Reading a recent op-ed about Oberlin College by Frieda Fuchs, titled “Zionism isn’t welcome at Oberlin College,” there were some things that I recognized. As chair of Oberlin’s Jewish studies program, as well as faculty director of the Jewish Language and Culture House, and adviser for the Chabad student group, I see every day how Jewish students “find vibrant communal [and] cultural life at Oberlin.”
For Fuchs, however, it is all made hollow by the lack of robust Zionist activism on campus. In her view, when Jewish students discuss their identities “without any reference to Israel,” it must be evidence of purposeful “exclusion,” engendered by a culture of antisemitism. Likewise, she seems to believe that any discussion of the Holocaust without reference to the much later horrors of Oct. 7 is incomplete. According to these exacting standards, she finds Oberlin lacking.
It is true that many Oberlin students, including Jewish students, are critical of Israel. As Fuchs notes, in November 2023, “165 Jewish students signed a public letter in the student newspaper denouncing Israel” for its military actions in Gaza. It was student groups who invited political cartoonist Eli Valley and political scientist and activist Norman Finkelstein to speak at Oberlin (although that was in the fall of 2019, ancient history for our current students).
The anti-Zionist Jewish students I know see their activism as an expression of deep-seated Jewish commitments and values. They may not have the Jewish identities that Fuchs wants them to have, but that doesn’t mean that they are insincere or inauthentic.
I agree with Fuchs that “Zionist students fear social ostracism” from their peers. This is a problem, but it is not necessarily a sign of widespread antisemitism or some deep malignancy within Oberlin College specifically.
Surveys have shown that younger people, including Jews, are more likely to be critical of Israel than older generations. Because of Oberlin’s progressive reputation, the student body is self-selecting; many are still finding their way politically, but Zionist students are undeniably in the minority. Plus, today’s college students have grown up immersed in a toxic social-media environment, and are learning how to express themselves and respectfully engage with difference. When students cross a line and violate the student conduct policy, the college should and does reprimand them.
Fuchs is never clear about who is allegedly suppressing Zionist expression at Oberlin. For instance, I never heard about “efforts” to bring speaker and social-media influencer Hen Mazzig to campus, but I would be curious to know who initiated and who stymied them. What campus funding channels did the proposal go through, and what explanation was given for its rejection?
In addition to her other complaints, including those about a teach-in that she did not attend, Fuchs argues that Jewish studies courses “either frame Israel primarily through a critical lens or avoid the subject altogether.” I find this claim particularly outrageous. Fuchs has no idea what I and the rest of the exemplary Jewish studies faculty at Oberlin teach or how.
In my courses, we approach all subjects with a “critical lens.” This does not mean that we criticize, but that we ask questions and offer context. I explain that our task is to be “descriptive” rather than “normative.” We seek to understand the people we are studying, not to judge or endorse any one perspective. My classroom is not a debate club, but a laboratory for encountering difference.
This also applies to Zionism and Israel. I regularly teach courses that explore the relationship between Jews and the land of Israel from ancient times to the present. Students in “Jewish Pilgrimage” write a paper arguing why Birthright Israel is, or is not, a Jewish pilgrimage, continuous with historic examples or consistent with theoretical paradigms. Students in “Introduction to Jewish Studies” analyze Israel’s national anthem, “Hatikvah.” They watch Nurith Aviv’s documentary “From Language to Language” (2004), about Hebrew-language learners. They read diverse Jewish perspectives on Zionism. I do not impose one viewpoint.
The Jewish studies program’s course on “The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict” regularly receives strong evaluations from across the political spectrum. Students praise our courses on the Holocaust and antisemitism. We also offer “The Hebrew Bible in its Ancient Near Eastern Context,” “Jewish Literature and Culture of the Americas,” “Jewish Communities of the Ottoman Empire” and other courses that give students a range of entry points into Jewish history, religion and culture.
Outside of the classroom, the Jewish studies program has avoided programming that presents any “side” of political debates. Instead, we invite to campus thoughtful academics who have produced works of rigorous peer-reviewed scholarship. We also sponsor a weekly Hebrew discussion table and provide funding for students who want to learn Hebrew during the summer. An Oberlin Jewish studies major was studying abroad at Hebrew University this spring, with our full support, until she was called home early due to the war with Iran.
Fuchs’s portrayal of Jewish studies professors as enemies of Jewish students is incredibly foolhardy. It is also part of a broader, deeply troubling movement to attack expertise in general and higher education in particular. For our part, Jewish studies professors do our work because we care about informed and thoughtful public discourse. We are not rabbis—as I always tell my students on the first day of class—but we play an important role on campus and in society. We work closely with students, including Jewish students of all backgrounds, who are trying to make sense of challenging issues. As researchers, we provide important tools for understanding their origins and dynamics.
Summer vacation has just started, but in the fall, my colleagues and I will be back on Oberlin’s campus, facing a new group of thoughtful, curious and independent-minded Jewish students. They will be arriving at an institution that offers them ample opportunities to learn about their tradition, find community and express identity in the ways that they want to, not the ones that outsiders choose for them.
***
Professor Shari Rabin’s response to my May 27 opinion piece confirms, rather than refutes, my central concern. I never argued that Jewish life does not exist at Oberlin, nor did I portray Jewish studies professors as enemies of Jewish students. The question is whether Jewish students who identify as Zionists feel equally free to express their beliefs.
My perspective is informed by years of conversations with Jewish students, parents and alumni, as well as nearly three decades in Oberlin. I have lived in the community since 1998; taught at the college from 2012 to 2014; served as Oberlin’s Chabad liaison before resigning over disagreements about how antisemitism should be addressed; worked as a provenance researcher at the Allen Memorial Art Museum; and been involved in a number of campus controversies.
Notably, Rabin’s title speaks of Jewish identity, history and culture. My article raised a related but distinct question: whether Zionist identity can be expressed and explored with equal freedom and institutional support, not only within Jewish studies but across the broader campus culture. It is reassuring to learn that Jewish studies offers courses addressing Israel, Zionism and antisemitism. The relevant question, however, is not simply whether these subjects are taught, but how they are framed and experienced by students, particularly those whose views place them in the minority. Rabin acknowledges that “Zionist students fear social ostracism.”
She notes that many students choose Oberlin because of its progressive reputation. Those observations suggest that the issue deserves more attention, not less.
A separate issue concerns the small-scale, ritualistic commemorations of the Holocaust (with only one large public event in the last decade, in which Israel or Oct. 7 were not mentioned). One would think that the moral lessons of the Holocaust would be relevant to all students, especially now, when Holocaust denial has become routine on both the extreme right and left. But the daily college newsletter does not mention International Holocaust Day (Jan. 27), while Yom Hashoah is at best marked with a perfunctory note with no message of substance.
After witnessing the talks of Eli Valley and Norman Finkelstein at Oberlin, I attempted to introduce some balance by soliciting support for a visit by Israeli author and activist Hen Mazzig. I contacted faculty and organizations in Peace and Conflict Studies, Jewish studies, Hillel and Hebrew House, receiving either no response or no follow-up. I retain the correspondence.
If the Oberlin administration had been willing to find out what the college climate pertaining to antisemitism was like (after Valley’s talk, but well before Oct. 7), they had every opportunity to do so with the help of a survey funded by a large Academic Engagement Network grant. Their refusal to confront the issue for the sake of public relations speaks for itself.
Frieda Fuchs
Managing Editor
Middle East Quarterly
