In case you’re unfamiliar with the story, Pulitzer Prize winning American playwright Tony Kushner was set to receive an honorary degree from the John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York City.  Until the degree was abruptly blocked by the City University of New York Board of Trustees during a May 2 meeting, after one trustee accused Kushner of being anti-semetic due to his past criticism of Israeli government policies.

Luckily, many past recipients stood in solidarity with Kushner by saying they would return their degrees if his was not reinstated. This symbolizes a breakthrough given that just a few years ago Norman Finklestien was denied tenure as a result of slanderous attacks based on his criticism of Israeli government policies.  The disingenuous antisemite label has been utilized to ruin a number of careers, but Kushner’s situation proves that the tides are changing.

As Amy Goodman lays out, “A campaign grew almost immediately, first calling on previous recipients of honorary degrees from CUNY colleges (of which John Jay College is one) to return them. Within days, what would have been a quickly forgotten bestowal of an honorary degree erupted into an international scandal. The chair of the board, Benno Schmidt, former president of Yale University, convened an emergency executive session of the board, which voted unanimously to restore the honor to Kushner.”

For a more in depth analysis of the story, check out this exclusive interview with Tony Kushner on Democracy Now!  However, what I would like to focus on is various statements that Jeffrey Wiesenfeld, the trustee who initially blocked the award, made to the New York Times when questioned about the incident:

I tried to ask a question about the damage done by a short, one-sided discussion of vigorously debated aspects of Middle East politics, like the survival of Israel and the rights of the Palestinians, and which side was more callous toward human life, and who was most protective of it.

But Mr. Wiesenfeld interrupted and said the question was offensive because “the comparison sets up a moral equivalence.”

Equivalence between what and what? “Between the Palestinians and Israelis,” he said. “People who worship death for their children are not human.”

Did he mean the Palestinians were not human? “They have developed a culture which is unprecedented in human history,” he said.

If Wiesenfeld wants to toss around the accusation of false moral equivalencies, he is entitled to do so, although I would strongly disagree.  I have regularly made the argument that the media promotes a false equivalency between the right and left when they suggest that both sides of the political spectrum are equally crazy, which couldn’t be further from the truth.  My point here is that, while I criticize the scoundrels on the far-right, I would never suggest that they are not human.  That is a very dangerous mentality.

In my opinion, the most troublesome aspect to these comments is the lack of outcry and condemnation of Wiesenfeld’s views.  I realize that dehumanizing arabs has been a common theme in regards to US foreign policy, but Wiesenfeld’s statements are another disturbing reminder that in America, it’s perfectly acceptable to view Palestinians as less than human.