You’re being very generous in thinking that Miller doesn’t detest his Jewish ancestors and relatives.

(And re spamming the faculty listserv, my first academic job saw a colleague who sent weekly email blasts regaling us with the latest machinations of the Zionist/Rockefeller/fascist/neocon conspiracy of global domination. It was annoying, but also a good lesson that one can survive such things).

But I did think it was important to note that this isn’t someone who thought “maybe a UN peacekeeping force would be a good idea” and got caught in a frenzy. He demands a global war of against Israel with the aim of its total annihilation. It’s not good stuff!

Yeah—it’s speech, and I don’t think it can be characterized as targeted harassment that might violate the law. This is not the first time a prof has uttered extreme views, and in general we know that it’s still protected speech even if many might view it as abhorrent.

Yes, he should be protected by academic freedom even if “demand[ing] that every country in the world make war on Israel immediately & until such time as Israel has submitted permanently and unconditionally to the govt of Palestine everywhere from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea” is … whoa.

To be honest, I really don’t get the logic of this gender policing at all.

“I’m a strong man; I can’t have a fruity drink”? Your masculinity can be overthrown by a cocktail? That’s weak! That’s incredibly weak and insecure! How do people not see that?

(This is the closest blog post I found of mine on this, though I only searched so far).

These are, of course, very different projects!

In either case though, there would be awkwardness in such principles emanating from Jewish, as opposed to Palestinian, sources and organizations (just as IHRA/JDA/Nexus came out of Jewish orgs).

“JDA-style” means primarily identifying “criticisms of Palestine/Palestinian actors” that are *not* Islamophobic/colonialist/etc., but are (wrongly) asserted to be so. It is a list of exonerations, meant to narrow what can be dismissed as bigoted and broaden the range of permissible “critique”.

“IHRA-style” means primarily identifying ways in which “criticism of Palestine” (or Palestinian actors) maybe Islamophobic/colonialist/etc. It is a list of things to avoid, or at least ones which raise yellow flags, meant to broaden what’s seen as unacceptable and narrow permissible “critique”.

I thought I had written a blog post on this, though I can’t find it right now (or maybe it was internal conversations we had at Nexus). One thing your query gets at would be whether such a project would be “IHRA-style” or “JDA-style”.

What do I mean by that?

Tie Fighter Collector’s Edition would like a word.

We called it “Make Audrey Great Again.”

No joke, one of my friends was inspired to apply for an exciting job despite initially feeling she was underqualified because “Donald Trump didn’t let being manifestly unqualified stop him from pursuing his dreams!”

She got the job too!

I’m going to split the difference and say that while there cannot be a per se bar, there should be a significantly higher threshold than normal for protesting at synagogues compared to other targets, so not all activities which might abstractly justify a protest will justify protesting a synagogue.

Albert Memmi was great and prescient on this in “The Liberation of the Jew”.

dsadevil.blogspot.com/2018/07/albe...

Here it would be far more than rhetorical: Trump is targeting Jews who leveled antisemitism complaints! I’m literally writing an article right now about how these actions are going to chill Jews who want to speak out on antisemitism (but don’t want to be pawns of MAGA repression).