Alessandro Caccamo, Special to The Denisonian
On October 23, the Harvard-Harris polling station released a survey that was conducted using a sample of 2,116 likely voters with the primary objective of tracking voting intentions for the 2024 presidential election. This same poll also assessed the positions on the most pressing social and political issues facing the country.
In the poll, when asked about the most important issues facing the country today, inflation topped the list with 32% of voters citing it as a major issue. Healthcare and climate change were both at 15%. Next was the Israel-Hamas conflict at 12%. More than two in three Americans stated that they are watching this conflict unfold very closely.
According to self-reported responses, citizens between the ages of 18-24 were, by far, the least informed group with only one in two claiming that they were following the conflict very or somewhat closely.
When analyzing the responses of voters between the ages of 18-24 in response to the terrorist attack that took place on October 7, their responses highlight their status as the least informed subset in the survey. 32% reject the idea that Hamas killed 1,200 Israeli citizens and believe that they are not responsible for committing the crimes they have been accused of: 36% reject the idea that Hamas should be designated as a terrorist group by the United States; 48% stand in support of Hamas more than they do with the state of Israel; 51% believe that this attack was justified by the grievances of the Palestinian people.
To me, it is worrisome that the demographic least informed on the issues may be reaching radical conclusions based primarily on images and videos on social media. There is a clear difference between advocating against Israel’s military intervention that has claimed more than 9,700 lives so far, and actively defending terrorist attacks aimed at civilians as a means to “liberate the Palestinian people.” The Palestinian Liberation Movement has propagated the claim that the state of Israel is a Western invention to justify mass genocide and territorial expansion in the Middle East.
In order to comprehend the complexity of the issue, we need to understand the religious significance of Jerusalem for Christianity, Islam, and Judaism. Jerusalem is recognized as one of the most ancient cities and has been successfully invaded more than forty times over the course of thousands of years. Jewish people inhabited an area that currently encompasses Israel, Palestine, and Jordan almost 3,000 years ago.
My own country was one of those numerous foreign invaders. In my hometown of Rome, the Arch of Titus stands at the entry to the Ancient Roman Forum. This was built following the death of Emperor Titus to commemorate his seige of Jerusalem and destruction of the Temple, following a revolt to Roman rule, in 66 AD. It was the Ancient Romans who created the name of Palaestina to erase the Jewish heritage of Judea. Since that time, the region has been consistently ruled by external powers. By 1,517, the Ottoman Empire ruled over a large portion of the Middle East, which encompassed a territory referred to as Palestine when the British Empire took control in 1918.
Zionism is the belief that the Jewish people have a religious claim over portions of territories in modern day Israel and Palestine. During the Holocaust, many Jewish people embraced Zionism and fled to Palestine to escape religious persecution. When the international community recognized these nations as sovereign, tensions arose immediately and Israel annexed territories to its own borders after several failed invasion attempts by Palestine and its allies. Israel never initiated these military conflicts directly.
Palestine is currently divided into two independently ruled territories. The Gaza Strip has been ruled by Hamas, which was elected to power in 2006 and has encouraged acts of terrorism, such as suicide bombings, against the people of Israel on a constant basis. Israel has always responded to these attacks with a greater degree of force. After the terrorist attack that took place on October 7, Israeli President Benjamin Netanyahu, declared an offensive military operation to eliminate Hamas, the ruling party in the Gaza Strip.
While it is understandable that the loss of life and destruction occurring as the conflict unfolds can lead us to reach hasty and emotional judgments, the Harris-Harvard statistics present the worrisome ease with which large portions of our generation side with a terrorist organization.
By demonizing an entire nation as objectively evil, young people expressed a clear political bias that stems from a failure to look at the issue from a different lens. In my opinion, our heavily ideological form of education in American schools, from elementary school through to the universities, is simply adding fuel to the fire.
I hope that the complicated unfolding of events that led to the creation of an Israeli and Palestinian state helps people understand the important considerations that must take place before forming strong and highly opinionated moral claims. It is my firm belief that there is no rational political justification for the terrorist attack that took place on October 7.
Now more than ever, liberal arts colleges like Denison need to foster true dialogue and open discussion and promote viewpoint diversity. In these days, we have seen many of the country’s most prestigious universities fall prey to the dangers of promoting violent rhetoric and activism over thoughtful dialogue, understanding, and inclusion. Denison can be better. I hope ours can be a campus that truly promotes viewpoint diversity. Open discussions should allow all viewpoints, as long as they are not backed by empty slogans.
As these past weeks have illustrated, now is the time.