FacebookTwitterRedditEmail

Burning Books at Harvard Law

Click on Harvard Law’s homepage and you find Dershowitz’s lambaste of Carter’s recent book entitled “Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid.” This is an op/ed piece by Dershowitz printed in Conrad Black’s National Post. If, as Lawrence Velvel (Dean of the Massachusetts School of Law School) has articulated very convincingly, what goes on in the hallowed halls of Harvard Law is inextricably linked to what goes on in the halls of power in Washington DC, because of the revolving door between the two, we are in a sorry state indeed.

This is particularly true if Dershowitz is representative the scholars at Harvard Law, which he must be as his editorial is on page one of Harvard Law’s website. In my opinion, his superficial review of Carter’s book is today’s equivalent of a verbal book burning–as any reader of the review would be persuaded to ignore Carter’s book. This, in effect, takes the book out of circulation.

The op/ed proceeds as follows: Carter’s book is initially described as an “anti-Israeli screed”; Dershowitz complains “a mere listing of all of Mr. Carter’s mistakes and omissions would fill a volume the size of his book (Dershowitz lists four, out of context and with his own very-subjective interpretation of the word “mistake”); Dershowitz continues with subjective comments such as “Mr. Carter just doesn’t like Israel or Israelis”; and finally, the coup de grace, “his (Carter’s) authorship of this ahistorical, one-sided brief against Israel forever disqualifies him from playing any positive role in fairly resolving the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians.” Thank you Professor Dershowitz for this anti-Carter screed!

Anyone who has actually read the book would know that most of it is centered on former President Carter’s own personal conversations and negotiations with all of the leaders of the Middle East from the 1970s to the present. The book is, in part, autobiographical. How can you label this autobiographical account of a former president “ahistorical”?

The major contribution of this book is not the pre WWI history of the region, but Carter’s own personal contribution to, and opinions of, the current history. Carter is a former President of the United States–he made this history. Carter’s book is important to read, if for no other reason than to get these first-hand accounts of his conversations with world leaders at critical moments in the recent history of the Middle East.

The final statement of Dershowitz, noted above, is especially galling when applied to former President Carter. Our former president is a man who has dedicated himself to seeking peace in the Middle East, he was the mediator of the historic Camp David accords between Egypt and Israel, and, most recently, was the monitor of fair Palestinian elections via his Carter Center and his own physical presence on the ground in the occupied territories. Ignoring these realities, Harvard Law has put it’s “seal of approval” on Dershowitz’s vitriolic review of an important work of a former President of the United States, effectively contributing to censoring this information. This is an accomplishment that should make our preeminent institution of higher education proud, or perhaps make the American public seriously question Harvard’s preeminence.

Troublesome as well, is the fact that Dershowitz’s review appears to be based on his reading precious little of the book. Obviously, he read the book title–as the entire first paragraph of his op/ed is a rant on the title alone. He is also familiar with a few selected quotes (perhaps highlighted for him by a student assistant) that are not representative of the tone of the book at all. Again, anyone who has actually read the book would know that it is not an anti-Israeli screed, quite the contrary. Carter has bent over backward to be fair in his presentation of Israel and Israeli citizens. Carter does, however, describe personal conversations and personal experiences on the ground that may put Israel in a negative light, but these are historic facts and if Dershowitz finds them offensive he might look to Israeli leaders, not Carter, to target his venom.

What I find especially frightening about the promotion of Dershowitz’s op/ed on Harvard Law’s homepage is that it says volumes about the current state of public discourse, free communication and public access to factual information in our country. Recently, in a radio interview, Carter stated that criticism of his book, and the recent resignation of Kenneth Stein from the Carter Center, has gotten more publicity from the mainstream press than has his book and its contents. If a former president, who has dedicated much of his life to seeking a fair solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, cannot get his opinions heard over the jeering of the likes of Dershowitz, who has dedicated much of his life (for big bucks) to defending murderers and currently, a child-molester in Palm Beach Florida, public discourse in the US is being seriously eroded. Even worse, this disinformation campaign is being abetted and empowered by Harvard Law, as evidently, Harvard Law prefers the bombast of Dershowitz to the serious historical facts of a former President of the United States.

MARY McGRANE is an associate professor in the field of biomedical sciences at the University of Connecticut.

