In the spring of 2015, Andrew Pessin, a philosophy professor at Connecticut College, became the target of student and faculty activists over a Facebook post in which he compared Hamas to a rabid dog. The ensuing campaign of harassment—which began after he took down the post—eventually drove Pessin and his ailing wife from campus. In the recently published book Salem on the Thames, the historian Richard Landes has collected a number of essays, written mostly by other academics, about the affair. Reviewing the book, Jonathan Marks highlights the most chilling aspects of the events at Connecticut College:

What is surprising, even stunning, is that, in response to the controversy—and student pressure—academic department after academic department lined up to issue statements, some specifically mentioning the Facebook post, the others meaning to show themselves on the right side of the matter. Even the members of Pessin’s own philosophy department, while sweetening their letter by declaring their eagerness to welcome Pessin back into the fold, felt they had to denounce Pessin’s post as dehumanizing.

There were a handful of faculty dissenters, but one has the impression, adding to the disgrace, that students, on average, showed more courage than faculty. In the judgment of [one contributor to the volume], most faculty “signed their petitions because everyone else was doing it, too, and because there was an indistinct but definite apprehension that not signing would, as the saying goes, have consequences.”

The administration’s response was nearly as appalling. Pessin was urged not to defend himself. The adults would handle it. Yet the chief adult, [the college’s president], at a hastily-called open forum, praised the “valor” and “intellectual acuity” of the students who had, at best, egregiously mischaracterized Pessin’s comments. . . . There is more, much more, but perhaps it suffices to say that the student who set all this in motion received a Scholar Activist Award.

There is a missed opportunity here, for the Pessin case, well-documented here, is so over-the-top awful that it could be exhibit A for those seeking to persuade persuadable members of what Landes calls the “global academic community” that something is badly amiss. Although the case is worse than most I know of, I suspect many middle-of-the-road faculty members, with no stake in [the Israel-Palestinian conflict], can imagine such a thing happening on their campus or in their departments. By reflecting on the Pessin case, such faculty members might discover that they do, after all, have a stake.

Two extraordinary events demonstrate something important about Israel’s most fervent adversaries. One was a speech given at something called The People’s Forum (funded generously by Goldman Sachs), which stated, “When the state of Israel is finally destroyed and erased from history, that will be the single most important blow we can give to destroying capitalism and imperialism.”

The suggestion that this tiny state is the linchpin of a global, centuries-old phenomenon like capitalism goes well beyond anything resembling rational criticism. Even if Israel were guilty of genocide, apartheid, and oppression—which of course it is not—it would not follow that its destruction would help end capitalism or imperialism.

The other was an anti-Israel protest that took place in front of New York City’s Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, deemed “complicit” in Israel’s evils. At organizers’ urging, participants shouted their slogans at kids in the cancer ward, who were watching from the windows. Given Hamas’s indifference toward the lives of Gazan children, such callousness toward non-Palestinian children from Hamas’s Western allies shouldn’t be surprising. The protest—like the abovementioned speech—deliberately conveyed the message that Israel is the ultimate evil and its destruction the ultimate good, cancer patients be damned.

The fact that Israel’s adversaries are almost comically perverse does not mean that they can be dismissed. If its allies fail to understand the obsessive and irrational hatred that it faces, they cannot effectively help it defend itself.