Pro-Palestinian activists at Harvard are showing great hypocrisy, freaking out over a loss of funds, which they deem as “censorship of free speech.” It seems they’ve forgotten about their favorite tactic: boycott, divestment, and sanctions.

Milbank, an international law firm, had pledged $1 million to Harvard Law School’s student groups and conferences, which was to be donated over a five-year period. It changed its mind, however, upon the discovery that some $2,000 was allocated to an event by pro-Palestine student groups, such as Harvard’s Justice for Palestine.

Close

[lz_infobox]This piece is part of a CampusZette series exploring the culture, oddities and experiences of students on college campuses through their eyes.[/lz_infobox]

The event, which sparked the Harvard controversy, was about “suppression of Palestinian advocacy rights in the United States.”

Instead of understanding that Milibank also has a right to free speech — which includes where it donates its money — the Palestinian students are invoking another one of their favorite activism tactics, the victim card.

“We are also disappointed, though not particularly surprised, that at Harvard Law School, too, there exists such an exception to free speech when it comes to Palestine,” said a letter to the Harvard Law Record.

[lz_related_box id=”102079″]

The firm, quite understandably, has zero interest in associating with the radical political leanings.

When pro-Palestinian students find themselves at odds with another’s ideas, they jump to BDS (boycott, divestment and sanctions) tactics. We’ve seen this time and time again over issues such as Israeli sovereignty. These student activists need to decide if they like capitalism, where every dollar represents a vote for a product or idea, or if they don’t.

Quite frankly, they have the right to hold whatever political and economic philosophies they want, but at least they should be consistent. As the old saying goes, they’re getting a taste of their own medicine.