Against Academic Boycotts
Against Academic Boycotts
复制标题
反对学术抵制
DOI：
10.1353/dss.2007.0051
复制
发表时间：
2011
期刊：
影响因子：
0.5
通讯作者：
M. Nussbaum
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
M. Nussbaum
很难看出象征性抵制所能达到的效果，而这种抵制不能通过谴责或有组织的公众抗议等替代办法更有效地实现。谴责明确地说明了谁对谁做了什么错事，在典型的情况下，它也是由一个团体投票决定的，所以谁支持它也是非常清楚的。目前尚不清楚抵制的原因是什么，实际上每个人都可能出于不同的原因加入抵制。我怀疑在以色列的情况下，要找到一个单一的理由来解释抵制背后的原因，并得到参与者的同意，是不容易的。也不清楚是谁在做这件事：在这种情况下，有期刊，专业协会和个人，所有人都形成了一个松散的联系运动，没有什么比投票通过的谴责决议更清晰。有组织的公众抗议也有一个上级的清晰度，因为每个团体都发表了自己的公开声明，由自己的官员或代表签署，所以我们既知道谁在说话，也知道他们在说什么。
It is difficult to see what is accomplished by a symbolic boycott that cannot be more effectively accomplished by one of the alternatives, such as censure or organized public protest. Censure makes a clear statement of exactly who has done what wrong to whom, and it is also voted on by a group, in the typical case, so it is also very clear who supports it. Boycotts have neither type of clarity. It is not clear what the reason for the boycott is, and indeed each individual may join the boycott for different reasons. I suspect in the case of Israel it would not be easy to find a single account of the reasons behind the boycott that would command the agreement of its participants. Nor is it clear who is doing it: in this case there are journals, professional associations, and individuals, all forming a loosely linked movement, and nothing as crisp as a voted-on resolution of censure. Organized public protest also has a superior clarity, because each group involved issues its own public statements, signed by its own officers or representatives, and so we know both who is speaking and what they are saying.