Our V24 undercover investigative series into American higher education reveals troubling support for anti-Israel activism at Columbia University. From faculty sympathizing with anti-Zionist movements to providing guidance on disruptive tactics, this exposé highlights the extent of radical sentiment within one of America's most prestigious institutions.
Anti-Israel Activism
Recently released undercover footage from Columbia University exposes a campus environment where certain faculty members not only express sympathy toward anti-Israel activists but actively advise them on tactics to bypass official channels and escalate disruptive protests. This covert conversation reveals a troubling dynamic in which anti-Zionist sentiment is fostered behind closed doors, raising concerns about academic authorities encouraging confrontation over constructive dialogue.
Students are reportedly encouraged to pursue direct action, including sustained protests and personal appeals to the president, while discreetly circumventing official university communication channels. This raises questions about transparency, campus governance, and the balance between activism and academic responsibility.
Faculty Criticize University Leadership
Faculty member Katherine Franke voices frustration with Columbia President Minouche Shafik’s leadership, describing a campus where moderate voices are marginalized and overshadowed by a “Zionist general counsel” and external pressures on the administration.
Franke criticizes the president’s reliance on a small group of advisors seen as “pro-Israel” and deferential to outside influence, resulting in policies perceived as unsupportive of pro-Palestinian activism. She laments, “The advice of the general counsel has not been good, mostly she’s followed it,” suggesting the president is isolated and dependent on counsel she describes as “very Zionist.” Franke adds, “I wish we had a president with a backbone.”
Inciting Action and Subversion
The footage reveals guidance for students to avoid official university email and digital channels, citing fears of surveillance: “They’ve instituted a police state, and police states usually surveil.” Franke claims the administration primarily hears complaints from Jewish students about an “anti-Semitic environment,” neglecting Palestinian perspectives.
She encourages more discreet methods of dissent, such as writing personalized letters to the president, and supports continued disruptive protests. “Not having somebody like, banging on the outside of the library which we’re going to keep doing,” Franke says, emphasizing the intention to make pro-Palestinian grievances impossible to ignore.
By advising confrontational activism over balanced dialogue, Franke blurs the line between mentorship and radicalization, steering students toward subversion and anti-establishment resistance.
Implications
The conversation highlights a broader problem: when faculty encourage students to bypass official channels and distrust administration, it erodes trust in academic institutions and fosters division. Students risk becoming pawns in ideological battles, while the campus atmosphere becomes increasingly fractious and impedes rational discourse.
Without credible, neutral mediation, ongoing polarization may lead to escalating tensions and unrest, undermining efforts to fairly represent Palestinian perspectives and damaging the community the faculty claim to support.
Stefan Tompson
Founder | Visegrad24
