At 7:24 last night, a Twitter account called @WeLoveTrayvon sent its third tweet:

“R.I.P. Trayvon Martin. For every RE-TWEET this tweet gets, $1 will be donated to the TrayvonMartinFoundation, which helps counteract racism.”

In the eighteen hours since, that tweet has been retweeted tens of thousands of times.

Unfortunately, it’s a hoax. There’s no such thing as a “Trayvon Martin Foundation.” Google shows no hits on the phrase other than ones relating to the tweet. And the @WeLoveTrayvon account, which originated the claim, includes no contact info, no website link, no nothing. The account was created less than 24 hours ago, and has only tweeted eight times — each time including a RT request.

It’s made up. It’s meaningless. There’s no foundation, and no pledge to match RTs with cash.

Some newer versions of the tweet claim that Will Ferrell is putting up the money, apparently on the basis of a RT from the @RealFerrellWill twitter account. But that account is unverified, it only has 25K followers, and its most recent tweet as I write this is a racist joke. It’s not really Will Ferrell.

Embarrassingly, the Toronto Sun and other newspapers were taken in by the hoax, which was repeated as fact in an article distributed by the British entertainment website WENN. But it’s a hoax nonetheless. You’re not providing anyone with any money by RTing.

Sorry.

George Zimmerman, the 28-year-old Floridian who shot and killed teenager Trayvon Martin a month ago, has been suspended, or perhaps expelled, from Seminole State College as a result of the shooting.

The reasoning behind what university officials are calling a “withdrawal” remains unclear. In a statement yesterday, they said this:

“Due to the highly charged and high-profile controversy involving this student, Seminole State has taken the unusual but necessary step this week to withdraw Mr. Zimmerman from enrollment. This decision is based solely on our responsibility to provide for the safety of our students on campus as well as for Mr. Zimmerman.”

At least in published reports, officials did not specify the nature of this perceived threat to the ” safety of [their] students” or whether they believed that this threat was posed by Zimmerman or by others.

It’s that ambiguity, rather than the suspension itself, that I find troubling. If the college removed Zimmerman because of legitimate, specific concerns about his actions, that’s one thing. But if they “withdrew” him simply because he has become a controversial and notorious figure, that’s very different.

And it turns out that Seminole State College has pretty much complete discretion to suspend any student for any reason at any time. The college’s code of conduct states that students who engage in “conduct … deemed improper and detrimental to the College” are “subject to disciplinary action.” The college president (“or designee”) may suspend any student they consider guilty of a “serious violation of College policies, regulations, or local, state, and federal laws where the students continued presence might threaten the welfare of an individual or the College.”

Not hard to see how that kind of policy could be abused.

Easing back into blogging after a bit of a break, and I have to catch a train in an hour, but I didn’t want to let this go unmentioned:

Yesterday in Montreal more than a hundred thousand students — some estimates say it was twice that many — took to the streets to oppose planned tuition hikes. This in the context of an ongoing, growing province-wide student strike.

Big stuff, and getting bigger.

 

In his first interview since his arrest and conviction on charges of violating Tyler Clementi’s privacy via webcam, Dharun Ravi says that although he “was stupid about a lot of stuff,” he doesn’t believe he contributed to his Rutgers roommate’s suicide in any way.

“I really don’t think he cared at all,” Ravi told ABC News. “It would be kind of obnoxious of me to think that I could have this profound effect on him.”

Ravi says he rejected a plea deal that would have spared him jail time because he would have had to admit — falsely — that “I did this because I had this hate for gay people.” Gay rights advocates have, he says, “a just cause,” but their criticism of his anti-gay language and his public taunting of Clementi “detracts” from it. “This is something people can point to and say, ‘You guys are going overboard,'” he told ABC.

“I think it’s bad for them.”

One of the most unfortunate elements of the Breitbart organization’s attempt to smear President Obama on the basis of his support, as a law student, for professor Derrick Bell has been the claim that Bell was somehow antisemitic. The claim rests on “Space Traders,” a 1993 short story Bell wrote, a sci-fi parable that sketches an encounter between the United States and mysterious space aliens who offer the country unimaginable wealth in exchange for the abduction of the nation’s black population.

