A Moral, Ethical and Legal Failure at the University of Washington

This was a somber day for the University of Washington, diminishing the institution in profound and important ways.

Today, the UW caved to several of the demands of a group of pro-Hamas students and their antifa/activist allies.

This group of activists has:

(1) Established an illegal encampment on the UW campus
(2) Caused hundreds of thousands of dollars of damage, including painting graffiti over many buildings
(3)  Took over the administration building during Chanukah
(4)   Attacked and threatened Jewish students on campus and painted antisemitic messages on buildings.
(5)  Physically hurt and intercepted media representatives trying to cover the situation. 
(6)  Closed off portions of campus and interrupted classes.
(7) Attacked faculty and others who visited the encampment.

To illustrate the seriousness of the situation, consider the statue of George Washington that was painted with a threat to kill Jews (known as colonizers by the encampment group).

Not only were the pro-Hamas group threatening and hurting people, breaking the law, ruining campus buildings, causing massive damage to the UW, and guilty of antisemitic acts, but they also made huge demands on the UW administration, such as breaking relations with Boeing, breaking all relations with Israel, divesting from Israel, giving scholarships to Palestinian students, and much more.

And UW President Ana Mari Cauce, in a statement that was stunningly weak and inappropriate, gave in to several of the demands.

In the deal to end the encampment, UW agrees not to proceed against students who were illegally camping on campus, will hire a Palestine studies faculty member, pay for the education of 20 students from Gaza, invite representatives of this group to review the UW's investment policies, and much more.

In short, break the law, threaten people, promote rabid antisemitism, and massively damage the UW, and not only do you not face legal restraints but you are rewarded.  A very bad look.

But it is even worse than that.

Ana Mari's statement as UW President calls for a ceasefire (totally inappropriate as a UW President), makes accusations that Israel targeted civilians (unfounded), and then talks about Islamophobia, for which there is no evidence at the UW.  The UW President represents the entire, diverse UW community, and it is a state employee, who should NEVER take sides on politically charged issues during official communications.  

Amazingly, there is not a single mention of antisemitism in Ana Mari's statement.  Nor does she mention the barbarism of Oct. 7.

Damage to UW's reputation

The UW administration's handling of this situation has been inept and morally problematic, allowing the situation to fester and increase for weeks.

When a terrorist makes demands, the worst thing is to give in to them.  The inevitable result will be more terror.   UW's weakness allowed the situation to spiral out of control. 

 When you give in to spoiled, immature children they always demand more.  It is revealing that none of the UW activists were picketing around the Boeing facilities of the region.  Nor were they collecting funds and supplies to be sent to Gaza.   And why were they not concerned about the dozen or so other conflicts around the world, several of them leading to vastly more loss of life?

UW's reputation is in tatters.  I have talked to several people who said they would never allow their children to attend UW.   Media coverage has been highly critical and negative (see sample below). The UW "brand" is highly damaged.

A major UW donor told me that his contributions to the UW will end.

Imagine if the UW administration had the wisdom of the leadership of the University of Chicago, which made the decision to remove a similar encampment with little injury or problems (they did it in the middle of the night).  The U Chicago president's statement is found at the bottom of this blog.   The UW administration knew the situation was becoming increasingly dangerous, as older (and more violent) outsiders got entrained into the camp.  

An Educational Failure

Perhaps most serious of all, the UW administration threw away a valuable educational opportunity.   Imagine if Ana Mari had ended the encampment on the second day when it was small and easily cleared.  Then she could have announced a series of special lectures in Kane Hall on the history of the region and the conflict.  And she could have established a series of fact-based debates on the conflict and how to proceed. 

Students would have learned that although freedom of speech is supported, breaking the law is not accepted in a free society.  For contentious issues, we need to take special care to learn the facts and to expose ourselves to different viewpoints.  THIS is what the university is supposedly all about.

Ana Mari Cauce would have been hailed as a visionary and much of the destruction could been avoided.

The University of Washington has been greatly damaged, and it did not have to be this way.

A reason for all Huskies to be sad this weekend.

________

Statement of the President of the University of Chicago (reprinted)

By Paul Alivisatos May 7, 2024 5:01 pm ET Chicago

As president of the University of Chicago, I ended the encampment that occupied the University’s Main Quad for more than a week. The Tuesday morning action resulted in no arrests. Recent months have seen tremendous contention over protests on campuses, including pressure campaigns from every direction. That made this a decision of enormous import for the university.

When the encampment formed on our campus, I said I would uphold the university’s principles and resist the forces tearing at the fabric of higher education. I didn’t direct immediate action against the encampment. I authorized discussions with the protesters regarding an end to the encampment in response to some of their demands. But when I concluded that the essential goals that animated those demands were incompatible with deep principles of the university, I decided to end the encampment with intervention.

Some universities have chosen to block encampments from forming at all or ended them within an hour or so. We had the means to do so. Immediate intervention is consistent with enforcing reasonable regulations on the time, place and manner of speech, and it has the advantage of minimizing disruption. Yet strict adherence to every policy—the suppression of discord to promote harmony—comes at a cost. Discord is almost required for the truth-seeking function of a university to be genuine.

