SUNY Stony Brook, Dube Controversy, 1984-May 1986

Online content

2 JEWISH WORLD*JANUARY 20-26, 1964

Efforts to resolve ‘Dube affair’ are reviewed
Dube invites two speakers on Zionism to class

By WALTER RUBY

The president of the State University of New York at
Stony Brook and the director of the Long Island chapter
of the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith were set
to appear this week in Albany before the New York
State Senate Task Force on Vandalism, Religious De-
secration and Other Acts of Bigotry, to discuss the
Stony Brook administration's efforts to resolve the
so-called ‘‘Dube affair."’

Stony Brook President John Marburger III and Rabbi ;

Arthur Seltzer of ADL had been scheduled to appear
before the task force last week, but Marburger was
unable to appear because of a snowstorm. Seltzer,
however, did meet with the task force.

The long-running controversy at Stony Brook was
triggered by the alleged teaching by Prof. Ernest Dube
of the Africana Studies (AFS) Program that Zionism is a
form of racism, and the open espousal of that doctrine
by the AFS Program in several departmental memos.
Seltzer of ADL has played a leading role in defining the
Jewish community's response to the events at Stony
Brook.

According to sources in the Jewish community, the
task force, headed by State Sen. Norman Levy
(R-Nassau), wants to meet with Seltzer and Marburger
together to review the Stony Brook administration’s
progress in resolving the Dube affair and in fulfilling
commitments Marburger made to Jewish community
representatives at an October 19 meeting. Contacted by
the Jewish World, Levy said that he preferred to make
no comment until after the meeting with Marburger
and Seltzer.

Report on University Initiatives

Meanwhile, Stony Brook Provost Homer Neal, the
ranking academic officer at the university after
Marburg.r, toia the Jewish World that he is
now completing a report for Marburger documenting
the progress of a number of initiatives taken by the
University administration to resolve the Dube con-
troversy. Neal said he planned to submit his report to
Marburger ‘‘before the beginning of the second
semester’’ (which begins the last week in January) and
that the president would shortly thereafter make the
report public, together with a shorter policy statement
of his own.

According to Neal, his report will document the
efforts of two key university commissions appointed in
the wake of the Dube controversy to respectively
increase dialogue on the campus concerning sensitive
racial, ethnic, religious and sexual issues, and to more
strictly define the parameters of academic freedom and

The Fight For Peace:
A Fight For

Jewish Survival

Featured speakers:

Dr. George Wald, Nobel Laureate
and Human Rights Activist
and

Dov Sheba, founder of Kibbutz Eilon and
past financial director of Hashomer Hatzair

at the
1984 Human Rights Luncheon
sponsored by

Americans for Progressive Israel
ind the
Givat Haviva Etecationl Foundation

Sunday, January 29, 1984

12 noon, The Sheraton Centre
New York City

Call 212/255-8760
for reservations

$50 per person

Stony Brook Provost Homer Neal plans shortly to submit his
report documenting the resolution of the controversy involving
Prof. Emest Dube.

academic responsibility when dealing with contro-
versial issues.

Neal said that the Neville Commission, headed by
Stony Brook Dean Robert Neville, which is charged
with improving campus dialogue, held a faculty
symposium last month on the issue and is planning a
day-long symposium on issues raised by the Dube
affair.

He said he hopes the symposium, which the
university plans to hold by mid-March, will include the
participation both of leading campus faculty, ‘‘as well
as international figures such as (former Israeli Foreign
Minister) Abba Eban. We would also like to get one or
two U.S. senators, as well as representatives of groups
that have been involved or interested in various aspects
of this controversy such as the ADL and AAUP
(American Association of University Professors)."’

Neal also said that the Yang Commission, headed by
Prof Chen N. Yang, director of the Institute of Theo-
retical Physics, which is charged with better defining
faculty rights and responsibilities, will issue a report on
its conclusions by February 15.

The Yang Commission has divided into two sub-
committees; one is preparing an institutional statement

HOMELESSNESS
IN NEW YORK CITY

a conference for Jewish
Communal Agencies & Institutions

Sponsored by
METROPOLITAN NEW YORK
COORDINATING COUNCIL
ON JEWISH POVERTY

Guest Speaker: ~
Mayor Edward |. Koch
WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 1, 1984
3:30 to 6 p.m.

Congregation Sheanith Serael

2 West 70th St., New York City

on the parameters of academic freedom a
responsibility, and the other is drafting procedu
safeguards designed to ensure that the rights of facu
and students are preserved and professional ethics :
upheld.

Changes in Dube's Course

Neal also said that he will announce in his rep
changes Dube has agreed to make in his presentation
Zionism in his controversial course ‘‘The Politics
Race’’ during the coming semester.

While Neal said he was not yet able to state publi
the changes to which Dube has agreed, Dube hims
told the Jewish World that he has agreed to drop fr:
his course description any connection between Zioni:
and Nazism. Dube said he has also decided to incluc
as part of his presentation of Zionism, outside speak«
who will present differing perspectives on the subje
He said he had inaugurated this practice during the l:

p~ semester and said he hoped to make it a regular featu
of his presentation of Zionism in ‘‘The Politics
Race.”’

Neal revealed to the Jewish World that the Africa
Studies Department will be reviewed on Februe
28-March 1, 1984 by an external review committe
which will then report to the Stony Brook a
ministration its perceptions of the strengths ai
weaknesses of the program. Neal explained that Sto)
Brook decided last year to initiate at regular intervz
external academic reviews of all of its undergradua
programs, of which AFS is one.

While noting that ‘‘AFS is only one of tl
undergraduate programs to be reviewed this year
Neal commented, ‘‘Given the controversy that h
erupted over AFS, we expect that both the broad
community and the AFS program will be ve
interested in the recommendations that will come fro
this independent body, after its review of AFS.

“The AFS faculty, who feel inappropriately m
ligned, would presumably hope to see this independe
body agree with them," said Neal. ‘‘Other grou]
would obviously expect the review committee to ru
that major changes should be made.’’ Neal stress«
however, that ‘‘the review committee will be playing
strictly advisory role. It will be up to the universi
administration to decide whether to implement any «
all of its recommendations."

May Postpone Tenure Hearing

Turning to the question of Dube’s upcoming tenu:
hearing (scheduled for March, 1984), Neal said that tk
administration was still waiting for Dube to formal.
request that consideration of his case be postponed fi
a period of a year or more because of the continuir
controversy. Said Neal, ‘‘President Marburger hz
already indicated a desire to wait with the tenur
hearing if Dube would prefer that.’’

Neal explained, however, that according to universit
guidelines, if Dube asked for a postponement, he wou!
have to either take a leave of absence from th
university until his tenure was decided or relinquish th
title of assistant professor during the interim perio
and accept a lesser position such as lecture
“According to the rules of the Board of Trustees an
the union agreement,"’ said Neal, ‘‘Dube would have t
choose one of these two options."’

Responding t a question, Neal said he knew of n
plan by the university administration to send a letter c
reprimand to AFS Program Chairman Amiri Baraka
condemning him for his outspoken anti-Zionist publi
positions. Although there have been rumors for som
weeks that Marburger plans to send such a letter t:
Baraka, Neal said, ‘‘To the best of my knowledge n:
such letter has been sent nor do I know of plans to sen
one.”

No Pressure on Poli. Sci. Dept.

Neal also denied reports that the universit)
administration is continuing to pressure the Politica
Science Department to overturn its decision last mont!
to end its policy of cross-listing its courses with AFS
(which gave political science credits to students takin;
AFS courses).

“I do not believe that the decision of the Politica
Science Department will be reversed, and I do no
believe the idea of getting them to reverse it is being
pursued,’ explained Neal.

“We do have to pursue steps to ensure that the AFS
Program does not become isolated and that there ar

continued on page 3¢

36 JEWISH WORLD*JANUARY 20-26, 1964

Dube affair

continued from page 2

more interactions with the cognate departments rather
than fewer,’’ he said. ‘‘But given the fact that the
(Politics of Race) course had changed substantially
since the cross-listing began, it is hard to argue that the
Political Science Department should not have been
allowed to reevaluate the course and make a decision
-either to stay with the course or not to do so."

Asked how the Stony Brook administration felt about
the renewed involvement in the Dube case of New York
State legislators, Neal replied, ‘‘Academic freedom
means that the administration and faculty should be
happy to meet with anyone at any time to discuss the
questions raised in this case.

“In my opinion,’’ he added, ‘‘the only time for
concern would be if actions were being contemplated
(by the State legislators) to limit the freedoms that we
have here . . . If there is such an organized effort in the
State Senate to do that, I know nothing about it. But we
are certainly happy to apprise the legislators and
senators of the efforts we are taking to try to resolve
this situation.’’

Invites Speakers on Zionism

In remarks to the Jewish World, Dube affirmed that
his course description of ‘‘The Politics of Race’’ for the
coming semester will no longer mention, as it did in the
past, ‘‘the three forms of racism — Nazism, Apartheid,
and Zionism."’ Instead, he said, ‘‘the course de-
scription has been changed to better reflect what is
really going on in the class, with emphasis on what I see
as the three forms of racism — overt, covert and
reactive."’

Dube also confirmed that he plans to bring in outside
speakers on the subject of Zionism and noted that he
had brought in two people during his discussion of
Zionism in his last semester's class, held during the
first week of December.

The two speakers were Dr. Jacob Stern, a Queens

-
A > 4, copy of
THE JEWISH OBSERVER

Yours FREE When You Subscribe

The Jewish Observer
5 Beekman Street/New York, N.Y. 10038

credit card: [) Master DD Visa
Accu Ne. OOO OOCo Sooo
Expiration date (J) (month) 00) (year)

pA paren et be mnie in US cellars, drownens US teak. |

cardiologist who, according to Dube, ‘‘took the position.
that Zionism is not racism and discussed it on the basis
of the experience of the Jews in the Holocaust, and
Elaine Friedland, who argued that Zionism is a racist
doctrine, basing her appraisal on an analysis of the
historical development of the Zionist organization and
of the Zionist philosophy as expressed by early leaders
such as Herz] and Weizmann.

“After the appearance of these two speakers,’’ said
Dube, ‘‘I summarized the discussion and expressed
where I disagreed with both of them . . . saying
essentially that I see numerous trends in Zionist
thought and see it as a mistake to treat it as
monolithic.’’

Differing Points of View

Asked why he had decided to bring in the guest
speakers, Dube replied, ‘‘I have had to contend with
the mistaken idea that I have not treated this subject
fairly. During recent months many people have
expressed an interest to come and talk to my class on
this subject . . . and I decided, here are two Jewish
people with different approaches to Zionism. Why not
allow my students to hear these differing points of
view?"’

Dube said he plans to continue the practice of
bringing in outside speakers in the future, ‘‘as much as
possible, whenever I can find people who will be able to
come and talk to my students.”’

Dube said that Friedland, a former student of his, is
a professor at a New York City technical college. (The
Jewish World was unable to reach Friedland before
press time.)

