This letter to the editor was written in response to “Letter to the Editor: Classrooms are for Learning, Not Anonymous Activism,” published on Dec. 5, 2025.
This is in response to “Letter to the Editor: Classrooms Are for Learning, Not Anonymous Activism.” I was not involved in writing on the chalkboards, but I fully support the ideas expressed by them. I am writing this because this other letter said that any political discourse should not be anonymous and should be more openly discussed, so I’m going to openly disagree.
Those who wrote and signed the letter feel concerned over the tensions on campus, and they stated that it is not political discourse or debate that is upsetting. I fully agree that political discourse is very important, but I believe that the sanctity of this debate is far more threatened by school policies that limit activism than said activism. Debate should be on an even ground without a doubt, but given that the school actively invests in and supports one side of the Israel-Palestine conflict/genocide more than the other, it falls in their interest to keep opposition from demonstrating.
Additionally, those that feel like protesting inhumane treatment of people in Palestine is harassment and makes people uncomfortable clearly just oppose the idea of protest. It should never be comfortable, and it should never be convenient. With something like the SAG-AFTRA strike, it certainly was a huge inconvenience to production studios. Any progress that they made was because they had some leverage. The point of a protest is to make people think about which side they are on. If it is the side that makes you sweat and makes you have to claim that it is harassment or some kind of personal attack, chances are you aren’t on the right side. There are certainly many people who speak out in support of Palestine due to their antisemitism, and that is a huge problem. However, the state of Israel has a government like any other, and the writing on the chalkboards protested that government and Trinity’s support of it. This was not a protest against Jewish students or Jewish people in general, it was a protest against genocide and inhumane treatment of the Palestinian people.
Furthermore, the initial letter states that the anonymity of the protest was an issue, but I guarantee that you would see a lot less anonymity if there was a lot more freedom to protest here. It should not be required that a demonstration gets permission to protest. It is understandable that the college wants to keep things running smoothly, but restricting where protests can take place easily would allow them to nullify any message that they are spreading. As I said before, the college has a reason to oppose protests of Israel’s government and Trinity’s involvement with them. Why not have them protesting off in a corner of campus where no one will see them?
This is not to say that I am advocating protestors to throw bricks through classroom windows that say “free Palestine,” but when a protest has to conform to the system they are protesting, everyone might as well watch it from their couch. People do not change their minds without a challenge, and when those who need to be challenged control the means to oppose them, any of that opposition is performative and pointless. St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Augustine and Martin Luther King have all said that “an unjust law is no law at all.” Having to appeal to an unjust system to protest only validates the system further.
I would also like to say that there is truly no better place to have this sort of discussion prompted than a classroom. The sanctity of a classroom as an area for learning would be better protected by allowing discourse, and this could prompt very relevant discussions in a political science class, for example. I have taken a few of these classes, and each one could have had a sensible discussion based on this issue.
Additionally, this is one of the least disruptive ways to protest in class. Chalk on a chalkboard is famously erased very easily. One swipe and the room is no longer haunted by the presence of these terrifying words. Even with the looming memory of seeing “free Palestine” written on the board next to a watermelon, anyone uncomfortable with this message should remember the letter from the Jewish faculty: the message is not targeting Jewish students. It is targeting people who support Israel in their colonialist invasion of Palestine. Those who support Israel do not need the protection of President Lugo. They don’t need their feelings protected. They are advocating for the continuation of a genocide, and if children in Gaza can get bombed, then they can be uncomfortable supporting that. History does not look kindly on supporters of a genocide. The writing is on the wall.
Love,
Gibson H. Schwartz ’29
Interested in writing a letter to the editor? You can find instructions here, under “Letter to the Editor Policy.”
Bravo, Gibson, for providing an example on how it is better to have open dialogue than conduct hit and run sloganeering.
In the spirit of agreeing on that one common point, and for the sake of brevity, I will address just a few of your claims. For one, you brought up Martin Luther King, Jr. So, it is worth mentioning that he was an ardent Zionist. Though he was murdered before his Civil Rights colleagues formed the Black Americans to Support Israel Committee (BASIC), he wasn’t murdered before he famously said that he sees Israel, and rightfully so, as “one of the great outposts of democracy in the world, and a marvelous example of what can be done, how desert land can be transformed into an oasis of brotherhood…” Indeed, during his time, the war against the Jews was as thriving as it is today, and the great Civil Rights advocates saw through it, including his father, Martin Luther, Sr., Rosa Parks and Bayard Rustin, BASIC’s director.
I suspect that you and most of your fellow anti-Zionists didn’t know this. And I hope that this plants a seed of curiosity to wonder what else you may not know.
Most Israelis (and Jewish and non-Jewish Zionists) are aware of how eager their/our enemies have been to destroy us. In addition to violence, much of that has been done through coordinated defamation. Even you concluded your letter by accusing your fellow Bantams, who disagree with you, as “advocating for the continuation of a genocide.” I would be surprised if there was even one such Bantam advocating for genocide.
Most Zionists, who had prioritized the rescuing of the hostages and the dismantling of Hamas, hated the war that Israel was dragged into, and also reject the fallacy that it is a genocide. Some of us have even read the original Hamas charter and recognize their nefarious goals playing out like clockwork. We are outraged that Hamas has publicly tortured and executed Palestinians who didn’t support them. We are angry that they funneled the billions of dollars the international community gave to the Palestinians, to use, instead, for nefarious purposes, like building a military tunnel system larger than the London Underground and lining their leaders’ pockets with billions of dollars.
And, “from the river to the sea,” (as was scribbled on many boards) is not merely criticism of the Israeli government, but a call to genocide the Jewish people from the country they, and the 20 percent non-Jewish Israeli citizens, built. Israel did not build a wall separating out Judea and Samaria (“West Bank”) until after they could no longer manage the murders coming from the terrorists there. The Intifadas were eras of extraordinary violence inflicted on Israelis, with constant bombings in public places and some bus hijackings.
In 2005, Israel withdrew from Gaza (previously part of Egypt). Gazans had so much potential. Alas, the innocent Palestinian civilians were overrun by militants who had other plans. And yes, Israel initiated a blockade– two years later– after withstanding incessant rocket attacks when the world stayed mostly silent during those assaults.
Israel is not even twice the size of Connecticut, surrounded by regimes or proxies eager to destroy it. None of these regimes or proxies treat their immediate subjects with compassion. For example, no one wants to “free Palestine,” more than Khamenei, who has taken the time, by the way, to thank college “anti-Israel protesters” (really, on social media) in between his hunt to arrest women wearing inadequate head covering and imprisoning young people creating music. He has also funded Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis, all which have brought misery to the people they rule, in addition to the Israelis who they boast wanting to kill.
I’ve gone on longer than I intended (and I assure you I’m still cutting this short:). I’d like to close by suggesting just several of the great resources run by people who value truth and democracy and fight the good fight: United Nations Watch, Foundation for Defense of Democracies, and books by former Israeli MP, Einat Wilf, who has started a new political party. Also, check out the memoir and podcast hosted by Yasmine Mohammed, an amazing woman, a Zionist, whose father was from Gaza. She offers tremendous insight into the conflict and the ideologies fueling it. Of course there are so many more people, but brevity:)
I appreciate having the opportunity to respond to you. I wish you the best that Trinity has to offer, of course hoping that includes (even if it doesn’t) an openness to understanding the other side. Cheers — Faith