OPINION
Last week, Voorhees Mall at Rutgers – New Brunswick was ground zero for a tent encampment protest, led by Students for Justice in Palestine. The organization, which is on probation after a winter suspension for disrupting learning, forced the postponement of dozens of final exams, affecting over 1,000 students.
After issuing an ultimatum to clear the area, University administrators acquiesced to a list of demands from the group, whose national ties to antisemitic causes were recently investigated in the Wall Street Journal. It’s yet another sad demonstration of moral rot and weak leadership at a University long plagued by a crippling fear of far left activism.
The 2010’s were marked by college campuses slowly marching toward becoming adult day cares, coddling students by shielding them from dissent and ideas that made them uncomfortable. The phenomenon was even called out by President Obama in 2016, months before he delivered the 250th Commencement Address at Rutgers. Incidentally, Rutgers had established itself as a place hostile to dissent just two years earlier when the histrionics of a small group of students drove former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to decline an invitation to speak at that year’s commencement. The administration, for its part, did little to defend their decision in extending the invitation or extoll the values of discourse that universities used to pride themselves on.
Fearful of students’ feelings as Rutgers has proven itself to be, this “deal” that the university struck with the organizers marks a dangerous new era. The administration’s stated strategy of de-escalation has morphed into full on capitulation, setting a standard that’s bound to ensure more bullying by radical outside organizations.
From a purely administrative standpoint, making these concessions to a group that’s currently on probationary status with the University blurs the lines of appropriate student organizing. What’s the point of creating these designations and guardrails for student groups if the administration has just proved that following university guidelines isn’t essential to getting their demands met? It reeks of special treatment and will surely create resentment across other student groups.
Then there’s the business of the organization’s national ties to antisemitism. Rutgers is part of an open U.S. Department of Education investigation on discrimination after widespread criticism of its handling of instances of antisemitism on campus. Negotiating with an organization whose radical national overlords maintain close ties with groups associated with antisemitism and support for terrorism is a powerful statement to Jewish students that their safety is not a priority.
Through their decision to negotiate, and ultimately capitulate to these demands rather than hold the group accountable to the policies of the University, Rutgers has proven that extreme, disruptive tactics are a wholly effective means of bullying the administration into elevating the clout and position of radical organizations. Even worse, they’ve undermined the role of the University’s institutions in facilitating free, open, and respectful inquiry among students and society, instead carving a new path for intimidation to lead the way.
Nobody wants the level of conflict and violence we’ve seen roil universities like Columbia and UCLA. But this week, all that Rutgers accomplished was signaling its lack of will in enforcing University policies for disruptive groups. This sets a dangerous standard for the next academic year as emotions are bound to run high with the November election looming.
Candice Greaux is a former New York Observer columnist from New Jersey.
The post Opinion: Rutgers administration’s cowardice appeared first on New Jersey Globe.