Protest is a strongly protected form of speech in the University of Chicago culture, enshrined in the Chicago Principles for a reason. In times of discord, protest serves as a mechanism for democratic societies, and places of reason like universities, to find a way back toward dialogue and compromise. This has value even if protests result in disruption or violate the rules—up to a point. When a protest substantially interferes with the learning, research and operations of the university, when it meaningfully diminishes the free-expression rights of others—as happened with this encampment—then it must come to an end, through dialogue or intervention.

Therefore, it was a crucial decision whether to seek a dialogue to resolve a disruptive protest. Some will argue that the moral hazard of even holding such discussions is so severe that they should never be undertaken at all—that no agreement could possibly be legitimate if it originated from these circumstances. Others will say such dialogue should always be sought. I believe dialogue may be appropriate under certain circumstances, provided that protesters come to it openly with an understanding that the consequences of their policy violations will be reviewed evenhandedly. The same applies to discipline now that the encampment has ended.

So I authorized the opening of dialogue with the protesters, even though that extended the number of days the university was disrupted. I won’t describe the sequence or the content of those discussions, since we agreed that our exchanges would remain private unless and until we reached a favorable conclusion. During our substantive dialogue, there were some very difficult moments, but also moments of progress. The student-protester representatives offered analytical arguments and made powerful statements; their faculty representatives and liaisons also made important contributions. I believe that the administration representatives showed respect for their interlocutors and came to the discussions with genuine openness and a willingness to look for ways to make it work.

Why then didn’t we reach a resolution? Because at the core of the demands was what I believe is a deep disagreement about a principle, one that can’t be papered over with carefully crafted words, creative adjustments to programming, or any other negotiable remedy.

The disagreement revolves around institutional neutrality—a foundational value to the University of Chicago. It is a principle animated by the idea that authority can’t establish truth for an entire institution dedicated to truth-seeking; rather, it is the imperative of individuals to seek truth without being limited by authority. Institutional neutrality vests freedom of inquiry and speech directly in faculty and students, where it belongs.

Underpinning the demands was a call for the university to diminish ties with Israel and increase ties with the Palestinians in Gaza. In short, the protesters were determined that the university should take sides in the conflict in Israel and Gaza. Other demands would have led to having political goals guide core aspects of the university’s institutional approaches, from how we invest our endowment to when and how I make statements. Faculty members and students are more than free to engage in advocacy on one side or the other. But if the university did so as an institution, it would no longer be much of a university.

As the depth of this philosophical difference became clearer, I decided to end the dialogue. I yielded on some time, place and manner policies and allowed some degree of disruption in favor of protest, regardless of viewpoint; engaged in dialogue with those who were disrupting the university so long as they were prepared to face discipline. But there is no way I would ever compromise on institutional neutrality.

Mr. Alivisatos is president of the University of Chicago.

No Heatwaves for the Rest of the Month!

 Today may well be the warmest day for the rest of the month.  

Mid-May warmth is quite typical around here.  But so is a cool down at the end of May.

And yes, precipitation will return.

Let's start with the latest European Center 10-day forecast for Seattle (below). 73F high today, but then temperatures slide into the 60s and then 50s.  My tomatoes will not be happy.

The NOAA/NWS National Blend of Models (NBM), which combines many forecast models and is usually quite accurate, also keeps things cool, with highs in the lower 60s.

You will need your sweater again.

And what about precipitation?

Let's look at the latest forecasts of the European Center Model.  The forecast precipitation accumulation through Friday morning shows a regional dampening, with the North Cascades getting a good wetting.

But it does not end there.  By the following Saturday morning (May 25th), there will be relatively heavy accumulated rain in all the regional mountains.  Good for river levels and fish.

The UW model has a similar solution.

This cool/wet period will be very positive for regional crops.   By the way, it appears that the Northwest cherry crop is in very good shape (I like cherries).

So why are we cooling down?  Because the warmth-inducing, high-pressure ridge over our coast will rapidly weaken, replaced by a trough of lower pressure.

Consider the average over the next five days for the upper level (500 hPa, about 18,000 ft) heights (like pressure) shown below.   Blue indicated below normal heights (called roughing).

Troughing (low pressure) is dominant over the region, with ridging (high pressure) offshore.  It's not a warm pattern for the Northwest.

Next five days?   Even cooler, with the troughing pushing westward over the Northwest coast.  Expect cooler and wetter than normal conditions.

You won't need any AC this month.

_______________________________________

Massive Vandalism Around the UW

I will talk about it in more detail in my next blog, but there has been massive (and very expensive) vandalism around the UW, including spray painting both historic and new buildings (see below).

This is what happens when a college administration allows lawbreaking and vandalism to spread. 

Antisemitism, physical violence, property destruction, and illegal camping are endemic around the UW.  The UW administration should have closed down the illegal encampment weeks ago.  When lawbreaking is tolerated with no consequences, it simply increases.

A sad period for all Huskies.  We are going the way of Columbia and UCLA and it could have been avoided.