Of GW, Jewish Humor and Antisemitism
Discriminatingly Applying Anti-Discrimination Laws
How often do we hear people excuse their racist or culturally insensitive jokes on the basis of being a member of that group? It's the perfect get out of jail free card. In college I even wrote an essay arguing that the Jewish people's ability to make fun of themselves had helped them to survive 3,000 years of persecution. Being Jewish myself, I saw nothing wrong with making the argument. Still a recent incident at George Washington University calls into question how and to what extent individuals should be self-derogatory.
According to student newspaper The Hatchet, freshman Sarah Marshak confessed to drawing at least three of the six swastikas that appeared on her dorm-room door. The confession comes amid a fortnight of campus-wide fear over a number of "hate-based" vandalisms. The strange part is that Marshak happens to be Jewish, and originally portrayed herself as the victim of a possible hate crime. The Hatchet, where she used to work, quotes her admitting "I wasn't looking to create this, sort of, insanity," but instead "looking for acknowledgment from university that someone drew a swastika on the door." Yet to do so it appears that she may have committed a hate crime against herself.
Since Oct. 23, GW, which is 30 percent Jewish, has been tagged with at least 9 swastikas, six of which appeared on Marshak's white-board and door. Over the weekend the university announced that they had apprehended one of the perpetrators, an upperclassman who lives off campus. Then, on Monday, the news came out that surveillance cameras had caught Marshak tagging her own door. Bizarrely enough, during an earlier interview she had actually said she "would like to see a few cameras in [her] hall."
But whether this was a cry for help, or a sociology study run amok, the case raises a number of confounding ethical questions. First, should Marshak's religion be a factor in accessing the crime? After all, is a Muslim person drawing swastikas any different than an Jewish person doing so? Or for that matter a white person wearing a noose tie or an African American making fun of Muhammad? How can we apply different standards to the same crime based on the perpetrator's race when the law is supposed to be blind?
According to our hate crime laws, the answer lies in the intent, which is a lot harder to ascertain through video surveillance than who's doing it. For instance if a white person uses the "n-word" with the intent of making a joke, and a black person uses it to be derogatory, who will appear more racist? We saw how that played out with Don Imus.
Marshak's drawing may not have been criminal in and of itself but her race-baiting did create a sense of terror on campus in the vein of screaming "fire!" in a crowded theater. The real question is whether she should be punished differently if she weren't Jewish? If so, then I can keep making Jewish jokes without a pang more guilt than that which I already carry in abundance.
By Emil Steiner | November 8, 2007; 12:00 PM ET | Category: OFF/beat Politics
Posted by: VoiceofReason | November 8, 2007 10:01 AM
Sarah Marshak "wasn't looking to create this, sort of, insanity," but instead "looking for acknowledgment from University that someone drew a swastika on the door."
Translation: she stirred the pot and splashed herself. Tsk, tsk.
Posted by: T. J. Cassidy | November 8, 2007 10:17 AM
WOW!! nice post and intresting website where r u buddy, i never see this website before. anyway i will tell my all friend about this.
Posted by: Anita | November 8, 2007 10:46 AM
Racism is racism and race should not matter in its diagnosis, nor should intent. If you draw swastikas you are being racist, if you hang a noose on someones door you are being racist. Bottom line we are all capable of hate crime
Posted by: Truth | November 8, 2007 11:02 AM
Yea soon there wont be any room left in so-called free speech to say anything. Why do we have to be afraid of our differences? Shouldn't we celebrate them?
Posted by: say it loud, I'm White | November 8, 2007 1:51 PM
I don't really see the connection here between a Jewish person making Jewish jokes and someone who fabricates a hate crime. Marshak shouldn't be treated any differently because she, herself, is Jewish; she should be treated differently because she performed the act upon herself. What Marshak committed wasn't a "Hate Crime" - it was fraud. Marshak should be punished for wasting the University's - and the FBI's - resources and time. It's not "applying different standards to the same crime" - it's simply not the same crime.
Posted by: Amanda | November 8, 2007 2:18 PM
False flag hate hoaxes are the rule not the exception. Anyone who believes these are being painted by anyone other than anti-nazis is unfortunately the victim of a political hoax.
Posted by: xy | November 8, 2007 2:19 PM
So, this incident happened in a school?
Let's see what the achool authorities do. That will reveal what kind of education the school gives, what it teaches, what the students get to learn. And whether we will keep our children there, and related decisions.
And then, let the State/Federal educational authorities act. Then we will know a bit more about what kind of education we have hereabouts and whether we agree it is right and proper and called for, or should we call against it for the sake of decency, civility, justice, and democracy.
Posted by: Marangleusa | November 8, 2007 2:54 PM
I think trying to incite a hate crime is worse than a hate crime. It is like Charles Manson's Helter Skelter. It creates panic under which hate crimes happen more readily. She ought to be expelled and tossed in jail. Her race is irrelevant. Anyone who does this is a criminal
Posted by: Harry L. | November 8, 2007 3:06 PM
...or she's just an idiot.
