At the Cultural Life Program A Case for Israel, Furman University became a virtual host to misleading and dehumanizing rhetoric presented by one of the most controversial figures in modern America — Professor Alan Dershowitz. Dershowitz spent over an hour justifying the killing of Palestinians by the Israeli Defense Force in an effort to assert the modern state of Israel’s right to exist.

Dershowitz has garnered much notoriety in his over 60-year legal career for defending figures like convicted sex offender Harvey Weinstein, 34-count felon President Donald Trump and convicted sex trafficker Jefferey Epstein. These clients were never mentioned during the program. Evidence even suggests that Dershowitz’s and Epstein’s relationship went beyond that of lawyer-client, with Epstein visiting Dershowitz’s home in Martha’s Vineyard, the two of them attending events together and the existence of a letter allegedly written by Dershowitz for Epstein’s 50th birthday. In no uncertain terms, this places Dershowitz in proximity with incredible quantities of abuse. If he has not himself engaged in the sex trafficking and rape of young women, he has either aided or been complicit in its perpetuation.

Dershowitz began the talk with a rough overview of the history of Israel, positioning Israel as a project to move displaced European and North African Jews to the region in the wake of World War II. However, this overview entirely omitted Zionism’s origins in the 1890s, the Balfour Declaration and the British Mandate for Palestine. By neglecting to mention this history, Dershowitz functionally ignored the role the British Empire held in establishing the state of Israel as a project carved out by imperial partitioning. In this initial summation, Dershowitz also conveniently avoided mentioning the Nakba — the expulsion of over 700,000 Arabs from a total area of land larger than originally allotted to Israel during the United Nations’ partitioning of Palestine.

During the remainder of the Cultural Life Program, Dershowitz continually employed incomplete statements of fact and warped the truth to give an inaccurate understanding of the Israeli state and its conflict with Palestine. He was particularly invested in the words used to talk about Israel and the war, adamantly refuting the argument that Israel is a settler-colonial state. 

Israel has demonstrated a vested interest in replacing the Arab population of Palestine with Jews from other parts of the world. The birthright trip, for instance, is part of a Zionist effort to bring Jews into the country and make the visitors want to relocate to Israel. Further, settlement projects are designed to move Israelis onto Palestinian land, thereby enabling Israel to assert a claim over it.

Dershowitz also condemned the notion that the country is engaged in genocide, though the United Nations Human Rights Council recently classified Israel’s actions in Gaza as genocide, according to a Sept. 16 press release.

In the wake of the murder of Charlie Kirk, University President Elizabeth Davis sent an email to the student body describing Dershowitz as someone whose views and actions are “seen by some as polarizing,” yet claiming his ideas as ones “that deserve our attention and study.” It is hard to take this seriously after attending a program where Dershowitz consistently exaggerated and misrepresented the truth. 

At the end of her email, Davis said she wanted the Furman community to engage “thoughtfully with someone whose views are different from (their own).” 

If the goal of this Cultural Life Program was to foster intelligent and thoughtful dialogue, it failed unceremoniously. When a speaker like Dershowitz presents information in a skewed manner, it is impossible to engage in good-faith discussion with it — a challenge that is made harder when one is also forced to consider the controversy that looms over Dershowitz’s personage at all times.

This program invites a question of efficacy. Do speaker events like this meaningfully generate dialogue? Further, what is the benefit of bringing such a controversial figure onto campus if the goal of creating dialogue ultimately fails? This Cultural Life Program was not the solution. The Furman University Administration must stop giving platforms to controversial figures who are ill-equipped and unwilling to foster meaningful discussion, and students must continue to express discontent when they do.

The Paladin is dedicated to publishing a broad and diverse set of opinions from the student body and beyond. We want to hear your reaction to the story or any of our pieces. Please email [email protected] or submit a Letter to the Editor via the form on our home page.