Harvard's response to federal government letter demanding changes • Hacker News Board

Re: Harvard's response to federal government letter demanding changes

#191

Post by dclowd9901 » Mon, Apr 14, 2025, 7:29 PM UTC

nine_k wrote: post #152

The university, as a private institution, has every right to hold whatever views and enforce whatever policies it sees fit within itself. The government, on the other hand, has every right to put conditions its counterparty should conform to in order to get money from the government. It's best when the bargaining about such conditions happens with mutual respect and without overreach, but respect and sobriety are in…

Do we really believe there is a rooted undercurrent of antisemitism at Harvard of all places? Or is this just anti-zionist expansion straw manning? I'm sorry but the continuously faithless positioning of the Trump administration right now makes me believe the antisemitic accusations are a pretext.

Re: Harvard's response to federal government letter demanding changes

#192

Post by vel0city » Mon, Apr 14, 2025, 7:29 PM UTC

School-Cotton wrote: post #59

ghusto wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point of no return is Trump getting a third term. The parallels are strong there. I was just thinking this morning that we very much needed the USA's help fighting Nazi Germany, but who will we turn to when we're fighting fascists coming from the East _and_ West? (Russia and the USA)

What is your definition of "fascists"? Edit to explain my point, because I'm getting downvoted (which I don't care about, but I _do_ care if people don't understand my point): fascism was a specific ideology/movement in the 20th century that, other than being right-wing and authoritarian, doesn't bear much resemblance to right-wing authoritarianism today: they have different goals, different motives, promote differen…

The opening passage of the Wikipedia article:

Fascism (/ˈfæʃɪzəm/ FASH-iz-əm) is a far-right [checks box], authoritarian [ignoring courts decisions, sending people to prisons without any due process; check], and ultranationalist [MAGA, american exceptionalism, etc; check] political ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader [do I really need to explain; check], centralized autocracy [feckless GOP congress, EOs left and right; check], militarism, forcible suppression of opposition [J6, anyone? also see Maine and TFA and the law firms being blacklisted and more; check], belief in a natural social hierarchy [pro-life, shrouded in "traditional family values", anti-gay, anti-trans, etc; check], subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation or race [tariffs, massive deportations without due process, etc; check], and strong regimentation of society and the economy [bathroom bills, tariff policies with exceptions for those who bribe him with million dollar dinner purchases, etc; check].

Tell me how this doesn't fit?

Re: Harvard's response to federal government letter demanding changes

#193

Post by morleytj » Mon, Apr 14, 2025, 7:29 PM UTC

quotemstr wrote: post #175

areoform wrote: post #26

If you've read history, this rhymes with certain acts that have happened before under certain regimes. Under a non-authoritarian Government, this type of showboating can be dismissed, but when habeas corpus and the right to due process is suspended — such actions take on a very different cast indeed. It's good that Harvard is fighting this. The more people accede, the more they will accelerate down a path where there…

[flagged]

So you're fine with them arresting dissenters as long as you disagree with the dissenters? That's fairly antithetical to the ideas expressed in the US constitution.

Re: Harvard's response to federal government letter demanding changes

#194

Post by duxup » Mon, Apr 14, 2025, 7:29 PM UTC

apercu wrote: post #39

rocqua wrote: post #14

Harvard just earned some reputation with me. It was already a place with great research. But now, it is also in institution with actual moral fiber.

> actual moral fiber. Maybe? Or maybe they realize that they will lose all future credibility with students, government and NGO's if they bow to the conservative & Christian right? There are two outcomes for the the current American government situation - a slide in to authoritarianism (it's right there in Project 2025), or these wackjobs get voted out because they are destroying global financial stability. If it's t…

Edited:

Yes, I doubt they're cool with the ideas in the letter like the federal government auditing everyone's "viewpoint diversity" and mandating staffing changes to fit what the federal government wants.