 

 

 

 

More articles by:
July 09, 2020
Richard D. Wolff
COVID-19 Exposes the Weakness of a Major Theory Used to Justify Capitalism
Ahrar Ahmad
Racism in America: Police Choke-Holds Are Not the Issue
Timothy M. Gill
Electoral Interventions: a Suspiciously Naïve View of U.S. Foreign Policy in the Post-Cold War World
Daniel Falcone
Cold War with China and the Thucydides Trap: a Conversation with Richard Falk
Daniel Beaumont
Shrink-Wrapped: Plastic Pollution and the Greatest Economic System Jesus Ever Devised
Prabir Purkayastha
The World Can Show How Pharma Monopolies Aren’t the Only Way to Fight COVID-19
Gary Leupp
“Pinning Down Putin” Biden, the Democrats and the Next War
Howard Lisnoff
The Long Goodbye to Organized Religion
Cesar Chelala
The Dangers of Persecuting Doctors
Mike Garrity – Erik Molvar
Back on the List: A Big Win for Yellowtone Grizzlies and the Endangered Species Act, a Big Loss for Trump and Its Enemies
Purusottam Thakur
With Rhyme and Reasons: Rap Songs for COVID Migrants
Binoy Kampmark
Spiked Concerns: The Melbourne Coronavirus Lockdown
Nino Pagliccia
Venezuela is on a Path to Make Colonialism Obsolete
George Ochenski
Where are Our Political Leaders When We Really Need Them?
Dean Baker
Is it Impossible to Envision a World Without Patent Monopolies?
William A. Cohn
Lead the Way: a Call to Youth
July 08, 2020
Laura Carlsen
Lopez Obrador’s Visit to Trump is a Betrayal of the U.S. and Mexican People
Melvin Goodman
Afghanistan: What is to be Done?
Thomas Klikauer – Norman Simms
The End of the American Newspaper
Sonali Kolhatkar
The Merits of Medicare for All Have Been Proven by This Pandemic
David Rosen
It’s Now Ghislaine Maxwell’s Turn
Nicolas J S Davies
Key U.S. Ally Indicted for Organ Trade Murder Scheme
Bob Lord
Welcome to Hectobillionaire Land
Laura Flanders
The Great American Lie
John Kendall Hawkins
Van Gogh’s Literary Influences
Marc Norton
Reopening vs. Lockdown is a False Dichotomy
Joel Schlosberg
“All the Credit He Gave Us:” Time to Drop Hamilton’s Economics
CounterPunch News Service
Tribes Defeat Trump Administration and NRA in 9th Circuit on Sacred Grizzly Bear Appeal
John Feffer
The US is Now the Global Public Health Emergency
Nick Licata
Three Books on the 2020 Presidential Election and Their Relevance to the Black Live Matter Protests
Elliot Sperber
The Breonna Taylor Bridge
July 07, 2020
Richard Eskow
The War on Logic: Contradictions and Absurdities in the House’s Military Spending Bill
Daniel Beaumont
Gimme Shelter: the Brief And Strange History of CHOP (AKA CHAZ)
Richard C. Gross
Trump’s War
Patrick Cockburn
Trump’s Racism May be Blatant, But the Culture He Defends Comes Out of the Civil War and Goes Well Beyond Racial Division
Andrew Stewart
Can We Compare the George Floyd Protests to the Vietnam War Protests? Maybe, But the Analogy is Imperfect
Walden Bello
The Racist Underpinnings of the American Way of War
Nyla Ali Khan
Fallacious Arguments Employed to Justify the Revocation of Jammu and Kashmir’s Autonomy and Its Bifurcation
Don Fitz
A Statue of Hatuey
Dean Baker
Unemployment Benefits Should Depend on the Pandemic
Ramzy Baroud – Romana Rubeo
Will the ICC Investigation Bring Justice for Palestine?
Sam Pizzigati
Social Distancing for Mega-Million Fun and Profit
Dave Lindorff
Private: Why the High Dudgeon over Alleged Russian Bounties for Taliban Slaying of US Troops
George Wuerthner
Of Fire and Fish
Binoy Kampmark
Killing Koalas: the Promise of Extinction Down Under
FacebookTwitterRedditEmail