Contacted by the Jewish World, Stern explained that
he is a survivor of Auschwitz and a member of a group
called Survivors of the Holocaust in the Professions.
“The whole approach of people in our group,’’ he
explained, ‘‘is that if we hear about a distorted
approach toward the Holocaust or toward Israel, the
home of so many Holocaust survivors, we feel a

~ responsibility to do what we can to correct it.’’

Stern, who heard about the Dube case from a patient
— a Holocaust survivor whose granddaughter attends
Stony Brook — said he had contacted Dube by
telephone and after several discussions, Dube had
invited him to make an appearance before the class.

British and Arab Role

During the course of his 45-minute lecture to Dube’s
class, Stern said, he focused on the tragedy that had
engulfed the Jewish people during the Holocaust and
the role played by both the British and pro-Hitlerite
Arab leaders like the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem in
denying the European Jews the possibility of escaping
to Palestine.

“I told them it was the Germans who killed the Jews
with prussic acid, but it was the British and Arabs who
closed the gates (to Palestine) . . . I pointed out to them

TO HELP OVER
4 MILLION PEOPLE?

Please say yes—and join your friends

|who volunteer for this annual “Super

Sunday” giant telephone drive, to
help over 4 million persons in need
here in New York, in Israel and 30 _
other countries.

TO VOLUNTEER, CALL

(212) 980-1000 Ext. 775

————_________,

= =
CAN YOU SPARE 3 HOURS
| ON SUNDAY, JAN. 29TH,

| You can truly make it “Super Sunday”.
|

UJA-FEDERATION CAMPAIGN

that many survivors of the Holocaust live today in
Israel, and they are still fighting today for their survival
- . . To castigate those survivors as racists is an
obscenity . . . and to use the statement ‘Zionism is
racism’ as a political item to whip the Jews, as is being
done at the U.N., is, in my opinion, a way of murdering
the victims of the Holocaust a second time."’

Stern said he also tried to ‘‘give the students an
historical development of how the canard ‘Zionism is
racism’ was cooked up in the Soviet Union, and how the
Third World had been bribed into accepting it. I told
them I believed that this equation had been introduced
into the classroom under the theme of studying racism,
when in fact it was a political decision, used strictly for

propaganda purposes.”’
Students Display Ignorance

Stern commented, ‘‘Dube certainly treated me in a
friendly and courteous manner, and I was pleased to
have the opportunity to address his students. From the
response of the students to my remarks, however, and
from some of the questions they asked me, it seemed to
me that most of the students are sympathetic to Dube’s
point of view concerning Zionism and Israel, and that
they are very ignorant concerning some basic facets of
the question.

“For example, one student asked me, ‘Why don’t the
Jews who came from Poland go back and live there?’ I
explained to her that when some Holocaust survivors
had gone back to Poland after the war, they had been
confronted with anti-Jewish pogroms and killings in
1946.

“Another student said to me, ‘In Germany, during
the Hitler years the Jews had to bow and scrape when
Germans passed by, and today in Israel the Pales-
tinians have to bow to Israelis.’ I was struck by the level
of ignorance."’

Stern, who has remained in contact with Dube and

“To use the statement
‘Zionism is racism’ as a
political item to whip the
Jews is a way of murdering
the victims of the Holocaust a
second time.”

says he is interested in appearing before the Dube’s
class again this semester, remarked, ‘‘I do not think I
made much of a dent on most of the students.
Nevertheless, several Jewish students came over to me
after the class and said they are now thinking about
challenging some of what he has to say."
Impression of Objectivity

Asked if he was concerned that Dube might be using
him to create an impression that his presentation of
Zionism is objective, Stern said, **I do not think he can
use me. Perhaps, in a sense, we are using each other. I
felt it was extremely important to impart to the students
the reality of what happened to the Jews in the
Holocaust and a greater appreciation of how ‘Zionism is
racism’ is being used as a whip against the Jews today.

“I am presently writing a letter to Dube, asking him
why he uses terms like ‘Zionist zealots’ and ‘Zionist
Ben-Gurion University.’ I said to Fred (Dube), ‘If I can
convince you from a scientific point of view that you are
wrong in your portrayal of Zionism, would you be
willing to look at the evidence I present?’ He replied, ‘I
will look at it.’ I think it is worthwhile that I stay in
contact with him."’

‘Asked if he felt that Dube’s action in inviting
Friedland and himself to speak before the class meant
that Dube was now taking a more fair and objective
approach to the subject of Zionism, Stern replied,
‘‘While I think he showed courage by his willingness to
let me tell my story, that does not change in my mind
the fact that the students are mainly hostile to Zionism
because they are misinformed. I certainly have no
power to change the curriculum of the (recommended)
readings, which all have an anti-Zionist bias . . .

“The question I have,"’ said Stern, ‘‘is why the Stony
Brook faculty did not go in there and really investigate
(Dube's) course so that they could determine whether
this subject is being studied in a way to arrive at the
truth, or if it is being used as a political item against the
Jews.”’ 0

2 JEWISH WORLD:JANUARY 20-28, 1964

Efforts to resolve ‘Dube affair’ are reviewed

Dube invites two speakers on Zionism to class

By WALTER RUBY

The president of the State University of New York at
Stony Brook and the director of the Long Island chapter
of the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B’rith were set
to appear this week in Albany before the New York
State Senate Task Force on Vandalism, Religious De-
secration and Other Acts of Bigotry, to discuss the
Stony Brook administration's efforts to resolve the
so-called ‘‘Dube affair."’

Stony Brook President John Marburger III and Rabbi ;

Arthur Seltzer of ADL had been scheduled to appear
before the task force last week, but Marburger was
unable to appear because of a snowstorm. Seltzer,
however, did meet with the task force.

According to sources in the Jewish community, the
task force, headed by State Sen. Norman Levy
(R-Nassau), wants to meet with Seltzer and Marburger

together to review the Stony Brook administration’s ~

Progress in resolving the Dube affair and in fulfilling
commitments Marburger made to Jewish community
representatives at an October 19 meeting. Contacted by
the Jewish World, Levy said that he preferred to make
no comment until after the meeting with Marburger
and Seltzer.

Report on University Initiatives

Meanwhile, Stony Brook Provost Homer Neal, the
ranking academic officer at the university after
Marborgir,-toia the Jewish World that he is
now completing a report for Marburger documenting
the progress of a number of initiatives taken by the
University administration to resolve the Dube con-
troversy. Neal said he planned to submit his report to
Marburger ‘‘before the beginning of the second
semester’’ (which begins the last week in January) and
that the president would shortly thereafter make the
report public, together with a shorter policy statement
of his own.

The Fight For Peace:
A Fight For

Jewish Survival

Featured speakers:
Dr. George Wald, Nobel Laureate
and Human Rights Activist
and

Dov Sheba, founder of Kibbutz Eilon and
past financial director of Hashomer Hatzair

at the
1984 Human Rights Luncheon

sponsored by

Americans for Progressive Israel
and the
Givat Haviva Educational Foundation

Sunday, January 29, 1984

12 noon, The Sheraton Centre
New York City

Call 212/255-8760
for reservations

$50 per person

Stony Brook Provost Homer Neal plans shortly to submit his
report documenting the resolution of the controversy involving
Prof. Emest Dube.

academic responsibility when dealing with contro-
versial issues.

The Yang Commission has divided into two sub-
committees; one is preparing an institutional statement

~ HOMELESSNESS
IN NEW YORK CITY

a conference for Jewish
Communal Agencies & Institutions

Sponsored by
METROPOLITAN NEW YORK
COORDINATING COUNCIL
ON JEWISH POVERTY

Guest Speaker: ~
Mayor Edward |. Koch
WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 1, 1984
3:30 to 6 p.m.

Congregation Shearith Serael

2 West 70th St., New York City

on the parameters of academic freedom ¢
responsibility, and the other is drafting procedu
safeguards designed to ensure that the rights of facu
and students are preserved and professional ethics :
upheld.

Changes in Dube's Course

Neal also said that he will announce in his rep
changes Dube has agreed to make in his presentation
Zionism in his controversial course ‘'The Politics
Race’’ during the coming semester.

While Neal said he was not yet able to state publi
the changes to which Dube has agreed, Dube hims
told the Jewish World that he has agreed to drop fri
his course description any connection between Zioni
and Nazism. Dube said he has also decided to incluc
as part of his presentation of Zionism, outside speak
who will present differing perspectives on the subje
He said he had inaugurated this practice during the lk

pr’ semester and said he hoped to make it a regular featu

of his presentation of Zionism in ‘‘The Politics
Race."’

Neal revealed to the Jewish World that the Africa
Studies Department will be reviewed on Februe
28-March 1, 1984 by an external review committe
which will then report to the Stony Brook a
ministration its perceptions of the strengths a
weaknesses of the program. Neal explained that Sto
Brook decided last year to initiate at regular interv:
external academic reviews of all of its undergradus
programs, of which AFS is one.

While noting that ‘‘AFS is only one of t!
undergraduate programs to be reviewed this year
Neal commented, ‘‘Given the controversy that h
erupted over AFS, we expect that both the broad
community and the AFS program will be ve
interested in the recommendations that will come fro
this independent body, after its review of AFS.

“The AFS faculty, who feel inappropriately m
ligned, would presumably hope to see this independe
body agree with them," said Neal. ‘‘Other grou}
would obviously expect the review committee to ru
that major changes should be made.”’ Neal stress:
however, that ‘‘the review committee will be playing
strictly advisory role. It will be up to the universi
administration to decide whether to implement any «
all of its recommendations.’

May Postpone Tenure Hearing

Turning to the question of Dube’s upcoming tenu:
hearing (scheduled for March, 1984), Nea! said that tl
administration was still waiting for Dube to formal
request that consideration of his case be postponed fi
a period of a year or more because of the continuir
controversy. Said Neal, ‘President Marburger hz
already indicated a desire to wait with the tenu:
hearing if Dube would prefer that."’

Neal explained, however, that according to universit
guidelines, if Dube asked for a postponement, he wou!
have to either take a leave of absence from th
university until his tenure was decided or relinquish th
title of assistant professor during the interim perio
and accept a lesser position such as lecture:
“According to the rules of the Board of Trustees an
the union agreement,”’ said Neal, ‘‘Dube would have t
choose one of these two options."’

Responding to a question, Neal said he knew of n
plan by the university administration to send a letter c
reprimand to AFS Program Chairman Amiri Barake
condemning him for his outspoken anti-Zionist publi
Positions. Although there have been rumors for som
weeks that Marburger plans to send such a letter ti
Baraka, Neal said, ‘To the best of my knowledge n:
such letter has been sent nor do I know of plans to sen:
one.”’

No Pressure on Poli. Sci. Dept.

Neal also denied reports that the universit;
administration is continuing to pressure the Politica
Science Department to overturn its decision last mont!
to end its policy of cross-listing its courses with AF:
(which gave political science credits to students takin;
AFS courses).

“I do not believe that the decision of the Politica
Science Department will be reversed, and I do no
believe the idea of getting them to reverse it is being
pursued,’’ explained Neal.

