Harvard library workers express solidarity with anti-Israel protesters who held 'study-in'
Recent pro-Palestine study-in demonstrations at Harvard’s Widener Library have created a divide between administrators and library workers, who have come out in an op-ed in support of the protesters.
Recent pro-Palestine study-in demonstrations at Harvard’s Widener Library have created a divide between administrators and library workers, who have come out in an op-ed in support of the protesters.
Two library workers, Maya H. Bergamasco and Jonathan S. Tuttle wrote the op-ed expressing support for the anti-Israel protesters who were punished by the university.
On October 2, library staff received an email from University Librarian Martha J. Whitehead, describing the study-ins as a disruption.
Whitehead argued the protest “undermined our commitment to provide an inclusive space to all users.” However, many library workers disagreed and stood with the protesters, questioning Harvard’s punitive response.
[RELATED: Harvard students freak out over Trump win, some profs let students stay home]
The protesters taped posters that stated “IMAGINE IT HAPPENED HERE” and “ISRAEL BOMBS HARVARD PAYS,” onto the backs of their laptops.
In response, administrators sent out an email to the protestors stating that their library access had been revoked for roughly a month after the incident, which included 25 faculty members.
“We fail to see how studying silently amounts to a disruption, and we reject the bans issued in response,” the library workers wrote in response to the disciplinary measures.
“Claiming neutrality creates a chilling effect,” Bergamasco and Tuttle argued, as it discourages advocacy and protects those already in power.
“In Harvard’s vision, a shared conviction made publicly known in any way — even silently — is a breach,” they wrote, questioning the university’s rationale for the bans. They claimed these restrictions reinforce the library as a place that suppresses, rather than supports, voices of justice and community advocacy, simply because it remained neutral on the issues at hand.
