Hillary Clinton recently had a broken clock moment when she criticized pro-Hamas activists and their vapid protests on university campuses across the country.
Since the war between Israel and Hamas in Gaza began in October, these people have been engaging in unrest on and off campus, harassing Jewish students and even committing acts of violence.
During a recent interview on MSNBC, Clinton commented on the anti-Israel protesters, saying they “don’t know very much at all about the history of the Middle East, or, frankly, about history in many areas of the world.”
She also detailed then-President Bill Clinton’s effort to foster peace in the region, saying the protesters aren’t aware that “an offer was made to the Palestinians for a state on 96% of the existing territory occupied by the Palestinians,” which would leave only four percent for Israel. The former Democrat presidential nominee also noted that if Yasser Arafat had accepted the offer, “there would have been a Palestinian state now for about 24 years.”
Clinton’s comments seemed to offend author Elizabeth Spiers, who penned an op-ed for The New York Times claiming that Clinton and others criticizing the anti-Israel protests “are engaging in a moral panic about America’s youth that is part of a larger effort to discredit higher education in general.”
Spiers also lamented that “the protesters are described as somehow both terribly fragile and such a threat to public safety that they need to be confronted by police officers in riot gear,” referencing the crackdowns on pro-Hamas protesters engaging in vandalism and violence.
The author then made the laughable claim that critics of the pro-Hamas movement are somehow overhyping the nature of the protests, then gave a rousing digital tongue bath for the students participating in them:
Students brave enough to risk their financial aid and scholarships are derided as childish rather than principled. And though they are educated to participate in civic life, as soon as these students exercise their First Amendment rights, they are told that protecting private property is a more pressing public concern. It’s as though some older adults simply can’t wrap their heads around the idea that college students, who are old enough to marry, have families and risk their lives for their country, are capable of having well thought-out principles.
Spiers went on to make the dubious claim that “[c]ollege students of this generation have far more knowledge about complex world events than mine or Ms. Clinton’s did” because of technology. However, it appears that, despite everyone having computers in their pockets, this does not necessarily mean that younger generations are better informed on geopolitics than previous generations. The reality is that most of these people probably couldn’t find Gaza on a map if their lives depended on it.
Moreover, the notion that any of these people are “principled” is quite the stretch given their inconsistency in their claims that they support the Palestinians living in Gaza and the West Bank. If this were truly the case, they would not limit their protests to Israel, while only calling on the Jewish state to agree to a ceasefire. They would have even more venom for Hamas and the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO), which has routinely oppressed Palestinian civilians.
The reality is that these people care nothing for the plight of those living in Gaza. They are not pro-Palestinian, they are anti-Israel--a fact they are far too dishonest to admit.
However, it is worth noting that the students participating in the protests and unrest do not necessarily represent the views of all, or even most, college-aged Americans. Indeed, polling shows that most in this age group are not focused as much on the situation in the Middle East as those seeking to exploit it to advance a Marxist agenda:
Another possibility is that the college students at the center of a national wave of pro-Palestinian protests in recent weeks aren’t particularly representative of their generational cohort. So a new Generation Lab poll of 1,250 college students from around the country, as reported by Axios, is of considerable interest in determining whether it’s as white-hot an issue on campuses as the news might suggest.
The poll confirms that college students exhibit considerable sympathy toward Palestinians suffering in the Gaza War and toward their fellow students who are protesting the war: “45% said they support [pro-Palestinian encampments] either strongly or a little bit. 30% were neutral, and 24% were strongly or a bit opposed.” But they also seem inclined to frown upon disorderly protests:
A large majority (81%) of students support holding protesters accountable, agreeing with the notion that those who destroyed property or vandalized or illegally occupied buildings should be held responsible by their university, per the survey.
A majority also said they oppose the protest tactics: 67% say occupying campus buildings is unacceptable and 58% say it’s not acceptable to refuse a university’s order to disperse. Another 90% said blocking pro-Israel students from parts of campus is unacceptable.
I have to say, the mental gymnastics routine Spiers went through to portray pro-Hamas activists as heroic students fighting for justice in the Middle East is worthy of Simone Biles. However, her arguments fall flat when taking even a cursory glance at the situation. If these people were so right in their convictions they would not have to use violence and other intimidation tactics to push their agenda.
