CEO criticizes UPenn for antisemitism, urges end to donations.

A Private⁣ Equity CEO Criticizes University of Pennsylvania​ for Allowing Pro-Palestine Festival

A private equity⁢ CEO has strongly condemned the University of Pennsylvania​ for hosting a pro-Palestine festival⁣ on campus,⁤ where some speakers allegedly made calls for violence against Jews. This controversial event⁤ took place just weeks before the Hamas attack on Israel, adding fuel to the fire.

Marc Rowan, CEO of Apollo Global Management and ‍an alumnus of the university, initially expressed his concerns about ⁣antisemitism ⁤in a letter⁢ to UPenn’s student publication, The⁢ Daily Pennsylvanian,⁤ on Oct. 10. However, when ​the letter was not published, ⁤it was shared on the eJewish ⁤Philanthropy website.

In his letter, Rowan criticized the Palestine Writes festival for featuring “well-known antisemites and fomenters of hate and racism.” Instead of ⁤focusing on ‌Palestinian arts and culture, the event seemed to center around Jews, Israel, and Zionism.

Related Stories

CEOs⁢ Looking to ‌Blacklist Harvard ⁢Students Who Signed Anti-Israel Letter

10/12/2023

Bipartisan⁢ Group of House Lawmakers Hold Candlelight Vigil ‍for Israel

10/13/2023

According to ⁢Rowan, one speaker at the festival advocated for ethnic cleansing and segregating Israel’s Jews into “cantons.” Another defended the use of violence, while numerous speakers repeated blood libels against⁣ Jews, referring to them as “European settlers” despite their ⁢long history in Israel.

Rowan pointed out the alarming timeline from the Palestine Writes festival to the​ brutal Hamas attack ⁢in Israel, emphasizing the dangerous normalization and legitimization of violence.

The Israeli military reported ‍that over 1,300 people, including 222 soldiers, have been killed in Israel, with more than 3,000⁤ injured.

University⁤ Funding Threatened

Rowan criticized ⁤UPenn President Elizabeth Magill and Board of Trustees Chair Scott Bok ⁤for allowing the university to be associated with the event and failing to condemn the “hate-filled call for ⁤ethnic cleansing.” He warned that the university’s funding could be at risk due to the backlash from over 4,000 signatories of an open letter expressing their concerns.

Rowan, who ​is⁢ also the chairman⁢ of the board‌ of advisers to UPenn’s​ Wharton School, called on all alumni and supporters who share ‌his​ concerns to withhold financial support until President Magill and Chairman Bok ⁢resign.

The open letter signed by ⁤alumni and supporters demanded that UPenn distance itself from the antisemitic‌ speakers and issue a strong statement⁣ denouncing their platforming. They also called for mandatory antisemitism awareness across the ​university.

University Statement

In response, UPenn’s leaders acknowledged the concerns raised about the festival’s speakers and their history of antisemitism. However, they defended the university’s commitment to the free exchange of ideas, even if controversial or conflicting with institutional values.

In a statement, Scott ⁣Bok emphasized that while Rowan is entitled to his views, it is false to ⁤claim that the university sought to silence dissenting trustees. He explained the importance of confidential ⁤decision-making processes and the⁣ rarity of public opposition from board ‍members.

Julie Platt, Vice Chair of Penn’s Board of Trustees, expressed solidarity with those affected by the Hamas attack and affirmed the university’s commitment to combatting antisemitism.

Rowan’s⁤ letter has garnered support online, ⁣with⁤ prominent figures like Elie Seidman ⁣and⁢ Bill⁤ Ackman praising his thoughtful stance.

It is clear that ⁢this controversy has put⁣ the University of Pennsylvania in‌ a precarious position, with potential financial consequences and a divided alumni community.

How should universities‍ handle controversial speakers and events that ⁣promote hate speech and violence?

Sors at UPenn’s Wharton School, emphasized the importance of fostering an inclusive and respectful environment on⁢ campus. He stated that hosting ​events that ‍promote hate speech and violence goes against the university’s values ​and tarnishes its reputation.

Rowan’s criticism comes at a time when there is increased scrutiny of universities and their‌ handling of contentious issues such as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Many⁢ universities‌ have faced backlash from both pro-Israel and pro-Palestinian groups for their perceived⁣ bias⁤ and⁢ failure to provide a balanced platform for dialogue.