“*We do have to pursue steps to ensure that the AF‘
Program does not become isolated and that there arc

continued on page 3

36 JEWISH WORLD*JANUARY 20-26, 1964

Dube affair

continued from page 2

more interactions with the cognate departments rather
than fewer,’’ he said. ‘‘But given the fact that the

(Politics of Race) course had changed substantially
- since the cross-listing began, it is hard to argue that the
Political Science Department should not have been
allowed to reevaluate the course and make a decision
-either to stay with the course or not to do so.”’

Invites Speakers on Zionism

In remarks to the Jewish World, Dube affirmed that
his course description of ‘The Politics of Race’’ for the
coming semester will no longer mention, as it did in the
past, ‘‘the three forms of racism — Nazism, Apartheid,
and Zionism.’ Instead, he said, ‘‘the course de-
scription has been changed to better reflect what is
really going on in the class, with emphasis on what I see
as the three forms of racism — overt, covert and
reactive."’

The two speakers were Dr. Jacob Stern, a Queens

-)
”
x a
- * This copy of

THE JEWISH OBSERVER
Yours FREE When You Subscribe

The Jewish Observer
5 Beekman Street/New York, N.Y. 10038

State/Zip—

j Expiration date DD (month) 00 (year)

ie 7
_ All payments mast be made in US dollars, drawn on US bank.

cardiologist who, according to Dube, ‘‘took the position.

that Zionism is not racism and discussed it on the basis
of the experience of the Jews in the Holocaust, and
Elaine Friedland, who argued that Zionism is a racist
doctrine, basing her appraisal on an analysis of the
historical development of the Zionist organization and
of the Zionist philosophy as expressed by early leaders
such as Herz] and Weizmann.

‘‘After the appearance of these two speakers,”” said
Dube, ‘‘I summarized the discussion and expressed
where I disagreed with both of them . . . saying
essentially that I see numerous trends in Zionist
thought and see it as a mistake to treat it as
monolithic.’’

Differing Points of View

Dube said that Friedland, a former student of his, is
a professor at a New York City technical college. (The
Jewish World was unable to reach Friedland before
press time.)

Contacted by the Jewish World, Stern explained that
he is a survivor of Auschwitz and a member of a group
called Survivors of the Holocaust in the Professions.
“The whole approach of people in our group,”’ he
explained, ‘‘is that if we hear about a distorted
approach toward the Holocaust or toward Israel, the
home of so many Holocaust survivors, we feel a
responsibility to do what we can to correct it."’

British and Arab Role

“I told them it was the Germans who killed the Jews
with prussic acid, but it was the British and Arabs who
closed the gates (to Palestine) . . . I pointed out to them

SUNDAY, JAN. 29TH,
TO HELP OVER
4 MILLION PEOPLE?

| ON

Please say yes—and join your friends

|who volunteer for this annual “Super

Sunday” giant telephone drive, to
help over 4 million persons in need
here in New York, in Israel and 30 _
other countries.

TO VOLUNTEER, CALL

(212) 980-1000 Ext. 775

CAN YOU SPARE 3 HOURS

| You can truly make it “Super Sunday”.

| UJA-FEDERATION CAMPAIGN

that many survivors of the Holocaust live today in
Israel, and they are still fighting today for their survival

. . To castigate those survivors as racists is an
obscenity . . . and to use the statement ‘Zionism is
racism’ as a political item to whip the Jews, as is being
done at the U.N., is, in my opinion, a way of murdering
the victims of the Holocaust a second time.”’

Propaganda purposes."’
Students Display Ignorance

Stern commented, ‘Dube certainly treated me in a
friendly and courteous manner, and | was pleased to
have the opportunity to address his students. From the
response of the students to my remarks, however, and
from some of the questions they asked me, it seemed to
me that most of the students are sympathetic to Dube's
point of view concerning Zionism and Israel, and that
they are very ignorant concerning some basic facets of
the question.

Stern, who has remained in contact with Dube and

“To use the statement
‘Zionism is racism’ as a
political item to whip the
Jews is a way of murdering
the victims of the Holocaust a
second time.”

Impression of Objectivity

Asked if he was concerned that Dube might be using
him to create an impression that his presentation of
Zionism is objective, Stern said, ‘I do not think he can
use me. Perhaps, in a sense, we are using each other. I
felt it was extremely important to impart to the students
the reality of what happened to the Jews in the
Holocaust and a greater appreciation of how ‘Zionism is
racism’ is being used as a whip against the Jews today.

“Tam presently writing a letter to Dube, asking him
why he uses terms like ‘Zionist zealots’ and ‘Zionist
Ben-Gurion University.’ I said to Fred (Dube), ‘If I can
convince you from a scientific point of view that you are
wrong in your portrayal of Zionism, would you be
willing to look at the evidence I present?’ He replied, ‘I
will look at it.’ I think it is worthwhile that I stay in
contact with him.’’

Asked if he felt that Dube’s action in inviting
Friedland and himself to speak before the class meant
that Dube was now taking a more fair and objective
approach to the subject of Zionism, Stern replied,
“While I think he showed courage by his willingness to
let me tell my story, that does not change in my mind
the fact that the students are mainly hostile to Zionism
because they are misinformed. I certainly have no
power to change the curriculum of the (recommended)
readings, which all have an anti-Zionist bias . . .

“The question I have,"’ said Stern, ‘‘is why the Stony
Brook faculty did not go in there and really investigate
(Dube’s) course so that they could determine whether
this subject is being studied in a way to arrive at the
truth, or if it is being used as a political item against the
Jews."’ 0

JEWISH WORLDeFEBRUARY 3-9, 1984

2
SUNY Provost Komisar:

‘Dube’ action rests in Stony Brook, not Albany

By WALTER RUBY

The Provost of the State University of New York
(SUNY) said last week that the proper place to resolve
the ongoing ‘‘Dube affair’ is on the campus of the
State University of New York at Stony Brook and not in
the offices of SUNY Central in Albany. The case
involves Prof. Ernest Dube of Stony Brook’s Africana
Studies Program, who allegedly taught that Zionism is
racism.

In comments to the Jewish World, SUNY Provost Dr.
Jerome Komisar said, ‘‘We (SUNY Central) are fully
supportive of the very appropriate actions Pres. (John)
Marburger has taken to resolve this issue, and we feel
that these actions are very much within the tradition of
university responses to these kinds of issues.”’

Responding to a statement in the Jewish World last
week by Sen. James Lack (R-East Northport) that
SUNY Central should formulate policies on what
constitutes unacceptable advocacy in the classroom,
Komisar commented, ‘‘I would not know how to draw a
definite line and say (to SUNY instructors), ‘You cannot
cross this point.’ The classroom is not a place for
propaganda or for professors to expound their own
personal political convictions. But this is an area that
has been controlled for generations by (a faculty
member’s) own peers — other faculty members. I
believe that is the appropriate way to handle it.’’

Komisar, who said he had spoken to Sen. Lack about
the senator’s suggestion for new SUNY guidelines, was

present at a recent meeting of the State Senate Task
Force on Vandalism, Religious Desecration, and Other
Forms of Bigotry at which Marburger and Rabbi Arthur
Seltzer, director of the Long Island Chapter of the
Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith, offered
conflicting assessments of the effectiveness of the
Stony Brook administration’s efforts to resolve the
Dube affair (see last week’s issue).
Committee Will Address Issue

Asked about Lack’s assertion that intervention from
SUNY Central was needed to bring about a satisfactory
resolution to the case, Komisar noted that “the campus
has a committee being chaired by Dr. (C.N.) Yang
which is now looking at many of the questions that Sen.
Lack has raised.’’ (The Yang Commission on Faculty
Rights and Responsibilities has been charged by
Marburger with the task of examining policies and
procedures concerning issues of academic freedom,
academic responsibility and professional ethics.)

Komisar added, ‘‘I am awaiting the results of that
committee. The material they prepare might well be
useful for the entire (SUNY) system and could be
reviewed in Central administration. After that, we
might see if further work need be done.”’

Komisar commented, ‘‘I have had a number of
discussions with President Marburger, and we have
offered whatever help he might feel is essential. But, as
in most situations of this nature, this is really a
campus-based issue. The campus is the organization

——-

that is responsible for the academic program of the
institution.”’

He added, “‘I believe Pres. Marburger has taken very
appropriate steps. I am awaiting the results of the
(Yang) committee, as well as some of the other steps he
has taken, such as looking toward (the setting up) of a
community advisory group and working to establish
seminars and things of that nature. I believe Jack
(Marburger) has taken the steps that need to be taken
on campus.”’

No Time Limit Set

Queried about the contention of the ADL and others
that Stony Brook has been slow in getting its various
commissions and committees into operation, Komisar
replied, ‘“These things take longer than any of us would
want. But Jack is working on them, and I have the full
expectation that they will be developed. The develop-
ment of academic forums and advisory bodies take a
considerable amount of time.”’

Komisar added that SUNY Central has not given
Marburger any deadline or time limit for the full
implementation of the commissions or for a definitive
‘resolution’ of the Dube case. ‘‘Naturally, we would like
to see everything resolved as soon as possible, but Ido
not have any clear sense of how much time all of this
will take. Each campus is different, and each
community is different.”’

Addressing the concern that Jewish families might
get the impression from the publicity surrounding the
Dube case that Stony Brook is not a_ healthy
environment for their college-age children, Komisar
said, ‘‘we are all concerned about that and feel it would
be very unfortunate if such a false impression became

{here is a great body of
literature on the subject of
academic freedom and
academic responsibility, and
yet this is a subject aren
where one cannot draw a
firm line or build a

Apprised that many in the Jewish community see
Dube’s alleged advocacy of the linkage between
Zionism and racism as part of a larger Strategy by the
Soviet Union and the Arab world to delegitimatize the
State of Israel, Komisar responded, “I do not know

2 JEWISH WORLD*APRIL 6-12. 1984

Stony Brook’s Yang Commission report:

Urges council to tackle academic freedom issues

By WALTER RUBY

The Yang Commission on Faculty Rights and Respon-
sibilities at the State University of New York at Stony Brook
has released a long awaited report which calls for the crea-
tion of a permanent faculty council to deal with conflicts
over academic freedom and academic responsibility atthe
university on am ongoing basis. ‘

The commission, which was headed by physics professor
C. N. Yang, also includes a framework and philosophy for
the proposed Council on Faculty Rights and Responsibilities
and for the university community in general to apply to ques-
tions of academic freedom and academic responsibility.

The commission’s statement seems to emphasize the im-
portance of professors applying strict standards of academic
responsibility to their work, noting, ‘‘Failure of members
of an academic community to act responsibly would under-
mine the integrity and invalidate the authority of the univer-
sity, and thereby render it less effective as an intellectual force
in society.’’

The Yang Commission was created by Stony Brook Presi-
dent John H. Marburger III in the wake of the so-called
“Dube Affair,’ as part of an effort to form more clear univer-
sity guidelines on the limits of academic freedom and respon-
sibility. The Dube Affair involved the case of Prof. Ernest
Dube of Stony Brook’s Africana Studies Program, who
allegedly taught students in his class last summer that
Zionism ia a form of racism. Marburger later disassociated
the university from any linkage between Zionism and racism,
but Dube claimed that he had never advocated that all
Zionists are racists.