The Breitbart folks quote from a review of a book critical of Bell which includes a gloss on the Space Traders story. Here’s the relevant portion:

“Jews condemn the trade as genocidal and organize the Anne Frank Committee to try to stop it. Empathy from another group that has suffered oppression? Not according to Bell. Instead, Jews worry that ‘in the absence of blacks, Jews could become the scapegoats.’ … The story is … a poke in the eye of American Jews, particularly those who risked life and limb by actively participating in the civil rights protests of the 1960’s. Bell clearly implies that this was done out of tawdry self-interest. Perhaps most galling is Bell’s insensitivity in making the symbol of Jewish hypocrisy the little girl who perished in the Holocaust — as close to a saint as Jews have. A Jewish professor who invoked the name of Rosa Parks so derisively would be bitterly condemned — and rightly so.”

This passage is the source of numerous criticisms of Bell, including a viral claim on Twitter that he “publicly mocked Anne Frank.” But it’s grounded in a fundamental misreading of Bell’s story.

In Space Traders, American Jews are among the leading opponents to the plan to trade away the country’s black population. Bell quotes a fictional rabbi as saying that people of faith

“Simply cannot stand by and allow America’s version of the Final Solution to its race problem to be carried out without our strong protest and committed opposition. Already … a secret Anne Frank Committee has formed, and its hundreds of members have begun to locate hiding places in out of the way sites across this great country. Blacks by the thousands can be hidden for years if necessary until the nation returns to its senses. We vow this action because we recognize the fateful parallel between the plight of the blacks in this country and the situation of the Jews in Nazi Germany. Holocaust scholars agree that the Final Solution in Germany would not have been possible without the pervasive presence and the uninterrupted tradition of anti-Semitism in Germany. We must not let the space Traders be the final solution for blacks in America.”

Bell never suggests that this speech is dishonest or maliciously motivated. He portrays American Jews as flocking to the rabbi’s call, and as suffering legal persecution, economic retaliation, and antisemitic abuse as a result.

But what of Kosinski’s quote, which he says demonstrates that Bell “derisively” regards all of the above as “hypocrisy” and craven self-interest? Well, you can read the relevant passage for yourself:

“A concern of many Jews not contained in their official condemnations of the Trade offer was that, in the absence of blacks, Jews could become the scapegoats for a system so reliant on an identifiable group on whose heads less-well-off whites can discharge their hate and frustrations for societal disabilities about which they are unwilling to confront their leaders. Given the German experience, few Jews argued that ‘it couldn’t happen here.'”

Bell doesn’t describe Jewish concern for blacks as a sham, nor does he characterize their concern about antisemitism as “tawdry self-interest.” He depicts Jewish opponents of the trade as motivated both by sincere empathy for blacks and by legitimate worries about antisemitism.

Derrick Bell was a pessimist. He believed that those who thought the country’s racial woes were in its past were dangerously deluded, and Space Traders was an expression of that perspective. A fair reading of the text makes it absolutely clear that he saw American Jews, like American blacks, as victims of the country’s white supremacist ideology, and that he viewed their fear of becoming targets of bigotry as entirely reasonable. The story is a slavery allegory, but it is a Holocaust allegory as well.

There’s nothing antisemitic in the piece. Nothing at all.

Update | Lots of folks seem to be under the mistaken impression that Bell himself called Anne Frank “the symbol of Jewish hypocrisy.” As the quotes above make clear, Bell never used that phrase in any context. The term comes from Alex Kosinski’s review, in which it appears as Kozinski’s gloss on Bell’s writing.

Second Update | Now it’s being argued in multiple places that Bell wrote that “Jews would sell blacks as slaves.” This is, of course, pretty much the opposite of Bell’s position, even in the most uncharitable reading of his work.

About This Blog

n7772graysmall
StudentActivism.net is the work of Angus Johnston, a historian and advocate of American student organizing.

To contact Angus, click here. For more about him, check out AngusJohnston.com.