A Tale of Two Reports

By Abe Greenwald

Wednesday, April 30, 2025

 

Here are the first two sentences of the New York Times’ write-up on two newly released Harvard task-force reports on “bias” in education and life at the university. See if you can spot the crucial difference in focus between the two:

 

Sentence 1: “A Harvard task force released a scathing account of the university on Tuesday, finding that antisemitism had infiltrated coursework, social life, the hiring of some faculty members and the worldview of certain academic programs.”

 

Sentence 2: “A separate report on anti-Arab, anti-Muslim and anti-Palestinian bias on campus, also released on Tuesday, found widespread discomfort and alienation among those students as well, with 92 percent of Muslim survey respondents saying they believed they would face an academic or professional penalty for expressing their political opinions.”

 

It’s not hard to see the game that’s being played here. The report on anti-Semitism documents the actions of anti-Semites on campus. The report on “anti-Arab, anti-Muslim and anti-Palestinian bias” surveys Muslim students’ self-reported feelings. It’s not about “bias” at all.

 

Jew-hatred is demonstrably rampant at Harvard, and 92 percent of the school’s Muslim students feel oppressed. Thanks for the update.

 

The anti-Semitism report documents anti-Semitism on campus because it’s a real phenomenon; the Islamophobia report documents perceived victimhood because Islamophobia is not.

 

The term “Islamophobia” came into popular use after the attacks of 9/11, because the first thing liberals worried about after a devastating terrorist attack on the U.S. was American bigotry. When that bigotry failed to appear, the term was repurposed. “Islamophobia” is now summoned to apologize for those rare moments when liberals are forced to acknowledge anti-Semitism—for example, when violent, pro-jihadist Jew-hatred has overtaken one’s own institution and the president of the United States demands accountability. That’s when liberals are compelled to acknowledge Muslims’ feelings of alienation.

 

Holocaust education has a lot to answer for, but at least there aren’t any “Holocaust and Germanophobia” centers.

 

According to the “Islamophobia” report, some students said they were called “terrorist” and “towelhead” for wearing kaffiyehs. For one thing, as the Times notes, “The authors [of the report] did not seek to verify the experiences described by the people who were surveyed.” For another, the purpose of donning a kaffiyeh is to advertise your support of anti-Semitic terrorism. If you walk around in a white hood protesting integration, try not to take it too hard if someone calls you a Klansman.

 

The anti-Semitism report states that “demonization of Israel has impacted a much wider swath of campus life than we would have imagined” and “bullying and attempts to intimidate Jewish students were in some places successful.” It describes an “avalanche” of anti-Semitic posts by people on campus, anti-Israel curricula, training sessions in which Jews were lectured about their “privilege,” and much more. Meanwhile, in contrast to the 92 percent of Muslim students who felt silenced, only 61 percent of Jewish students said they worried about expressing their views on campus.

 

That difference tells a story that reaches far beyond the Ivy League. It goes straight to the roots of Arab anti-Semitism and the failed 75-plus-years effort to destroy Israel. Victimhood breeds losers. Adversity forges heroes. The difference between the two is just as clear on the Harvard campus.