Despite complaints about Dube’s teachings by many
groups in the Jewish community, the black, South African-
born professor has continued to discuss mainstream Zionism
as a form of ‘reactive racism’ in his course ‘‘The Politics
of Race,’’ although he has now dropped a statement direct-
ly identifying Zionism as racism from his syllabus and last
semester brought in pro- and anti-Zionist speakers to ad-

15% OFF

ALL PASSOVER ITEMS
(except Haggadahs)

OFFER WITH AD ONLY—EXPIRES 4/16/84
RELIGIOUS
* ITEMS

WEDDING GIFTS
INVITATIONS
BOOKS
ISRAELI

BAR/BAT MITZVAH
NOVELTIES
CARDS

HOLIDAY
ITEMS

CHAI & MAZEL) 220 West Main st. Smithtown, NY
n 3 across from Beach Tree Cafe
GIFT SHOP 516/360-3331

Silver Judaica

Now featuring a large collection of Passover plates in addition
to an outstanding selection of candelabras, chalices and
wine cups, spice boxes, Chanukah lamps, Torah ornaments
and Silver Megillah cases; all handmade.

THE HECKER CORPORATION
605 Fifth Avenue (49th St)
New ¥ rk, N¥gO017

tony
1

ooo

WALTER RUBY

X Chocolate, Haggadah, Story of Passover,

SUNY Prof. Ernest Dube continues to lecture on mainstream
Zionism as a form of “reactive racism” in his class on ‘‘The
Politics of Race.”

Praise for Commission

In a March 20 memo to Marburger, Stony Brook Pro-
vost Homer Neal said the Yang Commission had done a
“commendable job of proposing a framework and
philosophy for dealing with future academic freedom and
academic responsibility issues on our campus.”’ Neal noted
that the commission report will be on the agenda of the
Faculty Senate during its meeting this Monday and that “‘im-
mediately following the Senate discussion I will submit to
you my final recommendations on the report, including a
proposed implementation schedule.’’ In the interim, the
report will be under review by the University Council of
Deans and the Provostial Council.

The Yang Commission report stipulated that the propos-
ed Council on Faculty Rights and Responsibilities, to be
chaired by a ‘Dean of the Council,’ ‘‘will be charged with
advising the President and Provost on conflicts between
members of the academic community in matters relating to
academic rights and responsibilities, on possible abuse of

The Unleavened

BREAD BASKET
$29.95 Ge

Tax + Shipping Extra ag

CELEBRATE PASSOVER txx

with this unusual basket filled with Holiday
Paper Goods, Kedem Wine, Passover

Matzah and Afikomen Covers.

CALL CVI Gy CYYUG 212/793-7141

Ask about our full line of Specialty Baskets Customized for
Business, Organizations and Individuals. Here is some Sf what we
can offer you: Birthday, Get Well, Wedding, Anniversary, Baby
Shower, Baby Birth, Bon Voyage, Congratulations

e Seder Plates * Haggadahs * Books

Z10N Se LION

e For All Your Passover Needs
e For The Unique Gift

Saleld UeZIEW e

dish e Saltwater Dishes ©

212 W. Jericho Tpke.
Huntington Station
2/10 mile west on Rte. 110

(516) 549-5155 Pen Ge)

eee

Piorsera
suoidy

(ELBAUM’S JUDAICA)

Next door to Delicious Dairy Restaurant

.) Serving the Neighboring Jewish Communities (|
= <
fi |[SEDER PLATES, | ws st’, [CANDLESTICKS|] §
@ || HAGGADAHS, MATZOH_ ||2
2 ||KIDDUSH CUPS, GIFTS covers, |2
J || CRYSTAL WINE Traditional AFIKOMAN <
Q || BOTTLES, ETC. and BAGS, |=
oC renpvrnty: | TABLECLOTHS

a =
e HOURS: 00 =
‘@) Sun. 11-7 re)
S| Mon, Tues. 10 (516) 569-4577 |
FS Wed., Thurs. 10-9 bf
nn

\ @ ALL RELIGIOUS ARTICLES ® cniiaren & Aautt BOOKS _/

SS re

such rights, on breaches of ethics, on questions of conflict
of interest,.and on behavior by any member of the academic
community which might reflect adversely on the reputation
of the University.’’

Noting that the Council will consider issues brought to
it .. . ‘by individual students, faculty members, departmen-
tal chairs, (and) deans or higher administrative officers,”
the report stipulated that ‘‘the Council will consist of six
tenured faculty, at least four of whom shall be full professors
. .. It is expected that members of the Council will be emi-
nent scholars and teachers with particular sensitivity to the
issue of the rights and responsibilities of the academic com-
munity and its individual members.”

Freedom and Responsibility

The statement by the Yang Commission on academic
freedom and academic responsibility restates long held
premises on the inviolability of academic freedom frequently
stressed in the past by groups like the American Associa-
tion of University Professors. .

The report goes on to state, ‘However, the very integrity
and vitality of any intellectual community can be maintain-
ed and preserved only through the exercise of both ‘its
freedoms and its responsibilities. These are not concepts an-
tithetical to one another, but rather complementary principles
necessary to sustaining the scholarly traditions of that com-
munity.”’

According to the commission report, ‘‘Faculty members
have the obligation to promote and perfect the processes of
inquiry appropriate to their professional commitments as
teachers . . . faculty members have the responsibility to
transmit to the students the subject matter as well as the pro-
cesses and standards of inquiry appropriate to the discipline.
In this role the faculty member must respect the student’s
intellectual independence.”

The report adds, ‘‘The mutual support of free inquiry
among (faculty) members implies the maintenance of
established standards and criteria in the exercise of such in-
quiry. The open exchange of ideas and their evaluation and
criticism should be undertaken without prejudice or penal-
ty. This entails also the proper recognition and acknowledge-
ment of the contributions of fellow scholars and students.’’

Initial Response Mixed

Initial reaction to the Yang Commission report by Jewish
groups which have been actively involved in consulting with
the university over the Dube Affair appeared to be mixed.

continued on page 31

RAPT
— =

694 Central Avenue/Cedarhurst, NY

Fri. 10-3 Visa ¢ Mastercharge / »

B Cinnamon’s
® 420 Jerusalem Avenue
A. Hicksville, N.Y. |

Ye) For your Passover needs |

We have a full line of Hagadahs,
Children’s books, Records, Table accessories, Seder |
plates, Kiddush cups, Horseradish dishes, Matzoh

plates, Matzoh covers and tablecloths, and much more!

* Upto 30% Discount on
Crystal Decanters & Wine Sets
* Upto 30% Discount on Silver
See us also for your year-round needs — Religious articles,

Bat & Bar Mitzvah and Wedding supplies and gifts, Books,
Novelties, Toys and Israeli imports —

Up to 50% Discount 14k Jewelry.

* Large selection of books at Tremendous Discounts

42 420: GhICc. 7AM

Stony Brook

continued from page 2

Rabbi Arthur Seltzer, director of the Long Island chapter
of the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith, said he
found the commission report ‘well written and very respon-
sible in the way it emphasized the corresponding principles
of academic freedom and academic responsibility. I was
pleased with the emphasis on scholarly methodology.”

David Peirez, president of the Long Island chapter of the
American Jewish Committee, commented, ‘‘In general, the
report was positive, because the Yang Commission evaluated
the whole area of academic rights in the context both of
academic freedom and academic responsibility. There was
a recognition that academic freedom cannot sit in a vacuum,
but must be seen in context of responsibility to society in
general.”’

Peirez said he also had ‘‘some problems’’ with the report.
“‘The commission totally avoided dealing in any way with
the Dube Affair. This is not something that happened at the
University of Southern California, but something that hap-
pened at Stony Brook, and it did not happen ten years ago
but rather this year. I see that as a serious omission.”

Peirez said that while he understood that the charge of
the Yang Commission was to set academic standards for the
future, ‘‘they still ought to have discussed the Dube Affair,
either in a preamble or conclusion. After all, if it had not
been for the Dube Affair, this whole commission would not
have come into existence.””

Peirez said he believes that the proposed Council on Facul-

Homer A. Neal, provost of the State University of New York at
Stony Brook, termed the Yang Commission report on academic
freedom a ‘‘commendable job of proposing a framework and
Philosophy for dealing with future academic freedom and
academic responsibilities issues on our campus.”

ty Rights and Responsibilities ‘“‘owes it to the Jewish com-
munity and society in general to apply its own set of stan-
dards to the Dube situation.’”’

Noting that he was not prepared to say how and when such
a review should be carried out, Peirez stressed, ‘‘Let them
apply these standards to what happened last fall and to what
is still happening (in Dube’s class), to some extent at least

. According to our information, the reading material in
Dube’s course has not changed substantially, and it may well
be that the course is still not balanced.’’

Peirez said also that the new Council should be ready to
consider complaints not only from members of the academic
community, but also by ‘‘any legitimate sustaining communi-
ty organization.’’ Peirez said that if community groups rang-
ing from the AJCommittee, the NAACP, the Polish-
American Society or a group representing the gay community
feels that their community has been aggrieved, they ought
to have access to the council. ‘‘Otherwise,’’ Peirez maintain-
ed, ‘‘the Yang Commission is just giving lip service to the
concept that they have a responsibility to society at large.
Society at large goes well beyond the campus.”’

Seltzer, who has been holding discussions over the last two
months in Albany with members of the State Senate Task
Force on Vandalism, Religious Desecration and Other Acts
of Bigotry and with top officials of SUNY Central in an ef-
fort to arrange a final settlement of the Dube Affair, revealed
last week that Marburger had agreed to meet April 4 with
Seltzer, SUNY Provost Jerome Komisar and Herbert

Gordon, SUNY chancelior for govermental relations.
Seltzer noted that he and Marburger are scheduled to
appear on April 10 before the State Senate Task Force.
However, he said he believes that if a satisfactory arrange-
ment of outstanding issues between Stony Brook and the
ADL can be reached April 4, the Senate Committee meeting
might not prove necessary or might serve as a ‘“‘wrap-up ses-
sion,’”’ officially ending the nine-month long dispute that
began when an Israeli professor at Stony Brook, Selwyn
Troen, complained that Dube was comparing Zionism with
racism and Nazism in his class in an offensive advocacy
manner.
Anti-Israel Reading List

Seltzer declined to spell out what he would consider a
satisfactory settlement to the dispute, noting the sensitivity
of the present negotiations. However many members of the
Jewish community, who requested anonymity, expressed
unhappiness with aspects of how Dube is continuing to teach
the ‘*Politics of Race.”

They pointed in particular to Dube’s reading list which
they said includes only books that take a pronounced anti-
Israel, anti-Zionist slant. Indeed, the books and articles
assigned by Dube this semester for his students to read on
the subject of Zionism include ‘‘The Arabs In Israel’’ by
Sabri Jiryis; ‘“The Fateful Triangle’’ by Noam Chomsky;
“The Evasive Peace: A Study of the Zionist/ Arab Problem’”’
by John H. Davis; ‘‘Is Israel on the Road to Nazism?’’ by
Israel Shahak; “‘Israel’s Sacred Terrorism’’ by Livia Rokach;
and ‘‘The Jewish Question: A Marxist Interpretation’’ by
Abram Leon.

