Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A university president makes a case against cowardice

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 934 posts

Re: A university president makes a case against cowardice

#151

Post by n4r9 »

PathOfEclipse wrote: post #132
n4r9 wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Jay Bhattacharya, who in hindsight was far more correct on everything COVID-related than the CDC was Bhattacharya who signed the Great Barrington Delaration, advocating for herd immunity and "focused protection" for the elderly? Just imagine how much larger the death toll would have been. This page has a good list of concerns about Bhattacharya, including how the study mentioned in your link was flawed and one of t…

An honest seeker of truth wouldn't just say Jay's estimate was off, but compare it to other estimates of the time. Bhattacharya's IFP estimate was .2%. The WHO's IFP estimate was 3.0%. Which of the two had the more accurate estimate? The WHO, with billions in funding, or Jay operating by himself on a shoestring budget, all while the CDC in its bureaucratic incompetence couldn't be bothered to do any real studies? In…

> it is widely accepted now that the lockdown strategy failed

Is it?

https://royalsociety.org/news-resources/projects/impact-non-...

Re: A university president makes a case against cowardice

#152

Post by Balgair »

alephnerd wrote: post #11
carbocation wrote: post #7

So far the fight/not fight decisions can be predicted in advanced based on whether an institution has a medical center with NIH grants.

And if they hire the right alumni lobbyists - major reason why you don't hear about Dartmouth in the news [0] despite a similarly active student activism scene. Most other private universities could have easily managed the relationship, but a mix of inertia and vindictiveness from certain alumni (eg. Ackman) messed it up. Mind you, Dartmouth is also kind of unique in that their alumni relations team actually TRY to m…

The way I saw the Columbia protests was that Donny's trial was downtown, and because it was not televised, producers told their crews to stop filming the doors to the courthouse. So, looking for any story at all, they took the subway uptown to the hippies camping out on the quad. Hey, at least it's better than literally staring at a door, right? Next thing you know, the student protest thing blew up. Why? Because there was literally nothing else going on for the TV news crews to film those days. Soon as graduation happened and the trial wrapped up, we never heard another thing.

Dartmouth, sure, it may have a high energy protest scene and be smart and whatever. But no-one knows about it - not because they are crafty - but because it's in freakin Hanover.

Re: A university president makes a case against cowardice

#153

Post by LightHugger »

_DeadFred_ wrote: post #133
SauciestGNU wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First we're not allowed to call the detention camps "concentration camps" because there aren't ovens, now we can't call them "disappearances" because they're not getting thrown out of helicopters. Forget that people are getting shipped to a foreign torture slave camp from which nobody has been released with, and with no due process. I think this language policing may be because people don't want to allow opposition t…

This is exactly how it went in Russia. First it was, ‘Well, this isn’t that bad.’ Then, ‘Okay, sure, this isn’t great—but it’s not like we need to take action yet.’ And bit by bit, people kept rationalizing, minimizing, delaying—until suddenly it was, ‘Well… we’re f’d.’ That’s why we should speak up now. We’re already at the point where one side is openly arguing that due process isn’t guaranteed by the Constitution—…

I agree. But did you stand up against discrimination against innocent people under the banner of DEI? Did you stand up against government directed censorship campaigns on social media?

The time to stand up was actually way before the extreme actions of the left inspired this extreme reactionary overcorrection from the right. You're supposed to stand up while you're still in power, not after you've lost it, it's a bit late. I still remember people insisting "but deplatforming works!" as they justified mass censorship of conservatives. Honestly if you have not stood up for the people you politically disagreed with as the noose tightened over the last 10 years you are part of the cause of this terrible over-correction.

I can only hope that people start noticing this pattern and the inevitable next "correction" is not so extreme and we get some damping on the seemingly accelerating pendulum back and fourth.

Re: A university president makes a case against cowardice

#154

Post by keybored »

_bohm wrote: post #85
sequoia wrote: post #49

A lot of Americans support these attacks on universities. Why do people harbour this much animosity towards these institutions? Is there anything they could have done differently in the past decade or two to have broader sympathy now, or is people's ambivalence towards elite universities 100% irrational?

While not about resentment towards universities specifically, I thought this article in The Baffler [1] did a good job of framing a dynamic that, I think, contributes to this phenomenon. My interpretation: As the country has entered the post-industrial era, holding a college degree has increasingly become a table-stakes credential for entering the white collar labor force. The higher education system has struggled or…

Remember all those people who are resentful (of course that word) towards degree-holders because they wish they had one themselves? Me neither. That’s a they-hate-me-cause’-they-ain’t-me kind of logic.[1]

True othering comes from people living in different worlds and hating the other person’s world.

[1] I did not read the the article but I’ve read this argument in a Graeber article.

Re: A university president makes a case against cowardice

#155

Post by dcrazy »

insane_dreamer wrote: post #138
carbocation wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wesleyan does not have a medical center and according to the NIH’s public reporting, they have under $2 million in NIH grants, compared to $600 million for Columbia. ( Edited from $400 million, which is the value cut. ) Wesleyan has a $250 million operating budget, so the (from what REPORTER indicates) $1.6 million in NIH funding represents 0.6% of their budget. In contrast, the $600 million in NIH funding to Columbi…

That makes a strong case for academic institutions not being substantially dependent on government research dollars.

No it doesn’t. The First amendment is supposed to prevent the government from conditionalizing access to government services based on the speech of the recipient. Private institutions are not subject to such restrictions. If we want to encourage academic freedom, we want to find this behavior by the government to be illegal.

Re: A university president makes a case against cowardice

#156

Post by guywithahat »

The best solution here is for universities to become less involved with government money. They should have to compete for students and research on an even playing field, and we shouldn't be creating politically aligned fields through government spending.

Re: A university president makes a case against cowardice

#157

Post by guywithahat »

sequoia wrote: post #49

A lot of Americans support these attacks on universities. Why do people harbour this much animosity towards these institutions? Is there anything they could have done differently in the past decade or two to have broader sympathy now, or is people's ambivalence towards elite universities 100% irrational?

> attacks on universities

This really feels like bad phrasing, when people read that they roll their eyes. Basically every major republican politician went to college, nobody is attacking universities, they're trying to help the students.

Re: A university president makes a case against cowardice

#158

Post by mmooss »

I don't see much talk of donors? My impression is that, as in many situations, the super-wealthy are forming a dominant class - as if it's their right - rather than respect democracy and freedom, and attacking university freedom. Didn't some person engineer the Harvard leader's exit?

Roth says the Wesleyan board is supportive; maybe they are just lucky.

Re: A university president makes a case against cowardice

#159

Post by insane_dreamer »

dcrazy wrote: post #155
insane_dreamer wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That makes a strong case for academic institutions not being substantially dependent on government research dollars.

No it doesn’t. The First amendment is supposed to prevent the government from conditionalizing access to government services based on the speech of the recipient. Private institutions are not subject to such restrictions. If we want to encourage academic freedom, we want to find this behavior by the government to be illegal.

> we want to find this behavior by the government to be illegal

of course we do - but we're sadly discovering how easy it is for the government to target and coerce these universities, with nobody stepping up to stop them

Re: A university president makes a case against cowardice

#160

Post by red_admiral »

insane_dreamer wrote: post #135
JKCalhoun wrote: post #3

Wild that he is some kind of exception. Rolling over, folding is not the university culture I remember.

> not the university culture I remember. that's because universities are now businesses first, research institutions second, and academic institutions third

This point gets to the heart of the matter. The more I look into it, everything else seems downstream from this.
Post reply on HN