Jewish students and faculty at Haverford College have expressed strong opposition to the upcoming congressional hearing on antisemitism organized by the US House Committee on Education and Workforce. They accuse the committee of “weaponising our pain and anguish” and assert that their voices “have absolutely not been represented in the current public discussion of antisemitism.” The committee, led by Republican Representative Tim Walberg from Michigan, has drawn scrutiny for its members’ controversial statements and associations.
The committee’s stated interest in using the term “antisemitic incidents” and “whistleblowers” has alarmed many in the Haverford community. They accuse the hearings of being a political circus. This tactic is meant to intimidate colleges and universities into continuing to erode their commitments to free speech and academic freedom. Faculty members say that opponents’ arguments often conflate legitimate criticism of Israel with hatred for Jewish people. This cloud of confusion makes discussing genuine instances of antisemitism even more difficult.
He is connected to the Moody Bible Institute, an organization that has gained infamy for training people to win Jews to Christ. This connection has led to the outrage of many scholars and students. They implicate the credibility of a hearing on antisemitism chaired by people with these histories.
Adding to the controversy, Representative Mark Harris from North Carolina has previously stated that until Jews and Muslims “accept Jesus Christ, there’ll never be peace in their soul or peace in their city.” Some of these Republican legislators are being sued. Critics argue they are using the fight against antisemitism to advance their own religious agendas.
Members of the committee have not only acted out in ways that are alarming, but have made disturbing remarks publicly. Last month, extreme MAGA Republican Representative Mary Miller of Illinois praised the Nazi leader Adolf Hitler. She claimed that he was correct to claim, “whoever has the youth has the future.” These comments have drawn sharp criticism from various quarters, including Haverford’s faculty, who argue that such rhetoric undermines serious discussions about antisemitism.
The controversy does not end there. Florida Republican Representative Randy Fine, who claims to be Congress’ only Jewish congressman, allegedly made a disgusting threat. He threatened to burn his own synagogue “to the ground” after it voted to hire an LGBTQ+ staff member. His actions go beyond this to confuse, obfuscate, and undermine the discourse of Jewish identity, authenticity, and representation that exists within these discussions.
The research environment has not escaped these pernicious trends either. See Ties That Divide, the Jewish Voice for Peace’s academic council’s new report. It disparages Project Esther for perpetuating antisemitic tropes and advancing conspiracy theories regarding Jewish domination of the social justice movement. Haverford’s professors are very vocal in denouncing this reversal by past administrations. They contend these moves were misleadingly justified as efforts to fight antisemitism.
Haverford College President Wendy Raymond, who was appointed to that position by President Obama, is slated to testify before the congressional committee. Her testimony comes at a make-or-break time. Jewish scholars and students are pushing back more vocally than ever against what they view as politicized efforts to intimidate pro-Palestinian voices out of their campuses. Unfortunately, the Haverford community worries that these hearings will be used to marginalize their voices even further.
They’re protesting that Jewish faculty are being used as pawns. They caution that conflating anti-Zionism with antisemitism can dilute the effectiveness of actual criticisms with prejudice against Jews. Rebecca Alpert, a scholar, emphasized this point, stating, “In my mind, it’s antisemitic to call a scholarly presentation by a rabbi antisemitism.” Needless to say, academics are getting very fed up. They want to address real antisemitism and anti-Zionism as a form of antisemitism, but are often afraid of being falsely accused themselves.
The Haverford community still comes to terms with the meaning of these hearings. The engagement of these committee members with a history of harmful rhetoric, including the examples above, raises serious concerns over their motivations and understanding of antisemitism.