Comment by endtime | Hacker News Reader

Comment by endtime | Hacker News Reader

I hope what this policy amounts to is declining visas to students who support proscribed terrorist organizations like Hamas and Hizballah, broadcast blood libels, harass Jewish students on campus, etc. I had a foreign (Pakistani) student tell me, to my face, "I don't like you because you're a Jew." -- in front of a group of mutual friends, who awkwardly laughed it off as if he must have been joking. It's _not_ about mere criticism of Israeli policy or war doctrine, and pretending it is seems to be a new popular misperception on both the far left and the far right.

This was a very real thing when I was an undergrad, and it's surely much worse today. I have family with long histories of attending Ivy League schools, and their seniors are no longer applying to those schools, entirely over antisemitism.

If American universities were 1/3 populated by, say, Russian students with a high propensity for harassing gay students, implying that all gay people are predators, etc., I think the left-leaning commenters here would take a very different perspective.

A massive problem in the current climate is that the middle-ground has been eroded. There are only two states: pro- or anti-Israel.

For example, if you show solidarity for killed children in Gaza, that also means that you're by proxy pro-Hamas, because Palestine = Hamas. Thus you can not be pro-Israel, and must be anti-Israel.

Likewise we've come to the point where you can say: "I feel for the Israeli people after the October 7 attacks, but I don't like the Israeli government". You automatically get classified as something other than pro-Israel, and, thus anti-Israel.

The middle ground has eroded. And with the Trump administration being what it is, I have zero faith that they'll see it any other way.

> There are only two states: pro- or anti-Israel

Not really. I take the third option: I don't know enough about the situation to reach almost any policy recommendation with high confidence. Not engaging is always an option, particularly when you're dealing solely with rhetoric and not any fundamental action. (Obviously, if you're greenlighting weapons purchases your duty of care is higher.)

You don't need to recommend any policy. Simply saying "I don't support genocide" will illicit a negative response from the pro Israel side of things and puts you in the "against" category.

> Simply saying "I don't support genocide" will illicit a negative response from the pro Israel side of things and puts you in the "against" category

Sure. But declining to use the term "genocide" similarly illicits a negative response from a lot of the pro Palestinian side.

Single-issue advocates will tend to dislike you if you don't take their position on an issue. That doesn't mean anyone has to. (My pet war was Ukraine. I, similarly, took a dim view of anyone who described Russia's invasion as a defensive war. And I'd similarly argue with folks who thought what happens in Ukraine has nothing to do with America's security, though I hope I was more respectful than the status quo with Gaza.)

> Single-issue advocates will tend to dislike you if you don't take their position on an issue. That doesn't mean anyone has to

These are the people who will determine whether or not you get a visa over a statement both you and I see as benign. Anything other than explicit endorsement is seen as adversarial.

> These are the people who will determine whether or not you get a visa over a statement both you and I see as benign

We don't know that yet, the guidance hasn't been issued. (And we haven't seen how it's being interpreted by consular staff.)

Assuming anything but the obvious is carrying water for fascists and which is how we've gotten into this situation. Is there any reason to assume that aren't going to do the exactly that?

> Is there any reason to assume that aren't going to do the exactly that?

Yes. They're publish something and then a picosecond later a district court will issue a nationwide injunction.

Trump's admin is ignoring court orders and are about to pass a bill that will make it illegal to hold them in contempt of court. I don't see why an injunction will matter.

> what this policy amounts to is declining visas to students who support proscribed terrorist organizations like Hamas and Hizballah, broadcast blood libels, harass Jewish students, on campus, etc.

I dressed up as Ghadaffi in college for a party. Not because I knew almost anything about the man. But because it was edgy and adolescent brains are dumb, particularly when male. Plenty of students who will go on to be good and productive members of society hold stupid views now, possibly most given the state of scial media.

This move, in particular, comes across as in particularly bad faith inasmuch as it's being done by the man who pardoned the January 6th nutters. Actual violent criminals subscribing to terrorist tactics.

Weird you mention a brown person, and not the various white nationalist ZOG types who actually go and shoot up synagogues. Also how did you even know he was Pakistani or a student?

I'm talking about my actual experience, and I know he was Pakistani because we had mutual friends. He dated one of them. I know exactly who he was. What a bizarre comment.

I didn't have any similar experience with any white international students.

That was what, 10+ years ago? There have been multiple terrorist attacks on synagogues by white men since then, and somehow this is still what you posted about antisemitism.

Do you think we should strip citizenship from and remove white men who are antisemites?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com