Dube included no books on his reading list with a perspec-
tive more sympathetic to Israel or Zionism. He did state on
his syllabus, however, that ‘‘there are many books on
Zionism, and they do not always look at this question from
the same angle. You (students) are therefore at liberty to read
any of them so long as you read them critically because they
do not represent the same view.’

Some in the Jewish community continue to question
Dube’s overall fitness to teach ‘“The Politics of Race,”’ noting
that his academic qualifications are as a psychologist. Dube
has maintained that he applies concepts from psychology
such as ‘cognitive dissonance’ in seeking to gain a deeper
understanding of racism.

It has been learned that Dube’s tenure hearing, which had
been scheduled to be held this month, has been postponed

Make
your seder
as rich at

it is at the
beginning

JEWISH WORLD®*APRIL 6-12, 1984 31

until a later date at the professor’s request. Dube had main-
tained that he could not receive a fair and unbiased hearing
in the present highly charged atmosphere.

It is not clear whether the university administration will
allow Dube to keep his professional status during the interim
period, between the end of the semester and his tenure hear-
ing, now expected to be held in mid-1985. According to
university regulations, a professor whose tenure hearings
have been postponed is either required to take a leave of
absence or may continue teaching as a-‘lecturer’ with less
than professorial status.

Commission Report Under Review

Reached by the Jewish World, SUNY Provost Komisar
noted, ‘‘While the Yang Commission Report is still being
reviewed on campus and there might still be changes in
language, overall, it looks like a very good report to me.’’

Asked if he accepted the interpretation that the report call-
ed for a tightening of academic standards, Komisar replied,
“T don’t know if it calls for a tightening of standards, but
it certainly made clear the importance of standards of
scholarship for the academic community. I found it to be
a balanced document.””

Queried if he believed that the proposed Council on
Academic Rights and Responsibilities might be directed to
look into Dube’s course and thereby effect a solution to the
Dube Affair, Komisar responded, ‘“‘It is certain that this com-
mission was formed because of the Dube Affair. But while
it is up to the (Stony Brook) Administration to decide how
to implement this document, my sense is that it is a forward
looking document which will deal with future issues that may
arise, rather than one looking backward in time.”’

He added, “‘I see this as a strong statement by an academic
community of academic freedom and responsibility and a
set of procedures that will be of universal use.’’

Asked about earlier statements he made that the Yang
Commission report might be useful for the entire (SUNY)
system, Komisar explained, ‘‘We (SUNY Central) will cer-
tainly share this material with all of the campuses and each
campus can use it in different ways according to their own
needs.”” .

Pressed if the Yang Commission recommendations will
be instituted as a statewide policy for all SUNY campuses,
Komisar replied, ‘‘We will certainly make this available to
the other campuses, but I do not see this being instituted
as a statewide policy.’’ 1

ian

100% Freeze- Oe Enon Cottee =

the end as mnt

Happy Passover from Maxim:
The spoonful rich enough for a mugful.

(1 for each mug ordered) along with a check or money order in the amount of $

MAIL-IN CERTIFICATE

SPECIAL MUG OFFER

Get this 12-02. stoneware mug by Ptaitzgratt for only $2 19 PLUS the inner seal from one jar
(any sie) MAXIM. Comparabie value is $4.99 Save $2 60.

Toreceive your mug(s). complete the folowing certificate
Please send me ___mug{s). | have enclosed

(«)

Certified Kosher

-innet seals) from any size jar MAXIM tor Passover

instalictions. Certificate

pm me ee ee ee ee

(52.49 per mug)
Mail to: SPECIAL MUG OFFER, General Foods Corporation, P.O. Box
3634, Kankakee, IL 60902 Gr Wel
NAME _
Please Print
= ADDRESS _ = ——-
cm STATE ae ee

OFFER EXPIRES 12/31/84. Otfer void where prohibited, taxed or otherwise restricted. Allow 6-8
weeks for processing request. Offer good onty in USA, Puerto Rico ond US.

may not be transferred, @ ee am ITN RD apoE
Of Copied. THIS CERTIFICATE MUST ACCOMPANY YOUR REQUEST.

iS A A A ES CR eS mR Me oa ca a a Gace a ea ea a oa de ol

1984 Genetat Foods Corporation

FOCUS

Jews turning a blind eye to anti-Semitism

A year ago at Israel’s magnificent Museum of the Dia-
spora a symposium on contemporary anti-Semitism was
held. A few speakers argued that the situation all over
the world is very much like that which existed in the ear-
ly °30s. It was their view that it was not inconceivable
that another Holocaust could come to pass, and very soon.

Speakers from the United States and England argued,
however, that Jews should not overreact to ugly sporadic
symptoms in both countries where, in their view, democ-
racy was still safe and secure. Listening to the symposium
was no delight. One wanted to believe that the optimists
were right, but the pessimists had enough evidence to
make one apprehensive. ;

There is no doubt but that the Arab world is making an
enormous contribution to the spread of anti-Semitism. It
does this in the United Nations, in the media and among
the intelligentsia on college campuses everywhere. It also
does this in black America. In Israel Americans are being
asked every day about the phenomenon they call “Jesse
Jackson.”

: e

ON ONE HAND, ISRAELIS are disappointed that
President Reagan fumbled badly on Lebanon and that the
people of the United States have simply lost their nerve.
Because of Americans’ unwillingness to fight for what is
their real national interest, Israelis believe, the next cen-
tury will not be theirs but rather than of the USSR or Chi-
na. But this worries Israelis less than the fact that, with
Arab and Jewish money, Jesse Jackson can be a threat to
them and their coreligionists in the Western Hemisphere.
Undoubtedly, they are overreacting, but one thing is cer-
tain — Hitler may be dead but his program is not.

I am no prophet. I do not know what the future holds.
Generally, I am optimistic. I have great faith in the
American system and the American people. I refuse to
panic. But on my last visit to the United States I found
two items that caused me concern.

One happened at a state university — at Stony Brook,
part of the State University of New York, the state and
the university with perhaps the largest Jewish enroll-
ment in the world. There anti-Semitism was made intel-
lectually respectable in the name of academic freedom. In
addition, many Jews — a horrifying percentage and some

of our finest — acted just as did the wealthy Jews of Ger-
many when Hitler rose to power. They were temperate,
inactive, accepting. At least when Germany’s Jewish plu-
tocracy did what they did, they thought that they would
thereby save their fortunes and their status. Stony
Brook’s masochists were ready to risk their lives and the
lives of others for the idol of free speech.

I may be overreacting. I may be faulting many col-
leagues, for whom I always had profound respect. But if it
is true — and I believe that it is — that anti-Semitism is a
cancer on the body politic, then I want to treat it as cancer
and destroy the first malignant cell that appears. I will
not suffer that cell to grow. Nor will I only pray for its dis-
appearance. I will do what the Bible mandates with re-
gard to Amalek — annihilate it and leave no trace or re-
membrance of it. Should I even resort to violence? At the

EMANUEL RACKMAN
RENO ESTEE PRE LIS AT, EO ETE IE TT

moment, no. Even justifiable violence has its perimeters.
And presently there is no need for violence to get rid of
one who sows the seed of hate only with words.

What worries me is that the hate is being taught with
state support. What worries me even more is that Jews sit
idly by. I ask myself: Have we learned nothing from the
Holocaust?

There is considerable disappointment in many circles
that even the leaders of several Jewish defense organiza-
tions were ambivalent about acting in the matter, not to
mention the Jews who always prefer to fight anti-Sem-
itism with silence. Theirs is the old slogan, “Jews, be nice.
Jews, be quiet.” As if the enemy will die because he is ig-
nored! To the credit of the Anti-Defamation League it
must be said that it acted firmly.

I was saddened, however, by another depressing aspect
of the American Jewish scene. There are Jewish organiza-
tions that do not deal with matters of defense but try to
capitalize on the phenomenon of anti-Semitism to raise
money for themselves, even though their programs are of
an altogether different kind. Jews contribute, thinking
that their gifts will be used for political action against the
enemy. In fact the recipient may be committed to different

tence of anti-Semitism to ré

goals, perhaps worthy ones, but not the goals on which
the donor wants his money spent.

For example, it is perfectly proper to publicize the exis-
money for Jewish educa-
tion the better to enable Jewish children to cope with it.
But ethics require that one be specific and say so. Or it is
perfectly proper to publicize the existence of anti-Sem-
itism to raise money for Holocaust education, research,
and memorials. But one should not make it appear that
the money given will be used for direct action against the
enemy.

I know that donors ought to be more careful when they
give. They should exercise a modicum of caution — make
inquiry, double check, then contribute. But Jewish organ-
izaitons also ought to exercise a bit of morality and not
convey impressions that are false. Or am I being naive?

MY FINAL POINT IS the most controversial. I have
spent almost all my life in academic circles, and I know
the blessing of academic freedom. Yet I also know its
abuse. I cannot fathom why the freedom to shout “fire” in
a crowded theater is not protected while a professor’s free-
dom to say things that are just as likely to precipitate vio-
lence, albeit delayed, is absolute. What the Stony Brook
professor was teaching again and again — that Zionism is
a form of racism — could easily provoke a confrontation
on campus between Jewish and pro-Arab students, black
and white. I imagine that such a tragic encounter will
come to pass. Yet must one wait until blood is shed before
one silences the cause of the evil?

Let us even assume that it is better to risk bloodshed
than to curb a professor’s expression of what he holds to
be the truth. How far will we go? Will we let him teach
that there was no Holocaust? Will we let him teach that
we must gas all children born to a family beyond a given
number? Will we let him urge students to become drug
addicts? Obviously, there are limits. If the Stony Brook
professor can teach what he is teaching, it is because his
teaching is deemed less of a lie or less of an evil than is
found in my illustrations. And this is precisely what his
defenders are accomplishing. They are giving a measure
of credibility to what he is saying.

What Jew can be silent about this and defend the pro-
fessor’s abuse of academic freedom?

Shame on those who are silent!

€€ 39Vd

‘oul WOUIWIEXY UROOWY ay, >y Yea”, YSIMAP eUL

N pe6t ‘eb dy

ah
2 Anti- Def mationt
of Bnai Bri 7 eague

/
¥ f
al Dub< APR 2 4 igeq

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

JOINT STATEMENT ~ Rabbi Arthur Seltzer

Long Island Regional Director

Anti-Defamation League of

B'nai B'rith

Dr. John Marburger

President, State University

of New York at Stony Brook
Great Neck, New York, April 19....As part of a continuing process of discussion
and consultation between the State University of New York, Stony Brook University
and the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith, initiated by the New York State
Senate Task Force on Vandalism, Religious Desecration and Other Acts of Bigotry

chaired by Senator Norman Levy, a meeting was held on April 4, 1984 at the

State University offices in New York City,

At that meeting, an understanding was reached by all the Participants,
Dr. Herbert Gordon, Deputy to the Chancellor for Governmental Relations of
the State University of New York; Dr. Jerome Komisar, Provost of the State
Tims aa)

niversitu of New York; Dr. John Marburger, President, SUNY Stony Brook; and

Rabbi Arthur Seltzer, Long Island Regional Director of the Anti-Defamation

From the wines of the Dube Controversy, discussions between the
Anti-Defamation _—— and the Stony Brook administration were focused upon
three major points. First was the matter of administrative disassociation
as

SUNY Board of Trustees 5/2

Long Island Regional Office, 98 Cutter Mill Road, Great Neck, NY 11021 (516) 829-3820

2 Anti-Defamation League
& of Bnai Brith

RABBI ARTHUR SELTZER

Regional Director

from the Zionism is racism equation. Second was a moral condemnation of this
equation. Third was the establishment of university mechanisms both to articulate
the relationship between the principles of academic freedom and academic responsi-
bility as well as to establish recognized procedures for addressing charges of the
abuse of academic professionalism within the university.

