The First Amendment safeguards the right to express foolish ideas, but the marketplace of ideas also demands that speakers be held accountable for their words, particularly when they are hateful. The ongoing demonstrations on Ivy League campuses are not just about Palestinians, Gaza, or even Israel. The Gaza conflict provides a pretext for anti-American and anti-Western radicals and anarchists to attempt to undermine and weaken our government and those of other Western democracies. None of the slogans advocate for a two-state solution or the release of hostages. At the very least, they demand Israel’s elimination “from the river to the sea” and its replacement with either an Islamic caliphate or a radical left-wing totalitarian state. Few protesters advocate for democracy, civil liberties, equality, or decency. They seek Israel’s, America’s, and Western values’ destruction. Some simply participate because their peers request it. Every radical protest has featured “useful idiots.” The demonstrators fall into four categories: First, Arab and Muslim Israel despisers and anti-Semites who seek Israel’s demise as the Jewish people’s nation-state and the elimination of any Jewish presence in the Middle East. They are the spiritual successors to the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, who collaborated with Hitler in the 1940s to eradicate the Jewish population in present-day Israel. Second, radical anarchists who exploit all conflicts as recruitment opportunities to undermine American democracy, Judeo-Christian values, and the free market economy. Third, professional organizers who raise and profit from organizing these demonstrations. Fourth, useful idiots who find it amusing to participate in radical demonstrations, even if it means intimidating vulnerable minorities and fellow students. Let there be no doubt that the events of January 6 posed a grave threat to democracy, despite involving only a small number of individuals attempting to disrupt Congress and overturn the 2020 election results. The Charlottesville March, in which a small group of people chanted “We will not be replaced by Jews,” was equally dangerous. The current anti-Israel and anti-American demonstrations are distinct. They involve tens of thousands of elite students, many from wealthy and influential backgrounds. They are our future leaders. Some of these bigoted demonstrators will soon seek employment in the most prestigious and influential institutions. They will soon run for Congress. These future leaders support Hamas, a terrorist organization responsible for murdering, beheading, and kidnapping Jews, Americans, and others, by supporting Hamas. Hamas carried out these atrocities on October 7. Some protesters vowed to repeat October 7 “every day for 1,000 days.” Some of these useful idiots are unaware of Hamas’s actions on October 7 and the implications of their support. They have simply been instructed what to say and chant, and they follow their pro-Palestinian pied pipers from the river to the sea, oblivious to the significance of either. However, useful idiots must be held accountable for promoting Hamas’s evils. They were useful idiots who marched alongside Hitler’s youth in the 1930s and Castro’s revolutionaries in the 1950s. Those who chant bigoted and hateful slogans should be identified, and their names and university affiliations should be made public. Potential employers have the right to know if job candidates support the rape of Jewish women or are willing to march alongside those who do. The First Amendment protects the right to express foolish thoughts, but the marketplace of ideas—the cornerstone of the First Amendment—also demands that speakers be held accountable for their words, especially hateful ones. Consider if the situation were reversed. Imagine if a group of white supremacists occupied an Ivy League campus and advocated for lynching and raping African Americans. Or consider if a group of former white Apartheid leaders from South Africa rallied to reclaim white rule in South Africa: “South Africa will be free of all blacks from the Atlantic to the Indian Ocean and returned to exclusive white rule.” Would Columbia University tolerate such bigotry in the name of academic freedom? The majority of the students and professors defending these student bigots are effectively claiming, “Free speech for me, but not for thee.” The First Amendment does not operate in this manner. There must be a uniform standard for all, but no Ivy League university would apply such a standard. They embrace the “intersectionalist” mentality, which promotes free speech for those favored by the diversity, equity, and inclusion bureaucracy while opposing free speech for those who are not. Universities are meant to educate our future leaders. They are failing miserably in this endeavor. If university leaders continue to encourage the current one-sidedness, we will pay a heavy price.
Anti-Israel Protests on Ivy League Campuses: A Threat to Democracy and Western Values
