In U.C.L.A. Debate Over Jewish Student, Echoes on Campus of Old Biases

[7962]

Source: New York Times

LOS ANGELES — It seemed like routine business for the student council at the University of California, Los Angeles: confirming the nomination of Rachel Beyda, a second-year economics major who wants to be a lawyer someday, to the council’s Judicial Board.

Until it came time for questions.

“Given that you are a Jewish student and very active in the Jewish community,” Fabienne Roth, a member of the Undergraduate Students Association Council, began, looking at Ms. Beyda at the other end of the room, “how do you see yourself being able to maintain an unbiased view?”

For the next 40 minutes, after Ms. Beyda was dispatched from the room, the council tangled in a debate about whether her faith and affiliation with Jewish organizations, including her sorority and Hillel, a popular student group, meant she would be biased in dealing with sensitive governance questions that come before the board, which is the campus equivalent of the Supreme Court.

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/06/us/debate-on-a-jewish-student-at-ucla.html

---

Absolutely disgusting behavior. Can you imagine if the same questions were asked of a black student? A Hispanic one?
ETA: Faculty leader says this is a "teaching moment"? Good lord.

[Fred Sanders]

1. She was unanimously elected to the board shortly afterwards...so...another tempest in a teapot.

"The council, in a meeting that took place on Feb. 10, voted first to reject Ms. Beyda’s nomination, with four members against her. Then, at the prodding of a faculty adviser there who pointed out that belonging to Jewish organizations was not a conflict of interest, the students revisited the question and unanimously put her on the board."

It gets reported in the N.Y.T......a month later.....with a hair on fire headline...

Can you imagine what Muslim students must be going through as the media fearmongers over Islam?

And, good Lord, it was a teaching moment, 4 students learned something, the ones that changed their votes.....

P.S. "Black" and "Hispanic" are not religions. Good Lord.

[7962]

3. The fact she was questioned AT ALL is silly. So since they changed their mind, nothing to see here?

Nothing different than a politician giving an apology after making an insulting statement. We hold THEM to the fire too.

[still_one]

18. The fact that her religion was brought into the questioning is what is disturbing?

[onenote]

6. care to explain the distinction you see

in discrimination based on religion versus discrimination based on race or ethnicity?

[cali]

8. she was ONLY elected because the faculty advisor told the little cadre of bigots that

what they were doing was patently illegal and bigoted dog shit. duh.

[cali]

9. how interesting that you launch into how awful it is for Muslim students and belittle this bigotry.

[Blue_Tires]

33. She shouldn't have been asked at all

And had she been rejected after that line of questioning, it would have been a damn sight worse -- Lawsuit, PR shitstorm, and probably some administrators being asked to step down...

I don't know what "sensitive governance issues" a freaking student council court would discuss, but if this is how they go about business, maybe it needs to be dissolved and rebuilt from the ground up...

[King_David]

78. What's the point in minimizing sntisemitic incidents?

And FYI being Jewish is an ethnicity as well as having a religious aspect.
A large number of Jews are atheists.

[NaturalHigh]

84. There is no justification, ever, for anti-Semitism.

The fact that you blow this anti-Semitic questioning and then express concern for Muslim students says a lot about your way of thinking.

[Fred Sanders]

89. Of course not. Any form of racism. Whatever term one prefers for the same thing. Your judgment is free to have of me.

[leftynyc]

2. A friend sent me this article

Could you imagine the howls of anger if this had been a Muslim student? This was out and out antisemitism - the word Israel was never even mentioned, just that she was active in Jewish affairs and that somehow made her unworthy of this post. It was a disgusting display and frankly their apologies didn't go far enough. Whoever asked this question:

“Given that you are a Jewish student and very active in the Jewish community,” Fabienne Roth, a member of the Undergraduate Students Association Council, began, looking at Ms. Beyda at the other end of the room, “how do you see yourself being able to maintain an unbiased view?”

should resign immediately.

[elehhhhna]

76. lol an unbiased view...like theirs?

[Behind the Aegis]

82. Ain't it interesting how more than a few go out of their way to "excuse" this behavior?

False comparisons, claims of overreaction, denying it is actually anti-Semitism, all seem to be on the menu. But, it is clear, for some, anti-Semitism is sometimes OK because....well, we know why.