Posted by: sgurd0187 | November 8, 2007 3:53 PM
Hey HARRY L u better watch it. I no her. She was my baby sitter. Now maybe what she did wasn't the rite choice but still. And u should think about what your saying.
Sarah Marshak was always the good girl in school. She rarely did anything wrong. She was a perfect role model. She was my role model. And Crazy as it seems still is. She has no bad record until now. She's AMAZING journalism, and she really wanted that to be her future. Maybe the choice she made wasn't a very good one Now I think what she did was totally wrong. We all make mistakes and for U HARRY L DUDE saying that she should get tossed in jail for that is just STUPID.
if anyone has any comment you need to say about her tell me also. my email is playbunnyhey@aol.com
Posted by: Sam V | November 8, 2007 4:51 PM
@ Sam V, you may want to find a different role model. Maybe she was a nice person to you and good baby sitter. But that girl is seriously disturbed. She intentionally used and manipulated people's fears to get attention. Thats sick on a Bush level.
Posted by: Harry L. | November 8, 2007 5:17 PM
The reason I believe this is a crime is because she wasn't the only victim. Every other Jew was (30% apparently). Those people were led to believe there was a hateful, and possibly dangerous, criminal in their community - in their dorm even. Inciting this fear is a transgression, and I would argue a hate crime, to the extent that a hate crime tries to incite fear in a specific group.
If a cross was burned, or a noose hung in a black community to instill fear, it shouldn't matter who did it.
Posted by: Aaron | November 8, 2007 10:28 PM
Also, this girl said she did this to make a point. She's also apparently an aspiring journalist. I'd hate to imagine what sort of points she might be inclined to make as a journalist.
Posted by: Aaron | November 8, 2007 10:35 PM
The issue here, as I see it, is that even if she does something to herself that may be considered a hate crime should someone else perform the same act, how does that act effect those around her? Writing a swastika on her own door may not be demeaning to her, but the meaning of that symbol is demeaning and carries a hate context with it. Similarly, a black person calling using the "N" word to depict himself may not be detrimental, but the assumption made that all black people are ok with being tagged with that moniker is not. We have become a nation that is so engrossed in ourselves that we often forget how our actions are perceived and accepted by others.
Posted by: CJ | November 9, 2007 10:27 AM
This story and numerous others (Google "hate crime hoax") are examples of why "hate" crimes legislation is a very bad idea. First, because it presumes to know what an individual is thinking. Second, because it is so susceptible to hoax, etc. And, ultimately it is used to stifle or suppress unpopular speech or expression.
Posted by: William | November 9, 2007 2:24 PM
3000 years from Moses to Sandy Kofax...you're god damned right I'm livin in the past... come on please
Swastiknuttin
Posted by: da dude | November 10, 2007 2:15 AM
She is a nut and should be given proper treatment to restore her marbles.
Posted by: Sam Sjodin | November 12, 2007 9:22 PM
She is a nut and should be given proper treatment to restore her marbles.
Posted by: Sam Sjodin | November 12, 2007 9:28 PM
not self hating it behooves to create the fear and hatred of any thing against that which threatens the status quo. She is smarter on many more levels.
Posted by: | November 18, 2007 12:16 AM
Reputation is worth its weight in gold.
Making up fake crimes is an age old form of libel. Her actions actually smear white people and put them under more of a 'racism' watch than they are already under, increasing the resentment, fearful perception, and acts of direct social control towards white people. In other words, her act was an act of voluntary, aggressive racism with the result being trepidation and paranoia. She's Jewish KKK. It's very much so a hate crime worthy of jail time.
Posted by: Leaves | November 23, 2007 2:06 PM
its obvious from this article who has power in the usa---if an average non jewish usa type person did this--they would be arrested &/or lose thier job or school rights--since markash is jewish--usa tries to deflect the issue--there is no more powerful usa political group then the usa jewish & aipac--no one dares oppose them--they have never lost a usa election--in south america--jewish are expected to respect the christian culture--& they do suerte por los machos
Posted by: lejos del usa | November 27, 2007 8:32 AM
Well done!
[url=http://xlffltht.com/sooe/qbyo.html]My homepage[/url] | [url=http://sawaodga.com/nwyx/bphu.html]Cool site[/url]
Posted by: Elaine | December 8, 2007 5:02 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.










The comparisons you used were interesting. Also interesting was the glaring omission: The "N" word.
Used by an African-American, the "N" word is acceptable (though repugnant) free speach.
Used by any other race, and the "N" word is a unforgivable racist attack.
I keep looking for a freed-slave to get their opinion, but there doesn't seem to be any around my part of town.
Maybe the crutch needs to be thrown away and everybody can be judged by THEIR own character. Then again, that won't happen because people would be accountable for their own actions and they couldn't use a 200 year old excuse to get a free ride.