The third point, that of the implementation of the requisite mechanisms, has
remained at issue between Stony Brook and the Anti-Defamation League until the
present.

It was agreed at the April 4th meeting that the report of the Commission on
Faculty Rights and Responsibilities, issued on March 1, 1984 by Dr. Chen Ning Yang,
Chairman, when fully operative, would serve as an acceptable basis for implementing
the concerns of Stony Brook and ADL that a formal mechanism incorporating a clear
conceptual and procedural mandate be established to both articulate the perameters
of academic freedom and academic responsibility in the abstract, as well as to
apply these principles in specific cases of alleged abuse.

It is anticipated that the conclusions contained in the Yang Commission Report
concerning these issues will serve as a model against which future issues of
academic professionalism may be referred.

In addition, the establishment of the Stony Brook Regional Relations Advisory
Council is anticipated to provide significant community input to the discussion
of these issues whose implications involve both the academic as well as the

general communities.

Long Island Regional Office, 98 Cutter Mill Road, Great Neck, NY 11021 (516) 829-3820

“5, §Anti-Defamation Lea
“ of Bnai Brith

RABBI ARTHUR SELTZER

Regional Director

In the meeting of April 4th, as in all previous meetings between Stony Brook
and ADL, the overriding concern has been the preservation of the integrity of the
academic process, and the strenghtening of universities as centers of scholarly,
methodologically rigoruus research and teaching in the best tradition of academic
professionalism.

With the discussions of April 4th now concluded, it is hoped that all con-
cerned will seek to apply the lessons learned from this controversy to the task
of ensuring that the relationship between academic freedom and academic responsi-

bility continues to be one which is both sensitive to the implications of issues

discussed as well as rigorous in the pursuit of truth.

Long Island Regional! Office, 98 Cutter Mill Road. Great Neck, NY 11021 (516) 829-3820

gue

THE JEWISH WEEK & THE AMERICAN EXAMINER, INC. 5/4/84

State University of New York at Stony Brook

Symposium
on

ACADEMIC FREEDOM,
ACADEMIC RESPONSIBILITY,
AND SOCIETY

May 8, 1984
8:00PM
Main ‘Vheater Fine Arts Center
Keynote Address
Dr. Sidney Hook

Hoover Insatution on War, Revolution and Peace Stanford Universit

Panel of Respondents

Ms. Laura D. Blackbourne Chief Executive Officer, Institute for Mediation
and Conflict Resolution: Counsel to the New York State Branch of the
National Association for the Advancement of Colored People

Professor Ralph Brown.Protessor of Law (Emeritus), Yale University: General
Counsel to the \merican Association of University Professors

Professor Monroe HL. #Freedman,Professor of Law and former Dean. Hofstra
University School of Law: former Director, US Holocaust Memorial Council:
Member, National Advisory Council of the American Civil Liberties Union

Professor Sumner Rosen. School of Soctal Work, Columbia University: former
Chair, \cademic Freedom Committee of the American Civil Liberties Union

Rabbi Arthur Seltzer.Long Island Regional Director, Anti-Defamation
League of Bonai Bonith

Professor Richard Teevan. Deparmment of Psvchology, State University of New

York at \Ibany: Representative. United University Professions

Ample Parking and no admission charge
For further information please call

(516) 246-8611/5934

_ Hal

State U. Professor Who Labeled

Zionism Racist Is Denied Tenure

By DAVID BIRD

A professor at the State University at
Stony Brook, L.I. who was involved ina
controversy two years ago because a
course he taught equated Zionism with
racism has been denied tenure and will
have to leave the university next year.

The university’s administration said
the controversy did not weigh in the
decision.

“‘T have concluded that external pres-
sures did not affect the recommenda-
Uons that were transmitted to me,” the
school’s president, Dr. John H. Mar-
burger 3d, said in a statement. Univer-
sity officials have declined to comment
further on the ground that tenure is a
private, personnel matter.

But the professor, Ernest Dube, said
that he had been approved for tenure
by all the academic committees of his
peers and that he was not turned down
until the process reached the adminis-
trative level.

Leslie H. Owens, the chairman of the
Program of Africana Studies, in which
Professor Dube has taught, confirmed
that the professor had been approved
by all the academic committees. ‘He
was a vast resource for our program,”
Professor Owens said. ‘I don’t think
we can replace him.”’

Professor Owens said he had no
doubt that outside influences affected
the tenure decision.

Professor Dube, who is 56 years old,
is a black native of South Africa who
spent four years in prisons there for his

acuvities in upposition to tie white:

Government. He joined the faculty at
Stony Brook in 1977.

There were no objections to his
teaching until a visiting Israeli profes-
sor complained, in a 1983 letter ito the
adrninistration, that Professor Dube’s
linking of Zionism to racism was
“sloganeering that is practiced by the
anti-Semite.”’

' Fhe Israeli professor, Selwyn K.
Troen, said he had never talked with
Professor Dube nor attended his
Classes, but based his charge on a com-

plaint by one student and by the course |

syllabus.

’ Professor Troen said he was upset by
the part of the syllabus that read:
“Fifth Week: the three forms of racism
and how they have manifested them-
selyes. 1. Nazism in Germany. 2.
Apartheid in South Africa. 3. Zionism
in Israel.”

, Professor Dube said he linked Zion-
ism with racism because he believed
there was a tendency of people who had
been victimized to victimize others. He
said he taught that many Israeli Jews,
inemselves victims of Nazi racism,
had ‘in turn developed racist attitudes
toward their Arab countrymen. He said
ne spent half a lecture a'sernester on
Zionism, Ew

After the complaint, the university
senate, made up of representatives of
the college’s faculty members and pro-

fessional employees, appointed an ex-
ecutive committee that investigated
the charges by Professor Troen. The
committee’s chairman, Joel Rosen-
thal, said at the time that the accusa-
tion of anti-Semitism against Professor
Dube was “‘a very serious charge based
on very weak evidence.’’

On Aug. 17, 1983, the committee said
Professor Dube had not overstepped
the bounds of academic freedom.

Jewish groups called for a more
vigorous investigation. And the day
after the committee’s decison, Rabbi
Arthur Seltzer, the Long Island re-
gional director of the Anti-Defamation
League of B’Nai B’Rith, said he had
brought up the matter with an aide to
Governor Cuomo.

Two weeks later, the Governor
issued a statement singling out Profes-

sor Dube and criticizing anyone calling |

Zionism racist. “It is a teaching which,
in my opinion, is intellectually dishon-
est,”’ the Governor said.

“I felt the Governor’s statement was
very unfortunate and very unneces-
sary,”’ said Professor Rosenthal. “I
think he did it to help himself political-
ly.” Dr. Marburger called the Gover-
nor’s statement “‘overly strong.”

In September 1983, the university
senate voted, 54 to 14, to support its
committee’s decision not to press a fur-
ther investigation of Professor Dube.

“We have not called for any specific
disposition of his tenure case,”’ Rabbi
Seltzer said last week. He said that the
issue was “‘academic freedom versus
academic responsibility” and that Pro-
fessor Dube’s teaching was ‘‘the rank-
est kind of political advocacy in an aca-
demic classroom in a publicly-sup-
ported university.”

Under university procedure, Profes-
sor Dube may continue teaching
through the coming academic year.
Then he must leave. *

—

“Cad: FY
hn ' herd LY

Sour Sawer = — Buber

STATE OF NEW YORK

EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT
EXECUTIVE CHAMBER

ae gD MQh S25 ~ ap
TATE USTEHSH Gris STATE CAPITOL
” oreo Ride sees ALBANY 12224
OFFIC. OF ra Ly eee ane
ii 1984
PM
7 (4561

September 28, 1984

Dear Mr. Diamond:

Governor Cuomo has asked me to thank you for your recent
letter concerning the State University of New York (SUNY). at

| Under the laws of New York, the State University is a

| semiautonomous system. The Governor appoints the SUNY trustees,
| who in turn set policy for SUNY and select the Chancelior and

| other senior administrative personnel. The powers of the

| Trustees, therefore, set the University apart from the typical

| State agency over which the Governor exercises more direct

| leadership.

Notwithstanding the unique place of SUNY within the gover-
mance structure of New York State, the Governor is concerned
about any instances of anti-Semitism within an academic institution
such as SUNY. You should know that the Governor spoke out clearly
and forthrightly on the Dube case at Stony Brook. Further, the
Governor has signed legislation this year that requires disciosure
oi grants in excess of $100,000 from sources outside the University.
This will ensure a public awareness of any funding received by SUNY
of other than State money.

In sum, the Governor's actions over the past year demonstrate
his abhorrence of anti-Semitism and his commitment to insure that
full disclosure is required of nonpublic funds.

Your interest in sharing your concerns on this important
subject is appreciated.

Sincerely,

/s/ Wichael Del Giudice

Mr. Joel Diamond
3618 Tonopah Street
Seaford, New York 11783

cc: Chancellor Clifton Wharton, State University of New York

24 JEWISH WORLD*NOVEMBER 2-8, 1984

‘

In considering foreign grants: _

Marburger endorses AJ

By WALTER RUBY '

President John Marburger of the State
University of New York at Stony Brook last
week wrote Joan Silverman, Long Island
director of the American Jewish Committee,
that he has “‘enthusiastically endorsed” an
AJCommittee document entitled
“Guidelines for University Practices in Ac-
cepting Foreign Grants or Contracts”? and
that he will ‘look to (the guidelines) as a
means of ensuring the nondiscriminatory use
of foreign grants within the University.”

Marburger’s acceptance of the AJCom-
mittee guidelines came in the wake of revela-
tions in the media this summer that Stony
Brook had been in communication with
Saudi Arabia’s King Faisal Foundation
about the possibility of support for an $11
million Islamic Studies Department at the
campus.

-Marburger has stressed that Stony Brook’s
interest in applying for the Saudi grant never
got beyond the discussion stage and that an
actual application was never submitted to the
Faisal Foundation. However, Jewish groups

ve criticized the university’s willingness to
consider the grant from a foundation known
to attach anti-Jewish conditions to its grants,
as well as the university’s apparently
misleading response to a freedom of infor-
mation request last February by the Long
Island Jewish World that the university hand
over all correspondence relating to attempts
© establish chairs of learning funded by
Middle Eastern governments or businesses.

