More than ever, Americans are skeptical of the value of higher education. One need look no further than a recent article by Benjamin Robinson, an associate professor in the Department of Germanic Studies at Indiana University Bloomington, to understand why such doubts exist. Instead of engaging in reasoned debate on issues raised by a Jewish student, Robinson resorted to straw man arguments and ad hominem attacks. If Robinson is representative of academic faculty in the United States today, then society’s skepticism is warranted.
Earlier this month, Rachel Applefield, a student at Indiana University, penned an op-ed at The Herald Times. Applefield carefully laid out her concerns about the antisemitic and pro-Hamas propaganda that had spread across campus. Concrete examples were provided, as were her reasoned and sourced explanations as to why the rhetoric and symbolism being used was extreme and hateful.
Applefield’s article demonstrated what society expects from a university education: the ability to intellectually engage on contentious issues in a respectful and reasoned manner.
But while Applefield modeled academic integrity, Robinson exhibited all the anti-intellectual behaviors universities once stood as bastions against.
A week after Applefield’s op-ed, The Herald-Times published a response from Robinson. The problems begin with the headline itself: “Addressing Rachel Applefield’s apology for Israel’s genocide.” Robinson didn’t take issue with, or even address, the substance of any of the young student’s actual arguments.
Instead, he attacked her on a personal level, making baseless accusations about Applefield’s motives and opinions, claiming she is “heartless” and “feels no empathy” toward Gazans.
Robinson’s malicious ad hominem attacks are beneath that of any self-respecting newspaper, let alone of a serious academic institution.
But the problems with Robinson’s op-ed go beyond his schoolyard bullying tactics.
Despite the title of his op-ed, Robinson never actually responds to Applefield’s arguments, which are about the antisemitic and pro-Hamas rhetoric of activists on Indiana University’s campus. Other than the personal attacks, Robinson’s entire article is simply a laundry list of the alleged sins of the Jewish state. Although none of these perceived sins have any bearing on the points raised by Applefield, Robinson’s article – and indeed the headline itself – falsely claimed she was defending said sins. It’s a classic straw man argument, suggesting an inability to substantively respond to Applefield’s op-ed.
Professor Robinson is, of course, entitled to his opinions. But given the quality of his arguments, or rather the lack thereof, the public is also entitled to question the value of the education he is providing to students at Indiana University.
CAMERA stands unreservedly behind Applefield, who is a 2024-25 CAMERA on Campus fellow. We’re proud of her article and of her ability to engage in public dialogue in a civil, fact-based manner.
As for Robinson, who also used his op-ed to accuse CAMERA of “intimidation and smear campaigns,” we invite him to review our many publications providing substantive, fact-based responses debunking his allegations against Israel. Perhaps it’ll assist the professor in understanding the difference between reasoned debate on the one hand, and “intimidation and smear campaigns,” such as his against Applefield, on the other hand.
This article was originally published on CAMERA.org
