Nearly 13 months after October 7, 2023, and amid the ongoing Gaza war, I find myself increasingly concerned about the lack of open discourse, particularly among those who identify as anti-Zionist on our campuses.
Many of the people who oppose Israel’s existence simply don’t know or understand the history, and there is an urgent need for constructive conversation on campus and elsewhere.
One such incident occurred at the University of Exeter on February 7, 2023, notably before the events of October 7th, where Yoseph Haddad, an Arab-Israeli activist and a foremost advocate for Israeli-Palestinian coexistence, was chased off campus with chants of “We don’t listen to racists” and “Apartheid off campus.”
This event has stuck with me in its utmost significance, since Haddad provides a nuanced and much-needed perspective, discrediting the accusation of Israeli apartheid and racism — since all citizens under Israeli law are treated equally, and all residents of Israel have a right to human dignity and freedom regardless of their religion or ethnicity.
The protesters ignored this and failed to engage in what could have been a thought-provoking and informative session, showing a lack of interest in reflecting on their preconceived beliefs about how “evil” Israel is perceived to be.
Following October 7th, university societies such as Friends of Palestine or Students for Justice of Palestine have continuously campaigned for a boycott of any university collaboration with Tel Aviv University, as seen in my own university — the University of Exeter.
Not only is the notion of boycotting Israel antisemitic –– demonizing and singling out Israel and its citizens among all other nations — but is also based in falsehoods. After engaging in my own dialogue with the university, I found that no such partnership between the school and Israel exists, only further highlighting a troubling trend — the commitment to blind protest over informed discussion.
One cannot overstate the importance of dialogue, especially in our universities — places that are supposed to be safe havens of further learning, where different viewpoints are not only heard but listened to and engaged with. This refusal fosters a hostile environment of division and an abundance of echo chambers, where assumptions thrive, leading to an increased polarized campus atmosphere, alienation of potential allies, and complete avoidance of meaningful discussion.
Further, this lack of open conversation on university campuses poses a larger threat for wider society, with overly simplified labels of “colonizers” or “apartheid supporters” being thrown around carelessly. Words like genocide have become intertwined in people’s daily vocabularies, without fact-checking and openly engaging in the debate, again: commitment to protest over discussion.
My own frustrations with this closed conversation has only fueled my passion for Zionism, a perspective I feel compelled to advocate for amid this hostile and inaccurate climate. Protests full of lies, calling us “spies” and “baby killers“ is something that we cannot tolerate.
Speakers and activists such Adiel Cohen are the advocates we need. People like this help work for peace and resolution, routinely refuting antisemitism and debunking anti-Israel propaganda, rather than stoking conflict and division. Cohen is a powerful example of how conversation can lead to change and understanding.
Our goals are reminiscent of each other: peace and the ability to live and exist in our shared land, and it’s only through debate and discussion that these ideas are realized.
The complexities of the Israel-Gaza conflict must lead to us prioritizing conversation and dialogue. We need to create spaces to hear our voices and room for civic discussion — and foster the environments needed to conduct real change.
This article was originally published in the Algemeiner.