Re: Harvard's response to federal government letter demanding changes

#195

Post by linktraveler » Mon, Apr 14, 2025, 7:29 PM UTC

repeekad wrote: post #113

ceejayoz wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> $9 billion dollars from the federal government to Harvard equates to nearly $30 per American… Now do what it gets them.

given my comment got railroaded instantly, this is clearly what everyone thinks, but let's at least have that conversation rather than blindly pumping money into academia while local schools can't even afford books

even partially agreeing with anything the trump administration does on this forum makes you a target for downvotes.

let me cred fall. idgaDANG

Re: Harvard's response to federal government letter demanding changes

#196

Post by malfist » Mon, Apr 14, 2025, 7:29 PM UTC

outer_web wrote: post #115

areoform wrote: post #26

If you've read history, this rhymes with certain acts that have happened before under certain regimes. Under a non-authoritarian Government, this type of showboating can be dismissed, but when habeas corpus and the right to due process is suspended — such actions take on a very different cast indeed. It's good that Harvard is fighting this. The more people accede, the more they will accelerate down a path where there…

Habeas corpus - still in effect unless you're already in El Salvador.

If they can decide someone is a migrant and deport them without due process and no recourse, they can decide anyone is a migrant and deport them without due process.

If a class of people don't have habeas corpus, no one does.

Re: Harvard's response to federal government letter demanding changes

#197

Post by arp242 » Mon, Apr 14, 2025, 7:29 PM UTC

bilbo0s wrote: post #73

ghusto wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point of no return is Trump getting a third term. The parallels are strong there. I was just thinking this morning that we very much needed the USA's help fighting Nazi Germany, but who will we turn to when we're fighting fascists coming from the East _and_ West? (Russia and the USA)

The point of no return is Trump getting a third term That's a little alarmist. It's not going to happen. Things are close to going off the rails and people are understandably troubled with the direction in which the US government is headed. I am as well. But we all need to start turning down the temperature a bit.

It will definitely happen if everyone is as complacent as that. At this point this attitude is extremely hard to take serious: you're either not paying attention or you're not engaging in good faith.

Re: Harvard's response to federal government letter demanding changes

#198

Post by nonethewiser » Mon, Apr 14, 2025, 7:29 PM UTC

ceejayoz wrote: post #123

nonethewiser wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does the Federal Gov need Harvard for? Harvard gets 16% of its funding from them - what outweighs that on the aide of the Federal government?

The tax revenues from the $1.3T company that arose from their online yearbook? Lawyers? Doctors? Medical research? Thousands of highly educated graduates annually? 161 Nobel prize winners?

Its not clear what the effect no Harvard would be on those metrics. And all of those are necessarily in Harvards best interest to maintain too.

This is compared to a direct payment to sustain operations which the government is saying they may not be in favor of. But its not like Harvard would say ”it may not be in our interest to produce successful people anymore.”

Re: Harvard's response to federal government letter demanding changes

#199

Post by kevin_thibedeau » Mon, Apr 14, 2025, 7:30 PM UTC

areoform wrote: post #139

outer_web wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Habeas corpus - still in effect unless you're already in El Salvador.

It's not. The rubicon has already been crossed. If you asked some of the framers of the US constitution - beyond all other factors, unelected powers etc - what was the one defining trait of the government structure they wished to avoid; they'd have replied with arbitrary imprisonment and the suspension of due process. Please don't take my word for it, hear it from the Prosecutor's Prosecutor. The SCOTUS justice, form…

The more fundamental corollary is that the US government does not grant any rights. We have them by default and cede limited power for the benefit of an orderly society. Within such a framework, it should be impossible to disenfranchise people by denying them due process.

Re: Harvard's response to federal government letter demanding changes

#200

Post by UncleMeat » Mon, Apr 14, 2025, 7:30 PM UTC

repeekad wrote: post #113

ceejayoz wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> $9 billion dollars from the federal government to Harvard equates to nearly $30 per American… Now do what it gets them.

given my comment got railroaded instantly, this is clearly what everyone thinks, but let's at least have that conversation rather than blindly pumping money into academia while local schools can't even afford books

Is there any evidence that we've been "blindly" pumping money into academia? Funding agencies are part of the federal budget and don't just get everything they ask for. Then those agencies have all sorts of review procedures for choosing grant awardees.

There isn't just some big slush fund labeled "dumb science ideas" that everybody grabs from.