Guidelines Fair and Reasonable

In his letter to Silverman, Marburger
thanked the AJCommittee leader for draw-
ing his attention to the existence of the
guidelines, which were drawn up in 1979. Ac-

cording to the Stony Brook President,
“These guidelines are eminently fair and
reasonable and appear to be consistent with
the various state policies and regulations
under which our campus operates. I have en-
thusiastically endorsed the guidelines and
look to them as a means of ensuring the non-
discriminatory use of foreign grants within
the University.”’

Marburger promised Silverman that
language from the AJCommittee guidelines
will’ be used in a brochure which will be
distributed to volunteer fund raisers for
Stony Brook. It was such a volunteer fund
raiser, Colin Jupp of Setauket, who ap-
proached a number of high-ranking Saudi
officials about the possibility of getting Saudi
money for Stony Brook.

Marburger wrote to Silverman, “Although
we believe that our past actions have been
consistent (with the AJCommittee
guidelines), we plan to apply them conscious-
ly in the future.”

Won’t Discriminate in Hiring

The AJCommittee guidelines call on
universities to affirm to potential donors that
the university is ‘‘an Equal Opportunity
employer and will not discriminate in the hir-
ing or assignment of personnel on the basis
of race, religion or national origin.”’

The university is also called upon to make
clear that it “‘will not discriminate in its ad-
ministration of grants, contracts, and other
agreements with foreign entities’? and that
it would not tolerate the foreign entity refus-
ing, ‘on the basis of race, sex, or national
origin, to grant entry visas or work permits
to individuals qualified in the judgment of
the university to perform assigned respon-
sibilities.”’

In a recent letter to Joan Silverman, Long Island
director of the American Jewish Committee,
Stony Brook president John Marburger called
the AJCommittee’s guidelines for accepting
foreign grants “eminently fair and reasonable.’

The university is called upon not to
discriminate against any student ‘‘in the ad-
mission or assignment of students to any
study or research program sponsored in full
or in part by a grant from a foreign enti-
ty” and to make clear to the foreign entity
that it will not accept any grant, contract or
other agreement with a foreign entity ‘‘which
is contingent upon the university’s cancell-
ing or curtailing any of its other programs

Committee guidelines

or relations with any other country.”’

The guidelines also advise that “the
university has an obligation to prevent the
skewing of program offerings, an imbalance
of the curriculum, which may result from a
grant or contract to promote the study of one
country.’’ The guidelines stress that if the

- donor country is involved in an evident

significant political dispute, “the university
is obligated to make available the study of
alternate views and to prevent the involve-
ment of the university institutionally in the
Propaganda activities of one party or
another.’”’

Method of Controlling Funds Key

Franklin Ornstein, president of the Long
Island Chapter of the AJCommittee, com-
mented, ‘‘We are gratified that Stony Brook
has taken the very positive move of adop-
ting these guidelines...which if followed can
help a university to make sure that any fun-
ding it accepts from foreign governments has
no strings attached. We are gratified that
Stony Brook came the distance that they
have on this question.’’

Ornstein noted that the deciding factor for
universities considering the acceptance of
funds from foreign sources “ought not to be
the source of the funds, but rather the
methods by which the funds are controlled.”

Noting that AJCommittee has no objec-
tion to a non-discriminatory grant from
Saudi Arabia, Ornstein Stressed, ‘The
government itself is not significant, as long
as it exercises no control.’’

Ornstein said that the AJCommittee plans
to urge Gov. Cuomo and the SUNY Board
of Regents to follow Stony Brook’s
lead and adopt the ‘‘Guidelines for Univer-
sity Practices”’ as official policy. 0

3 ie ta SS oe etme = rw si — |

Chancellor Calls for
Second Committee to
Decide Dube Tenure.

SUNY Chancellor Clifton R. Wharton Jr
has directed that a new Chancellor's
Advisory Committee be convened to act
on the tenure appeal of Ernest F. Dube
of the Africana Studies Program at
Stony Brook

Professor Dube had appealed the
decision of Stony Brook's President
John H. Marburger not to grant his
request for tenure. Wnen Dube
appealed last summer, under terms of
the United University Professions (UUP)
contract with the State University of
New York. Wharton formed an advisory
committee, as required under terms of
the union-state agreement. That
committee reported to Wharton on
March 5.

In a letter to Dube. dated May 6. the
Chancellor said the process had been
“compromised” by what he called
“overriding factors.’ He said these
actions, involving the American
Association of University Professors and
the Long Island newspaper. Newsday,
had “seriously compromised (and)
undermined the integrity of (the)
process.”

The Chancellor has directed that the
new Advisory Committee report no later
than Nov. 15 and that Marburger grant
Dube an extended appointment through
Feb. 28. 1987.

Under the UUP-SUNY agreement.
Dube will select one faculty
representative on the Chancellor's
Advisory Committee, Marburger will
select one representative and those two
together will select a third member. The
first tripartite committee's membership
consisted of Professor Leslie H. Owens
of the Africana Studies Program,
Professor Elof Axel Carlson of the
Department of Biochemistry and
Professor Aaron W. Godfrey of the
Comparative Literature Program. The
following is the text of the letter from
Wharton to Dube

“You have requested, pursuant to
Article 33 of the Agreement between
the State of New York and United
University Professions, Inc., that the
decision of President Marburger in the
nonrenewal of your appointment at the
State University at Stony Brook be
reviewed by me together with the
recommendations of the ad hoc
Chancellor's Advisory Committee.

“Although that review has been
completed, there are overriding factors
which impel me to conclude that the
Article 33 process has been seriously
compromised. | find that actions taken
in regard to the release and
dissemination of the confidential report
of my Advisory Committee have
undermined the integrity of that

process. Because of that breach and
the pressures brought to bear as a
result of the information disseminated, |
find it essential to direct that a second
Chancellor's Advisory Committee be
convened.

“There is no question that the
maintenance of confidentiality of the
decision-making process is an integral
element of a tenure review system,
whether it be a campus-based peer
review or a Collectively negotiated
appeal process. Yet, during the
pendency of this appeal, and prior to
the completion of my review of the
record, confidentiality has been
breached to my knowledge on two
occasions.

“First, and most serious, is the
release of the Advisory Committee

- report to a competing labor

organization. That organization has now
intervened directly on your behalf
based upon its unauthorized receipt
and analysis of the Committee's
recommendations to me. Such
intervention by one collective
bargaining organization on behalf of an
individual represented by another is an
unwarranted intrusion in the appeal
process. Second was the release of the
substance of the Committee's
recommendations by a member of the
Committee to a media representative.
This resulted in the premature
disclosure in a national newspaper of
matters pending in the Article 33
review. These serious breaches have
not permitted me to proceed with a
confidential assessment of the record.
To proceed to final action at this time
would condone the intervention of
parties and issues extraneous to the
requirements of the Agreement.

“| direct therefore, in accordance with
Article 33.4(q) of the Agreement, that
three new members be empaneled
under (33.4(c) and (d) to serve on a
second ad hoc tripartite committee and
report to me no later than November
15, 1986. In order to assure the
integrity of the entire process, which will
enable me to reach the merits of your
appeal, all participants will be
admonished to maintain confidentiality.

During the completion of the second
review, | am also directing that
President Marburger grant you an
additional appointment through
February 28, 1987 in a title of qualified
rank.”

State University of New York

State University Plaza
Albany, New York 12246

Office of the Vice Chancellor for
University Affairs and Development

(518) 473-1825 May 5, 1986

MEMORANDUM

TOs Members, SUNY Board of Trustees

FROM: [Ueno G. Ballard
cting Vice Chancellor for University Affairs

and Development

SUBJ: Chancellor's Decision in Ernest F. Dube Case

Enclosed for your information is a copy of Chancellor
Wharton's letter to Professor Dube relative to Professor Dube's
Article 33 appeal. Also enclosed are copies of correspondence
between the Chancellor and Mr. Robert Kreiser, an official of
the AAUP, concerning this case.

Because there has been widespread interest in this case on
the part of the media and others, we plan to release the May 5
letter from the Chancellor to Professor Dube as soon as he
receives it (probably tomorrow). We will not publicize the
correspondence with Mr. Kreiser at this time.

Chancellor Wharton's position in respect to further in-
quiries is that the May 5 letter is self-explanatory. We will
have no additional comment on the matter at this time.

Attachments
cc: Dr. Wharton

State University of New York

State University Plaza
Albany, New York 12246

Office of the Chancellor

May 5, 1986

CERTIFIED MAIL

Professor Ernest F. Dube

523 East Fourteenth Street
Apartment 3-E

New York, New York 10009

Dear Professor Dube:

You have requested, pursuant to Article 33 of the Agreement
between the State of New York and United University Professions,
Inc., that the decision of President Marburger in the nonrenewal
of your appointment at the State University at Stony Brook be
reviewed by me together with the recommendations of the ad hoc
Chancellor's Advisory Committee.

Although that review has been completed, there are over-
riding factors which impel me to conclude that the Article 33
process has been seriously compromised. I find that actions
taken in regard to the release and dissemination of the confiden-
tial report of my Advisory Committee have undermined the integrity
of that process. Because of that breach and the pressures brought
to bear as a result of the information disseminated, I find it

essential to direct that a second Chancellor's Advisory Committee
be convened.

There is no question that the maintenance of confidentiality
of the decision-making process is an integral element of a tenure
review system, whether it be a campus-based peer review or a
collectively negotiated appeal process. Yet, during the pendency
of this appeal, and prior to the completion of my review of the

record, confidentiality has been breached to my knowledge on two
occasions.

First, and most serious, is the release of the Advisory
Committee report to a competing labor organization. That
organization has now intervened directly on your behalf based
upon its unauthorized receipt and analysis of the Committee's
recommendations to me. Such intervention by one collective
bargaining organization on behalf of an individual represented

Professor Dube - 2 May 5, 1986

by another is an unwarranted intrusion in the appeal process.
Second was the release of the substance of the Committee's
recommendations by a member of the Committee to a media repre-
sentative. This resulted in the premature disclosure in a
national newspaper of matters pending in the Article 33 review.
These serious breaches have not permitted me to proceed with a
confidential assessment of the record. To proceed to final
action at this time would condone the intervention of parties
and issues extraneous to the requirements of the Agreement.

I direct therefore, in accordance with Article 33.4(g)
of the Agreement, that three new members be empaneled under
§33.4(c) and (d) to serve on a second ad hoc tripartite
committee and report to me no later than November 15, 1986. In
order to assure the integrity of the entire process, which will
enable me to reach the merits of your appeal, all participants
will be admonished to maintain confidentiality. During the
completion of this second review, I am also directing that
President Marburger grant you an additional appointment through
February 28, 1987 in a title of qualified rank.

Sincerely,

Clifton R. Wharton, Jr.
Chancellor

cc: President Marburger
Dr. Godfrey

be: Dr. Burke
Dr. Frangos
Dr. Haffner
Mr. Levine
Mr. Mannix
Dr. Penney
Mr. Rosenthal

State University of New York

State University Plaza
Albany, New York 12246

Office of the Chancellor

May 2, 1986

Mr. B. Robert Kreiser

Associate Secretary

American Association of
University Professors

1012 Fourteenth Street, N.W.
Suite 500

Washington, DC 20005

Dear Mr. Kreiser:

I am in receipt of your April 28, 1986 letter regarding
the Dube tenure appeal which is presently pending before me
pursuant to Article 33 of the Agreement between the United
University Professions (UUP) and the State. Since the AAUP
is a competing labor organization, I believe it would be
inappropriate to respond regarding the merits of recommenda-
tions made in accordance with an existing collectively
bargained procedure.

