It’s possible for individuals and parties to deserve both credit and blame at the same time
W
e all believe in balanced, even-handed analysis of issues, giving praise and blame where each is due, don’t we? Here, then, is a balanced way to approach a recent news story, with ramifications, too, for how to respond to the recent resurgence of anti-Semitism.
The president of the United States recently issued an executive order (EO) regarding campus anti-Semitism. The EO formally adopted the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of anti-Semitism and applied the Title VI federal anti-discrimination laws to universities that tolerate anti-Semitic activities on their campuses.
A balanced analysis of this story would do the following:
It would credit the president for issuing an EO designed to protect Jewish students from those who hate them. It would also credit the George W. Bush administration, whose Assistant Secretary of Education for Civil Rights, Kenneth L. Marcus, in 2004, set forth the very same policy stated in the EO. (Marcus currently holds the same position under the Trump administration.) And it would also credit the Obama administration, whose Assistant Attorney General, Thomas E. Perez — now the chair of the Democratic National Committee — reaffirmed in 2010 that same position.
Create a free account to keep reading.
