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

Harvard's response to federal government letter demanding changes

harvard.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 1001 posts

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

#241

Post by nairteashop »

FloorEgg wrote: post #184
PerilousD wrote: post #13

I guess that Harvard probably does not need the Feds as much as the Feds need Harvard but I'm glad they are standing up to the Fascists. I'm going to have to see what NYU is doing now.

Genuinely curious: what part of the federal government's letter to Harvard seems fascist to you? Is the government asking a university to shift their bias away from skin color diversity to viewpoint diversity fascist? Is there a historical parallel? Or is it just the fact that the government is asking for reform, and any reform request would be considered fascist? If so, do you also consider the DEI reform requests f…

Let's set aside specific terms like "fascist" for now. Below is one of the demands from the government:

> the University shall commission an external party, which shall satisfy the federal government as to its competence and good faith, to audit the student body, faculty, staff, and leadership for viewpoint diversity, such that each department, field, or teaching unit must be individually viewpoint diverse.

Do you feel this is ok for the government to demand of an educational institution? This isn't about specific political ideologies. If the Biden administration had threatened to withhold funding from a university because, for example, their hiring policies weren't left-leaning enough or something, it would be equally outrageous.

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

#242

Post by thrance »

outer_web wrote: post #121
epolanski wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point of no return was January 6th 2021! Once Americans pardoned an attempt by the sitting president to overthrow US democracy the game's over. America desperately needs a huge revision to the powers conceded to individuals and should instead mature to a slower, maybe less effective at times, but stronger democracy that nurtures parliamentary debate and discourse.

It could have been water under the bridge if we simply did not re-elect him. But now we have a second term emboldened by de facto total immunity.

It would have been water under the bridge if him and his cronies all got perpetuity starting jan 7th and we never heard of them ever again. Instead the dems chose a demonstration of weakness, and showed that an attempt on our democracy would be punished by a strong worded reprimand, at best.

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

#243

Post by [deleted] »

ren_engineer wrote: post #142
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…

these types of moves wouldn't be possible in the first place if these institutions hadn't spent decades burning their own credibility. They even mention Alzheimer's research in this post, something that has literally wasted billions of taxpayer dollars due to an academic cartel shutting down anybody trying to expose the fact that they were completely wrong about amyloid plaques

[deleted]

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

#244

Post by nineplay »

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

I promise you right now that no one in the Trump administration is interested into providing more books to local schools. Quite the opposite

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

#245

Post by morleytj »

quotemstr wrote: post #207
morleytj wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I'm fine with stopping the flow of federal money to people who hate me in particular and who take a salary to convince others to do so too. Those who defend the conduct of universities need to pause and consider that the public has noticed the radicalization of academia, despises it, and will support state action to reverse it.

Who hates you in particular? What do you mean by that? Also, that's fine to have a conversation about funding, but it's fairly different from arrests, deportations, and shipping individuals to foreign prisons. Rather motte and bailey to earlier suggest that the government was going to go "Henry VII" on universities, and then say that you just want to change funding. These are very different positions.

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

#246

Post by fma »

bretpiatt wrote: post #32

With their endowment above $50 billion, combined with Federal plus Non-Federal sponsored revenue at 16% of operating budget, it makes sense to me they just forgo Federal funds and operate independently. If all 16% is canceled, then they'd need to draw an additional $1 billion per year from endowment at current budget levels. That would put them above 7% draw so potentially unsustainable for perpetuity, historically t…

Harvard is probably thinking they just need to draw the $1 billion extra for another 4 years. Unless, Trump runs for a 3rd time which he has floated. If that happens then I think everyone's just screwed.

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

#247

Post by __loam »

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

Massachusetts has some of the best public schools in the nation.

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

#248

Post by [deleted] »

BuckRogers wrote: post #236
esrauch wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did; it explicitly demanding an audit of employees and students political views, the forced hiring of more professors who are sympathetic to the current administration's politics. That doesn't sound authoritarian to you? Can you imagine if Obama had demanded that any university do an ideological purge of its conservative staff and students?

[flagged]

[deleted]

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

#249

Post by chairmansteve »

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.

It's starting to like authoritarian is the wrong word.

Totalitarian? not yet, but....

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

#250

Post by enaaem »

arp242 wrote: post #169

So first they demand "Merit-Based Hiring Reform" and "Merit-Based Admissions Reform", and then it continues to demand "Viewpoint Diversity in Admissions and Hiring". I can't even engage with these levels of cognitive dissonance. Or bad faith. Or whatever it is.

I have never been a "woke" person, but Trump really makes me doubt the meritocracy argument. If Trump was a black woman he would never get away with half the things he is doing now.
Post reply on HN