I do, however, feel obligated to express my grave concern
about your receipt and review of a copy of the Chancellor's
Advisory Committee report. This breach of negotiated procedure
as well as the basic principles of confidentiality in a tenure

review undermines the integrity of the entire process. I find
it simply unacceptable.

Very truly yours,

Clifton R. Wharton, Jr.
Chancellor

cc: President Marburger
Professor Dube

bc: Dr. Burke, Dr. Frangos, Dr. Haffner, Mr. Levine,
Mr. Mannix, Dr. Penney, Mr. Rosenthal

AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF UNIVERSITY PROFESSORS

1012 FOURTEENTH STREET, N.W., SUITE 500
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005
ieRAlme 202) 737-5900
STATE UN'YTRS'T’ oF Hew york = 7°”?

= OC 2 8vc 3
OFFIC! 95 THE OHA CFILLGR

President: Associate Secretary:
Paut H.L. WALTER APR Qn 196 B. ROBERT KREISER
. 7°

Skidinore College P’y
General Secretary: PBZ 2 845i
ERNST BENJAMIN

April 28, 1986

Dr. Clifton R. Wharton, Jr.
Chancellor

State University of New York
State University Plaza
Albany, New York 12246

Dear Chancellor Wharton:

Professor-Ernest F. Dube has been in correspondence with us since the
fall of 1985 concerning the decision to deny him tenure at the State Uni-
versity of New York at Stony Brook and allegations that serious violations
of due process had occurred in the evaluation of his tenure candidacy and
that considerations violative of his academic freedom figured significantly
in the adverse tenure decision. We learned at the time that Professor Dube
had appealed his case to a three-member "Chancellor's Advisory Committee,"
which is charged under Article 33 of the collective-bargaining agreement
with conducting a final review of the matter. Accordingly, we advised
Professor Dube that we would defer commenting on his situation until the
review committee had issued its report.

note that the committee has unanimously endorsed the favorable recommen-
dations for tenure that were previously made by the ad hoc Departmental
Committee and the College of Arts and Sciences Personnel Policy Committee.
Mindful of the principle that the faculty of a university has primary re-
sponsibility in determining matters of faculty status, we hope very much
that you will give due consideration to the report of the Chancellor's
Advisory Conmittee and that, absent compelling reasons to the contrary not
previously voiced by administrative officers at Stony Brook, you will ac-
cept the recommendations of the three faculty bodies that have reviewed
this matter to grant tenure to Professor Dube.

s|]| This morning we received a copy of the committee's report, and we

Sincerely,

A Udit [bter

B. Robert Kreiser
BRK: id

cc: President Johri H. Marburger
Professor Ernest F. Dube

Yule T¢

State University of New York

State University Plaza
Albany, New York 12246

Office of the Chancellor May 14, 1986

Mr. B. Robert Kreiser
Associate Secretary
American Association of

University Professors
Suite 500

1012 Fourteenth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005

Dear Mr. Kreiser:

Thank you for your prompt response to my May 2, 1986 letter.

I believe, however, that you have missed the most important point
completely.

Regardless of how AAUP views itself in "advising" and playing
a "mediative role" on behalf of faculty, your organization is a
competing collective bargaining representative intruding into a
university where the faculty are already represented exclusively
by the United University Professions (UUP). Article 33 of the
Agreement between UUP and the State of New York provides the

collectively-negotiated procedure for tenure review in certain
circumstances.

I strongly believe that the intervention of AAUP in the Dube
appeal, following your receipt and review of a report made con-
fidentially to me as a part of the Article 33 procedure, was in-
appropriate. As a competing collective bargaining organization,
there is simply no legitimate role for AAUP to play in the process.

Sincerely,

Clifton R. Wharton, dr.
Chancellor

cc: President John H. Marburger
Professor Ernest F. Dube

bce: SUNY Board of a 4

. AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF UNIVERSITY PROFESSORS

1012 FOURTEENTH STREET, N.W., SUITE 500
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005
(202) 737-5900

President: Associate Secretary:
Paut H.L. WALTER B. ROBERT KREISER
Skidmore College

May 7, 1986

General Secretary:

ree STATE UN:VERSITY OF MEW YuRK
Dr. Clifton R. Wharton, Jr. eS ek
Chancellor
State University of New York vey th Tks
State University Plaza AR a
Albany, New York 12246 Guitehea ley) Be 4iGiG

Dear Chancellor Wharton:

Thank you for your letter of May 2, responding to mine of
April 28, concerning the case of Professor Ernest Dube at the
State University of New York at Stony Brook.

You express concern over the fact that we received a copy of
the Chancellor's Advisory Committee's report, characterizing this
as a breach of "basic principles of confidentiality." Regularly,
over several decades, persons seeking the assistance of this
Association have provided us with documents and other information
that is not intended and would not be appropriate for public
dissemination. Our files are not open to the public and we have
been scrupulous in protecting materials that should appropriately
be kept confidential. We receive such materials from administra-
tive officers and faculty members alike. If members of the acade-
mic community did not feel free to share such materials with the
Association, our longstanding responsibilities in advising and
in playing a mediative role would be severely impeded. Neither
we nor the general academic community has viewed this practice of
providing us with full information as in any way violative of
Association-recommended or institutional strictures against pub-
licizing information pertaining to a proceeding prior to the
proceeding's completion.

When we wrote to you on April 28, I might add, we merely
noted that we were in receipt of the Advisory Committee's report
and did not refer to its contents other than to its unanimous
recommendation that had already been reported in the public

press.
Sincerely,
B. Robert Kreiser
BRK/mjs

cc: President John H. Marburger
Professor Ernest F. Dube

State University of New York
State University Plaza
Albany, New York 12246

Office of the Chancellor

May 16, 1986

Rabbi Arthur Seltzer
Long Island Regional Director
Anti-Defamation league
of B'nai B'rith
98 Cutter Mill Road
Great Neck, NY 11021

Dear Rabbi Seltzer:

Thank you for your letter of May 8, 1986
and the accompanying May 2 letter. I helieve my
action in the Dube appeal speaks for itself and
any further comment is unnecessary at this time.

Sincerely,

ae i \ gor . Vv ee Ow all = A,
Clifton R. Wharton, Jr.
Chancellor

be: tes Board of Trustees

President Marburger

fA OT
’ f ke es

a & bee
€ % ra eteeration League

RABBI ARTHUR SELTZER

Regional Director

May 8, 1986

Cihle Peis OF HEM Yuh
ry p oyu cata LLOR
Chancellor Clifford Wharton offtes ar re

State University of New York 1: iy ;
State University Plaza os my
Albany, New York 12246 ht, oo)

Dear Chancellor Wharton:

The accompanying letter expresses the concern of the Anti-
Defamation League of B'nai B'rith with published comments
appearing in the New York Times, attributed to a member of the
Chancellor's Review Committee, regarding the apparent

recommendation of the committee concerning Dr. Ernest Dube's
tenure appeal.

Reports appearing in Newsday on May 6 and May 7, 1986 indicate
that you have notified Dr. Dube that the apparent recommendation
of the Chancellor's Review Committee is to be set aside because
"the release and dissemination of the confidential
report...undermined the integrity of the process,".

Nonetheless, ADL considers it to be an important matter of
record that you be apprised of the League's concerns at the
publication of the New York Times report on the committee's

recommendations, thereby compromising the integrity of this
confidential procedure.

ADL would hope that in the course of the deliberations of the
second Chancellor's Review Committee on Dr. Dube's tenure
appeal, it is understood by all that the integrity of the
process is essential to a proper resolution of this controversy.

Sincerely,

Rabbi Arthur SeJtzer
Long Island Redional Director

Long Island Regional Office, 98 Cutter Mill Road, Great Neck, NY 11021 (516) 829-3820

« A ges A 1
\ Anti-Defamation League

a. of Bain =
RABBI ARTHUR SELTZER

Regional Director

oe oan le | STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK
E
OFFice OF THE CHANCELLOR
Chancellor Clifford Wharton AM MAY 12 1986 Ph
; ; re:
State University fies” “°o* espa
Albany, New York 12246 F

Dear Chancellor Wharton:

I write because I feel it necessary to apprise you to widespread
concern within ADL and the Jewish community over a late
development in the matter of Dr. Ernest Dube. I refer to the
statement published in the New York Times that an apparent
recommendation of the Chancellor's Review Committee that Dr.
Dube be granted tenure "was disclosed by a member of the

committee who requested anonymity."

When we at the ADL were first informed of the existence of the
Review Committee, we advised against any public comments
concerning its deliberations lest this present an appearance of
interference with the impartial nature of the tenure process,
We saw the integrity of this process as essential to a proper

resolution of the whole controversy.

We are disturbed to see that one of the members of this
confidential panel chose to compromise that confidence --thus to
endanger impartiality -- by creating possible public
expectations regarding Dr. Dube's tenure in advance of the
Chancellor's decision.

We would naturally hope, in keeping with our concern for
preserving academic standards, that the tenure process be kept
free of partisan influence. But the disclosure from within the
Committee could in fact make the press an adjunct to that

process and possibly result in generating undesirable public
pressures,

I hope that we might be able to meet with you and discuss this
problem together at your earliest convenience,

Sincerely ,—

rthur §
Regional Dire

Long Island Regional Office, 98 Cutter Mill Road, Great Neck, NY 11021 (516) 829-3820

Metadata

Containers:: Box 3 (1-SUNY Schools), Folder 6
Resource Type:: Document
Rights:: CC BY-NC-SA 4.0
Date Uploaded:: December 13, 2023

Using these materials

Access:: The archives are open to the public and anyone is welcome to visit and view the collections.

Collection restrictions:: Access to this record group is unrestricted.
Collection terms of access:: The researcher assumes full responsibility for conforming with the laws of copyright. Whenever possible, the M.E. Grenander Department of Special Collections and Archives will provide information about copyright owners and other restrictions, but the legal determination ultimately rests with the researcher. Requests for permission to publish material from this collection should be discussed with the Head of Special Collections and Archives.

About the Archives

Access options

Ask an Archivist

Ask a question or schedule an individualized meeting to discuss archival materials and potential research needs.

Ask a Question Book a Meet

Schedule a Visit

Archival materials can be viewed in-person in our reading room. We recommend making an appointment to ensure materials are available when you arrive.

Schedule a Visit Hours

Collection

Donald M. Blinken Papers, 1969-2003

Collection ID	apap080
Total components	175
Items available online	3
Last indexed	2025-07-29

Schedule a Visit

Collections

SUNY Stony Brook, Dube Controversy, 1984-May 1986

Online content

Metadata

Using these materials

About the Archives

Access options

Ask an Archivist

Schedule a Visit

Collection

Donald M. Blinken Papers, 1969-2003

Collection contents