[NaturalHigh]

83. We see it far too often.

I don't care how they try to justify it, it's blatant, ugly anti-Semitism.

[Nye Bevan]

4. Disgusting (nt)

[Paladin]

5. I'll keep this incident in mind.....

....the next time some smug West Coast DU'er lectures me on what a backward, prejudiced place my home state of Texas is.

[7962]

45. Ha!

[NaturalHigh]

85. Same here from the Sooner State.

[DesertDiamond]

7. Isn't Roth a Jewish name too? I think questions of bias are normal in courtroom situations.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

11. "A Jewish name."

[alp227]

24. Somewhat.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roth_%28surname%29

Note: Roth is not a Hebrew surname. Its origins are in the Northern Hemisphere, and it is a common name in Scotland and other English speaking countries as well as in German speaking countries. For historical reasons, the Jewish people merely adopted various established names, many of which were common amongst non-Jewish people in their respective countries.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

25. Yeah, I kind of get that, but my remark was also to its relevance.

[leftynyc]

13. A Jewish name?

Are you sure you're in the right place? Would you be as blase about it if it were a Muslim student who was being questioned about whether their biases would exclude them from being fair?

[mwrguy]

14. She's from Switzerland

http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2015/mar/02/budget-standoff-leaves-uc-applications-in-limbo/

[wordpix]

22. this is a student council, not a courtroom! Besides,

in a courtroom, when jurors are questioned about their biases, the q's are oriented toward the crime at hand, such as the impact on jurors of reading articles, viewing reports on TV or internet, etc. I don't think the q's are about a person's religious views.

[treestar]

10. What an awful question

Do they ask that of anyone else, due to religion or any thing?

[leftynyc]

12. I'm also very sorry

that the very first comment on this was to complain about something else and downplay this very real problem at this school. Seems to be a pattern with some people but I'm going to say how very sorry I am it happened on your thread.

[7962]

47. Thank you, lefty!

[NaturalHigh]

86. It's disgusting but tragically common.

[romanic]

15. This is becoming an alarming trend

on college campuses. After the Israel/Palestine conflict and the failure of these "passionate" student activist to separate Jewish people from Israel's politics, the hatred towards Jewish students has definitely become common and in some cases accepted. I don't know if it's the radical Pro-Palestine activists who fueled it or all this talk about Jews and their privilege (cause every Jew is a privilege rich white person who controls the banks, don't ya know? ) or maybe something even deeper; but it's there and it's being taught in academia.

[leftynyc]

16. Far too many

people are unable to separate the actions of Israel from all Jews. This is just more proof of that. That it is happening on college campuses just makes it all the more disgusting. This whole story (and anybody who tries to downplay it by bringing in grievances of other groups) makes me nauseous.

[csziggy]

17. Some members have issued a non-apology

I say "some" since I am not sure how many are on the board.

Submission: USAC members apologize to Jewish community
By Sofia Moreno Haq, Negeen Sadeghi-Movahed, Manjot Singh and Fabienne Roth
Posted: February 20, 2015
3:22 am

As individuals committed to social activism and advocating on behalf of underrepresented communities, we understand the importance and urgency of wearing our identities as a badge of honor. Integral to this is respecting and celebrating identities other than our own, and for this reason it is vital to hold ourselves accountable when we fail to respect this necessity.

Thus we ask the Jewish community to accept our sincerest apology for remarks made during the Feb. 10 Undergraduate Students Association Council meeting concerning the potential Judicial Board appointee. Our intentions were never to attack, insult or delegitimize the identity of an individual or people. It is our responsibility as elected officials to maintain a position of fairness, exercise justness, and represent the Bruin community to the best of our abilities, and we are truly sorry for any words used during this meeting that suggested otherwise.

As students of this university, we are in a unique position to learn from individuals from all backgrounds and identities; this education is a necessary and significant part of the True Bruin experience. Moreover, we look forward to engaging in cross-cultural exchange with the Jewish community and learning more about what we can do to better support the community.

With solidarity and respect,

General Representative 1 Manjot Singh, General Representative 2 Sofia Moreno Haq, General Representative 3 Fabienne Roth and Transfer Student Representative Negeen Sadeghi-Movahed

http://dailybruin.com/2015/02/20/submission-usac-members-apologize-to-jewish-community/

Non-apology: "we are truly sorry for any words used" NOT for the underlying prejudice they displayed!

