News from Georgetown, Divest!
Saxa Politica: Immoral Investments: “While divestment is non-negotiable to administrators, it appears that Georgetown’s Jesuit and Catholic identity is.”
Misguided idealism of Georgetown, Divest!: “The string of reports coming from the Middle East appear to confirm the assertions aired by the newly formed coalition Georgetown, Divest! that the human rights situation in Gaza and the West Bank is deplorable and the University is obliged to take action….Yet as dire as the situation in Israel may be, Georgetown, Divest!’s argument that the University has an obligation to pull its investments in companies that profit from Israel’s poor policies is impractical.”
From The Hoya:
Students Decry No Investment Oversight: “‘Social responsibility and ethics currently play no role in Georgetown’s investment practices, and the establishment of some mechanism for oversight is a pressing concern,’ Schwartz said. According to the university, the question of divestment is a non-issue because the university generally does not directly invest in specific companies. ‘The endowment fund managed by the Investment Office does not directly invest in individual companies,’ said Andy Pino, director of media relations. ‘Rather, it invests in managed funds that are similar to the mutual fund most people invest in as part of their retirement plans. Georgetown’s investment practices do not include the selection of individual securities. As a result, the question of divestment does not apply.’ Members of the Georgetown, Divest! Coalition said that this distinction is nothing more than a loophole, and that they are not satisfied with the university’s response to their concerns.”
Poor Execution: “For those of us who aren’t economics majors, the details of the new campaign by Georgetown, Divest! — and the university’s response to it — may seem somewhat baffling. Anyone who does comb through all of the facts, however, will conclude that Georgetown, Divest! is a group with a good heart but an outdated and politically divisive strategy….While the group’s leaders have claimed that they do not favor either side of the conflict, their Web site exhibits a clear pro-Palestinian leaning.”
We’re unsure where The Hoya heard this claim of neutrality. We contend that certain Israeli actions and policies have oppressed the Palestinian people, such as the construction of illegal Israeli settlements on Palestinian land, the construction of the illegal separation barrier on Palestinian land, military action against innocent civilians, and institutional discrimination against persons of a specific race, religion, or ethnicity. I don’t think we’re trying to hide our stance on the “conflict.”