Last week, I had a rather disconcerting experience with the group known as the Global Justice Project. I attended an open "organizational" meeting the group hosted March 12 in Devlin 309 after receiving an e-mail notification. Of particular interest to me was the discussion of an upcoming "street theatre" event, involving a "Boston to Palestine" representative. I had never been to a GJP event before, but I felt this would be a good opportunity to see how the group is run and to learn about the upcoming actions they are considering. At the meeting, students in attendance were asked to state their names and other organizations with which they were affiliated. As peculiar as the latter request was, I kindly obliged - the implications of such identifications were unbeknownst to me at the time. It was announced by the group leader that those individuals not having previously participated in the discussions and planning of the "Rachel Corrie Commemoration" or the "Boston to Palestine" event would be asked to leave as a "security measure."
When the agenda reached these topics, it was again announced that those without any prior involvement must leave the room. The student making these announcements looked directly at my friend Lorenzo (also an active participant in Boston College Hillel) and me. Rather surprised, I asked if there was anything else involved in this meeting that I might be able to witness or get information about, to which they responded in the negative.
At this point, my friend and I exited and began to converse with one another about our spring break activities. Two flights below, we stopped in the stairwell and continued in conversation about matters unrelated to our discriminatory exclusion from this meeting. Then a "messenger" from the meeting - a presumably prominent member of GJP whose name I do not recall from the initial "background check" that kicked off the meeting - peered down to us and asked, "I was wondering if you guys were planning on coming back to spy on us because everyone inside is talking about it, that you guys are going to try and listen in or come back in." I kindly let him know there was no such intention, and Lorenzo asked if we were allowed back in. The messenger responded, "No, you're not allowed back in, and you're not allowed to listen in, either."
It has become painfully clear to me that the so-called Global Justice Project is intent on stifling intellectual dialogue and excluding certain students from participation or simple attendance of events based on presumed classifications of political ideology or organizational involvement. For the GJP to function in this manner in a university setting is an outrage, especially on a campus that purports itself to be in accordance with Jesuit ideals. As a non-sanctioned student group, it is no wonder to me that the BC administration does not fund this endeavor. These individuals do, however, receive significant support and funding from faculty members within the sociology and fine arts departments.
What justification is there for a professor at a Jesuit university condoning and promoting the purposeful exclusion of certain students from intellectual discourse based on the students' affiliations or personal beliefs? In my mind, there can be no justification for this behavior, just as there is no justification for efforts to exclude or stifle voices of dissent anywhere in our democratic nation.
The GJP's Web site (http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/cas/soc/Justice/about.html) claims: "we are a consensus-based and non-hierarchal organization committed to participatory democracy, meaning that all members have an equal say in forming agendas, plans, and tactics. being a member of gjp does not entail a political obligation or ideological adherence. there are no cards to carry, registers to sign, or dues to pay. if you consider yourself a member of the global justice project, then you are a member."
I have experienced this statement's falsehood firsthand. I considered myself a member that night, but I was denied access. The "antiestablishment" grammatical flaws pervading the group description do not mask its divergence from GJP's actual behavior and poor treatment of students. I can only speculate that, given the secretive and repressive nature of this group, their description has changed without an update in the Web site to notify the public.
I have to wonder how my exclusion from the meeting could serve as a "security measure" unless the group was planning something that was in violation of BC regulations or state or national laws. I also have to wonder where else the urge to dismiss me could have emanated from. Perhaps they remembered me from last year, when, as BC Hillel president, I refused to co-sponsor with them the blatantly anti-Israel lecture of the GJP-invited speaker, Janice Hayden. Or perhaps it was the simple mention of the term "BC Hillel" that raised red flags in their minds about my beliefs and motivations.
Considering our unassuming presence at this meeting, there truly was no basis aside from prejudice with which to exclude us. As if the GJP's base prejudice was not sufficient, I was also sought out personally and accused of being a "spy" - a spy for whom, exactly, I can still only imagine. My conclusion is that in their attempts to inform people about the Israeli-Palestinian issues, the GJP refuses to notify "outsiders" what they plan to do for fear that their shortsightedness, underhandedness, limited knowledge, outright propaganda, and Israel-hatred might be exposed in light of the facts they often choose to ignore. The GJP and the professors supporting it are not holding themselves responsible to the high academic standards of respectful dialogue that our University warrants.
As an individual who supports the right of Israel to exist as a Jewish state and believes in the necessity of a two-state solution to "the conflict," any campus event relating to the Arab/Israeli conflict usually garners my attention. While I am heavily engaged in my scientific research in the biology department on campus, I consider myself an intellectual and a free-thinking individual, and I take advantage of many lectures, events, or meetings relating to other topics I pursue in my free time, including Middle East history and culture, foreign policy, and politics in general.
Currently, I receive e-mails from Americans for Informed Democracy, BC Democrats, BC Republicans, MEISSA, and the Center for Christian-Jewish Learning, among others. I have never been instructed to leave an event or meeting by any of these groups, nor have I been sought out for ridicule by those in charge of them.
In their attempts to misinform the BC student body with half-truths and fabrications concerning the Arab-Israeli issue, GJP cloaks its activities in the guise of the pursuit of justice and opposition to the marginalization of groups of people. In its selective amnesia, the group often forgets that marginalization of the innocent lives of Israeli citizens is just as pressing of an issue as marginalization of the rights of Palestinians.
Similarly hypocritical in this instance, GJP seems to have "forgotten" that its own distinctions for group membership apply not only to those who provide GJP with unequivocal support and allegiance, but also those who might happen to disagree with their views on certain topics. I feel this incident should not go unnoticed, and the hypocrisy of GJP, which has affected me personally, must be exposed by students on this campus as a responsibility of academic enterprise.
Will Markis is a senior in the College of Arts & Sciences.
Be the first to comment on this article!