[Fred Sanders]

19. It is an excellent apology, read in entirety, by the entire student board - compare with Ben Carson.

[leftynyc]

20. It's a bullshit apology

that in no way apologizes for that vile question being asked in the first place - just for the words used. Whoever asked it should resign immediately.

[freshwest]

27. The one asking “how do you see yourself being able to maintain an unbiased view?” needs a MIRROR!

The whole caboodle should be called out as bigots for bringing it up. They said her religion meant she could not act fairly. Were theirs brought up when they got their positions?

And they did NOT learn anything. Such carefully honed 'ignorance' is not an error among those smart enough to attend that college. Were they under the influence of their own religion when they asked that?

Or did they just refuse to learn basic civics in the United States? Such as the First Amendment? Do they dispute Freedom of Association, as well? Who do they associate with?

Their NON-apology was shallow, insincere, and adds to discrimination.

[leftynyc]

28. That there are those

who think it's an acceptable apology is pretty fucking nauseating and I'm sure if this was done to a different group they would be screaming at the top of their hypocritical lungs. That was no apology.

[freshwest]

29. And now that she's been 'accepted' she's likely to 'keep her place' to suit them.

The the most disturbing thing is that she's going to a second-class member of this group. She had to pass a 'religious test.'

That's not supposed to be in American law. They're not in the legislature now.

But in the future these deciders will make law by voting or whatever other influence they garner, to reflect their prejudices.

[leftynyc]

30. Oh - I don't know about that

Once the story hit the Sunday NY Times, it has brought this out into the open. They will be watched closely. And not because there MIGHT be a problem. They'll be watched because obviously there IS a problem.

[freshwest]

35. I hope that does change the behavior on the campus. We need to get back to some sense of neutrality.

[Doctor_J]

64. why would the entire student association apologize for one girl asking a question?

The questioner exercised her right to make a dumb statement, discussion ensued, candidate was named to the association. What should have happened?

[cali]

65. It was NOT one girl asking a question, it was several members

and it wasn't on dumb question, it was a line of questioning and comments. The candidate was originally rejected by these little dimwit bigots and only elected after intervention from the faculty adviser. There's video/audio and a transcript. and the bigotry should never have happened.

[onenote]

26. Giving an apology that was half as bad as Carson's would still be a bad apology

While there are some positive elements to the apology, they are mostly undercut by this line: "Our intentions were never to attack, insult or delegitimize the identity of an individual or people."

Okay, then what were the intentions of those posing the questions and raising the issue of her religion/religious activities?

[Jefferson23]

34. Their intentions seem pretty clear, to control the deck of the group's opinion and the price

was to cross examine her Jewishness...outrageous behavior. No sense of fairness and
equity at all toward the young woman.

[romanic]

21. It truly is a non-apology

Just big words mixed in PR gobbledygook. A simple "Were sorry for roleplaying Nazi interrogators when questioning Beyda" or something along that line would have been a MUCH better aplogy imo.

[Fred Sanders]

46. Yes, what is what it is...way too many big words....?? Nazi interrogators.....yeah..same thing....

[7962]

49. Here's another non-apology; regretting how the question was "phrased".

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/ucla-jewish-student-board-question

Such bullshit

[Fred Sanders]

51. Muslim KILLED in public shooting in Dallas...comments...comparisons of the harm done?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=1031800

[7962]

55. And this has what to do with THIS story? Nothing.

But you want comments? Read the article. "According to ABC affiliate WFAA, witnesses told police that a group of men randomly started firing a gun and some nearby cars were also hit."
So apparently him being a Muslim had nothing to do with the crime, which means nothing to you. But whoever shot him should get the needle.

[Fred Sanders]

56. I guess police and other folks should just read Internet comment board investigative reports and close the books...

Texas...again...

[cali]

66. man, you really can't help yourself

first of all that has nothing whatsofuckingever to do with this. secondly, it has NOT been established that he was shot because he was an Iraqi or Muslim. but keep stepping in it , fred. Your comments in this thread are.... interesting.

