By Brandon Cruz
Kent Schull presented “Bordering on Insanity” in the Humanities lecture hall. (Photo by Brandon Cruz)
On Nov. 14, guest lecturer Professor Kent Schull of Binghamton University presented a talk on the Israeli-Palestine conflict, “Bordering on Insanity: Demystifying Palestine and Israel.”
The event was held in the lecture hall of the Humanities building, hosted by the Fostering (Dis)Agreement group. It attracted around 50 people at its peak.
Schull is an associate professor of modern Middle East and Ottoman History at Binghamton University. He felt that the idea to come present to Purchase was an easy one.
“I have this great relationship with the folks here at Purchase,” he said. “We’ve been able to share resources and work together.”
Schull’s presentation talked about some of the reasons the conflict is still ongoing, and some myths concerning the issue.
Topaz Gal-Zur, president of Hillel, said, “The presentation was extremely productive and helps keep the door open to having engaging conversations on campus.”
Mara Horowitz, an assistant professor of global studies and a senior member of Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP), spoke about the importance she feels these events have on campus.
“I think they're vital because we have such a very diverse community here,” Horowitz said. “We have people who are not involved, and know almost nothing about the situation. We have people who come from that region, or like me, have family in that region and know quite a lot about the situation.”
“Some of what we know, unintentionally, may actually be propaganda,” she continued. “So it's good for us all to sit and look at the same set of facts together and then discuss it.”
Purchase has hosted events discussing the nature of the Israeli-Palestine conflict before. On Oct. 1, Daniel Chalfen visited campus to show his film about the same conflict, “Israelism.”
“My understanding is that this has been a contentious issue on campus to some extent,” Schull said. “Let’s get some facts out here and talk about the situation in a way that is not belittling, demeaning, or dehumanizing to others.”
The Fostering (Dis)Agreement group held another event on Sept. 25, which was a discussion among faculty and students regarding the topic. Aviva Taubenfeld, the director of Humanities department and an associate professor of literature and writing, spoke more about the first event, and how it led up to Schull’s lecture.
“The goal was to show how we could really disagree with each other, come from different places, and talk personally about our feelings about the crisis,” she said. “That was meant to be the opening shot, and to create a space for people to come together. It was imperfect as these things always will be, but I do think it had a result because we had people of very different perspectives here at this event.”
Taubenfeld gave praise to the way Schull discussed the conflict, saying, “Honestly, I find him quite incredible for his ability to try and present this very difficult topic with real balance, real passion and real empathy. I hope it will carry through to everybody who was here.”
Schull with his final thought displayed in the background. (Photo by Brandon Cruz)
A student and member of Raise the Consciousness (RTC), a student-run political activism group on campus, spoke positively about the overall message of the event, calling it “engaging, and a good starting point for people unfamiliar with the history.” However, they took exception with some parts of Schull’s presentation.
“I took issue with the way he framed certain things,” the RTC member said. “He didn’t challenge the legitimacy of colonialism the way he challenged other Western truisms around Israel-Palestine, and I thought he skirted around the issue of Israel being a settler colony in general.”
During the event, a student spoke out about their displeasure with the way Schull discussed certain topics, which caused frustration for some of the audience members. One of those audience members voiced their displeasure with the way the student talked about Schull. Horowitz talked more about the tension that took place.
“I think it's inevitable,” Horowitz said. “You know, people have died over this issue, and it's obviously an existential issue for a lot of people, and so there's no way to avoid the intensity of people's feelings.”
“I do expect pushback,” Schull said. “My philosophy is that we can be very uncomfortable by having our assumptions challenged about how the world works, but we can still be safe while we’re uncomfortable.”
“There's no opportunity for any of this to get any better if we let our feelings overwhelm us, and sometimes we can't help it,” Horowitz said. “I think that the more we see ourselves as one community with one goal, to stop the slaughters of everyone, then that's our way towards building a community and a campus where we can have these kinds of discussions.”
Comments