A university president makes a case against cowardice

Post by casey2 » Fri, Apr 04, 2025, 4:26 AM UTC

watwut wrote: post #163

guywithahat wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Yes they went to universities. No, they are not trying to help the students. They don't even pretend to be trying to do so. They are nit trying to make it cheaper and they are not trying to make it more accessible. They agenda was either openly the opposite or they ignored the students. Except when they think they are too progressive and attack then verbally.

Post by nl » Fri, Apr 04, 2025, 4:34 AM UTC

mlindner wrote: post #275

necubi wrote: post #213

Oh hey, Wesleyan on HN! I’m an alumnus (matriculated a year or two after Roth became president). Wesleyan has a rich history of activism and protest, and not always entirely peaceful (Roth’s predecessor, Doug Bennet, had his office firebombed at one point). I’ve had a few opportunities to speak with Roth since the Gaza war started, and I’ve always found him particularly thoughtful about balancing freedom of expressio…

[flagged]

Post by Aeolun » Fri, Apr 04, 2025, 4:36 AM UTC

Thorrez wrote: post #76

rincebrain wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There wasn't, historically, the level of enormous potential negative consequences legally and practically if the universities talked back. Universities, like many institutions, have also become more like large incumbent businesses than previously - e.g. perpetuating their own existence over having strong core values.

Biden was considering withholding federal funds from schools over their vaccine policies[1], and tried to withhold federal funds from schools based on how they treat transgender students[2], but that was blocked by a judge. Obama did a similar thing regarding transgender students[3]. Things like this are why Hillsdale College rejects all federal funds. So they can do what they want without threat of the government re…

Post by ralfd » Fri, Apr 04, 2025, 4:39 AM UTC

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #247

cosmic_cheese wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In reality I don’t think people’s political opinions change very much and they are just mad that their children individuated. I think this probably the case as well. If I look back at how my own views shifted, the shift very likely would’ve happened regardless of if I’d attended university, assuming everything else was the same. It wasn’t the university that resulted in the shift as much as it was my getting out of…

But the most likely life experiences to do that are ones that put a person in touch with new ideas and new situations. Universities are much better positioned to generate such experiences than, say, most jobs. To some degree, those that have attempted to be at least nominally more diverse (economically/racially/...) are also the sorts of places where students are more likely to meet other people who are not like them…

Post by geonineties » Fri, Apr 04, 2025, 4:44 AM UTC

nickff wrote: post #178

dcrazy wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

If you're going to resort to Constitutional arguments, you shouldn't gloss over the fact that the federal government is supposed to be one of enumerated powers, and there's no 'bribing universities to do what you want' federal power.