[Fred Sanders]

68. Of course, using vulgar, gratuitous language always makes for a better argument, we can agree on that?

[cali]

72. So you think the rude pundit's arguments are diminished by his language? then we

disagree. I fucking love fucking fucking curse words. So I use them. And yeah, I can write, and write well. It's just preference. I do hope you keep smelling salts at hand.

[Fred Sanders]

74. You can write without cursing, AND writing well, but you prefer not to? Good to know....

Who is the Rude Pundit?

[NaturalHigh]

87. Can you explain what that has to do with this thread?

It seems to me it's just more justification to try and blow off the insulting anti-Semitic questioning mentioned in the OP.

[BillZBubb]

40. Generalizing much?

Your comment is baloney.

[Jefferson23]

31. Their adviser tells them the law, and they ignore it? Sounds as if they did not care, and they

open themselves to a civil suit where the young woman would deserve a hefty amount
for the treatment she endured. The fact is they may have a bias as well, so what is
it they wanted, someone Jewish would have been fine as long as they agreed with the
group? They're looking at her Hillel affiliation which she has every right to belong to.
Ack..that is a bigoted position and the students should be ashamed at what they
did to her.

[Fred Sanders]

36. Beyda seems to be satisfied with the apology and the result, shouldn't she be the judge?

Last edited Fri Mar 6, 2015, 06:07 PM - Edit history (2)

[Jefferson23]

37. Of course that is up to her, and I believe it is fair to suggest they have placed her

in an awkward position. I myself find the apology lacking, could be she does not, but if she
does find it disingenuous, is she going to feel comfortable to say so? I doubt it.

Their actions were beyond repugnant and they should realize that what they were ultimately
trying to achieve is as undemocratic as one could get. Discrimination is an ugly thing, does
not matter what reasons you feed yourself in order to reach said goal and that is worrisome
in this scenario..we're talking UCLA.

[Fred Sanders]

53. I totally agree the original vote was ridiculous...but it was fixed completely, apology made...sometimes

there is justice to balance the injustice and when it happens it should not also be panned.

[Jefferson23]

57. Those students need to self examine themselves much further, Fred. I question if they

are up to the task to do it alone..I hope this will be a turning point for them, for the better.

[Fred Sanders]

58. They do seem to have a good mentor overseeing the Board. Righting wrongs is a good thing.

[Jefferson23]

59. Yep, I hope they do. n/t

[cali]

38. Roth is one of bigots who apologized, fred

and the victim of this disgusting display, Ms. Beyda, was quite upset about the ugly bigotry directed at her- the bigotry that YOU seem to think is no big deal at all.

[Fred Sanders]

42. No problem, edit made. It is up to the victim to decide what is just for them? No? Lay your strawmen to rest.

[cali]

67. you clearly are clueless as to what a strawman is, fred.

and you're posts in this thread are very.... interesting.

[Fred Sanders]

69. "Clueless"? - now that there is an interesting choice of words...

[onenote]

39. So you think that if the person who offends is satisfied with the apology they give then it's okay?

You couldn't mean that. So I guess you just got confused assuming that someone named "Roth" must be the Jewish person who was the target of this anti-Semitic crap.

I'm also guessing you don't know squat about what you are posting, but just post based on your rather obvious biases.

[Fred Sanders]

43. Obvious biases are apparent all over. As are fertile fields of strawmen.

[onenote]

48. poor attempt to deflect, especially since you still haven't gotten her name right

It's possible to explain one's edits on DU. I'm curious how anyone who is familiar with this situation could confuse Roth with Beyda.

By the way, you still haven't come close to getting her name spelled correctly.

[Fred Sanders]

50. What is in a name? - Makes no difference to my point.....she is apparently satisfied..why are some who

have nothing to do with it and are unfamiliar with the intimate details - not?

[onenote]

77. Oh, it makes a difference. You just can't or won't acknowledge it.

Your defense of the offenders, while not even being able to get the offended party's name right, speaks volumes.
And now the name of the offended party, used multiple times in every story about this incident, is "an intimate detail"?

Your slip continues to show.

