‘Good little Leftists’

A couple of weeks back, I commented on the criticism aimed at the Revolutionary Marxist class PSU offers through the Chiron Studies program. On the conservative website The Blaze, author Erica Ritz suggested that a “controversial” course like this should not be covered by taxpayer dollars. She added that classes like this are the reason our country’s university system is under fire.

As much as I disagreed with her views, it seemed as though this was an isolated blog (though I am aware she represents the views of a large demographic) and that that would probably be the end of that.

It wasn’t.

Much to my surprise, the Marxist class popped back up last week. And this time, it was causing even worse trouble! It is now being held responsible for hate-speech in the form of anti-semitic graffiti on the walls of our campus.

Let me explain.

PSU’s chapter of Christians United For Israel chapter recently invited Christian Broadcasting Network correspondent and terrorism analyst Erick Stakelbeck to address their “Stand With Israel” event here at the university. In the days leading up to the event, a poster advertising Stakelbeck’s speech was defaced with a swastika and the words “Never Again includes Palestinians!”

On his blog, Stakelbeck On Terror, the analyst was incensed by the move—and rightly so. No matter what political side one is on or whatever point one is making, the Nazi swastika is a universal symbol of evil and its use can only be interpreted as callous. Plain and simple.

Where it gets surprising, though, is Stakelbeck didn’t leave it there. He went on to suggest that those behind the vandalism were undoubtedly, “elements of the radical left or Islamists on campus, or perhaps a combination of both.”

He followed it up with, “And with Portland State offering courses like this [the Revolutionary Marxist Class], it’s not surprising that good little Leftists—who are invariably hostile to Israel—are being produced.”

It’s a bit confusing to see how an inevitable leap is made from students learning about Marxist theories to brandishing the genocidal sign of Nazism. It’s even more confusing that a class that explores different economic and social systems should be viewed as such a significant threat. Agree or disagree about its content, but why assume anyone who’s remotely interested in broadening their knowledge about an alternative to capitalism is automatically a threat to Israel?

There is no question about where Stakelbeck stands on the Israel, Palestine issue—take one look at his blog and nothing is left to the imagination. There is nothing ambiguous about his speaking in a “Stand With Israel” event. We know up front what he thinks. It’s important that he was invited to speak, regardless of his attacks on our university’s supposed left-ness. That’s what institutions of higher learning should be all about—freedom of speech and learning from one another.

But the idea of learning seemed furthest from his agenda. Rather, it was like he was looking for a fight, and was all but gleeful about any resistance to his message. Going into great detail about the protesters that arrived, he actually spent more time describing and insulting them than discussing the contents of his speech.

The protesters, wearing tape over their mouths, hardly looked like the violent anarchists he seemed to be expecting. What was telling, however, was his description of them one not wholly unusual in conversations such as this.

He observed that they were a “motley bunch of hijab and skullcap-clad Muslims, aging ex-hippies and tie-dyed stragglers,” and then “a handful of reasonably normal-looking people with them as well. Normal, except for their brainwashed, aggressive Leftist views.”

Hmm. I’d be interested to know what Stakelbeck’s definition of “normal” is. Apparently anyone wearing a hijab or a skullcap—well, a Muslim one, at any rate—is not. And, don’t forget tie-dyed clothing either.

It’s scary and sad. Sad, when someone’s definition of “normal” excludes millions and millions of people. I mean, Oregon has to have at least a few million tie-dye enthusiasts.

But seriously, in a time not long ago, one man said that normal was blonde haired and blue eyed. Please tell me we’ve moved away from such dangerous tendencies. If we see our enemies or just people who disagree with us as abnormal, they lose their humanity and thus their innate value. There is no normal.

Again, I’m all for peoples’ opinions being heard—everyone’s. But why does a correspondent from a major media organization feel the need to insult and denigrate students who oppose his way of thinking and assume they’re terrorists in the making? He claimed to know they were “brainwashed” and “aggressive” without them even opening their mouths.

I will not be so arrogant as to say that I have even an inkling of the deep-seeded pain that is embedded within the long struggle between these two groups of people. To suggest that speaking nicely to each other will solve everything would be ludicrous. But I can’t help wondering how people like Stakelbeck think they are adding anything to the discourse by coming to our campus and insulting the appearance and class choices of its students.

Can’t we rise above such pettiness and divisiveness? Isn’t a university the place where we should be learning to dialogue peacefully and honorably? There will always be two sides to this issue—two equally passionate, equally culpable and equally human sides.

So, rather than ridiculing a university class and its “brainwashed,” “zombie” students, why not engage on a higher level, one that invites respectful dialogue and chooses to model tolerance in the midst of extreme complexity and volatility?

At the very least, leave tie-dying alone.