wrong tree.

 

Perhaps with their pocketbooks? Don't buy their exports. While some would like to think boycotting the rugby team had huge impacts on the ending of apartheid, the two biggest issues, as listed in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_boycotts_of_Israel was the US taking economic sanctions and the election of de Klerk, which was made more likely by the economic sanctions that the country was feeling.

 

Why? Restricting Israeli academic freedom as punishment for supporting the restriction of Palestinian academic freedom seems perfectly fair, in fact I wouldnt be surprised to find a couple of verses in the Torah that say pretty much just that, oh wait, exodus 21:23-21:27 does

 

But your own links say that the Israeli academics are pushing for more freedoms, not restricting. What you really have a problem with is the gov't.

Let me ask you, how effective was the springbok boycott? Close to nil? How long did the boycott go for? They started in what, 1971? Until there was an economic effect, there was no change.

 

I've clearly missed a paragraph somewhere, the most I saw was a reference to a courageous few, few normally refers to a small minority.

The Springbok boycott was symbolic of the worlds intolerance, it would be like banning the English Soccer team from playing in the World Cup, or to a lesser extent banning the US basketball team from playing in the Olympics, it showed white South Africans that their behaviour was disgusted and it showed black South Africans that they did not stand alone.

 

From the article:

But which is better, a symbolic act that accomplishes next to nothing or an action that may make the gov't change it's course.

 

there are almost 40 academic institutions that may be affected to my count so your quote accounts for 10% of them.

The only thing a body like the AUT can do as a means of protest is boycott academic institutions, members of that organisation have no other meaningful form of protest at their disposal, any economic measures they take would be a drop in the ocean.

 

I suppose the question--raised previously-is whether the universities have taken similar action in the past against other countries. If other countries do not merit this treatment, why does Israel?

 

This is a very relevant point. Does anyone know the answer?

Regards,

 

because its never happened before does that mean they shouldn't take a stand ever?

I read an interesting reader comment on one of the guardian articles that said we should deal with Israel first because they wish to be seen as a modern western power and as such should be held to the same standards of behaviour.

 

They got a lotta work to do! If you've ever been there, you'll know what I'm talking about... they do have beautiful beaches though, and excellent weather.