[azmom]

32. I would have expected better from UCLA

[Mosby]

41. Earlier article in the campus paper

-snip-

All council members swiftly agreed Rachel was amply qualified for the position, but half of the council had strong reservations stemming from Rachel’s Jewish identity. “My issue is, I’m going to be upfront about it, I think she’s pretty great. She’s smart, she like knows her stuff, she’s like probably going to be a really great lawyer. But I’m like not going to pretend this isn’t about conflict of interest. … It’s not her fault … but she’s part of a community that’s very invested in USAC. … Even if she’s the right person for the job,” claimed Roth. Sadeghi-Movahed added, “For some reason, I’m not 100 percent comfortable. I don’t know why. I’ll go through her application again. I’ve been going through it constantly, but I definitely can see that she’s qualified for sure.” Throughout this discussion, Rachel anxiously paced outside, where, she later informed me, she could hear “conflict of interest” being yelled and concluded that it could only be about her being Jewish. Undoubtedly, the Israeli-Palestinan conflict is one of the most contentious issues on our campus. However, Israel was not mentioned during the discussion of Rachel’s appointment, only her affiliation with Jewish organizations, making the extensive deliberation a definitive act of discrimination.

The initial telling vote of 4-4-1 was dismissed when Cultural Affairs Commissioner Irmary Garcia said she was “not ready” for the vote. A faculty member in attendance eventually stepped in to point out the problems with the council’s reasons for denying Rachel the position. And in the end, the council unanimously approved her appointment.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/12231597

[Fred Sanders]

44. Not good enough for the Black hat/White Hat folks...that the students revoted and humbly apologized should be applauded.

[7962]

52. Yes, apologized after they were told they'd BETTER apologize!

[Fred Sanders]

54. I condemn the original action - and commend the Justice done. I do not like wearing hats.

Student council and UCLA have learned a valuable lesson in the end, more good has been done than harm.

[7962]

62. Agreed

[sadoldgirl]

60. I realize this happened at an academic

institution, but I don't think that this is uncommon
at all, and not just for jewish people.

I remember several attacks on Romney about the
fact that he was a mormon.

Kennedy had to fight against this intolerance as well.

It is sad, yes, but unfortunately a fact in our country.

[7962]

61. +1

[Fred Sanders]

63. It is a fact...bigotry and racism is a wide spectrum disease...and being such an evil fact means it has to be fought.

Folks who do not even accept the fact of widespread and rampant racism and bigotry are the root of the evil.

[cali]

70. I love unintentional irony. n/t

[Fred Sanders]

71. Isn't that special...I love how my posts draw certain...attention. I hope folks take note.

PS: I tend not to explain anything to demanding folks who clearly want no explaining at all....not much fun.

[cali]

73. oh, I think folks have taken notice, fred. But not necessarily in the way YOU wish.

[Fred Sanders]

75. What I know is you are on Full Ignore...28.

[7962]

90. Hey Cali, looks like I'm #29!

having such a high number on ignore says more about the ignorer than the ignored, I believe.
I made the mistake of not accepting his "teaching" on why iran can be fully trusted

[NaturalHigh]

88. A self-reflective person might stop to consider...

why his posts draw said attention.

[candelista]

79. What if this were about a Catholic instead of a Jew?

What if UCLA student government were interested in divestiture of UCLA endowment funds from the Vatican Bank? And suppose a Catholic candidate for an appointive office were up for consideration. Not just any Catholic candidate, but one who was very active in the Newman Club (a Catholic campus organization) and in other Catholic organizations, including a Catholic fraternity. Would it still be inappropriate to inquire into the candidate's ability to be objective on issues affecting the Catholic Church?

[ripcord]

80. Very sad but the group that opposed her was interesting

Three of her four detractors were themselves minority representatives. One was President of the Sikh Student Association. Another was an Iranian transfer student. A third was Pakistani.

Can you imagine the uproar if those exact questions were asked of them substituting their own ethnic/religious background?

[candelista]

81. Interesting in another way, too.

One of her detractors was a Sikh. Sikhism is a combination of Hinduism and Islam. Both the Iranian and the Pakistani are likely to be Moslems. Moslems are, in general, not friendly towards Israel. The main issue in the background here is UC divestiture from Israel, which the Regents have been asked to consider. Perhaps the Moslem students were concerned that the candidate would be pro-Israel and anti-divestiture because she is Jewish.