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

331–340 of 1001 posts

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

#331

Post by pqtyw »

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…

Perhaps but "the framers of the US constitution" are almost always over idealized. It was the very early stages of democracy (even if you can call it that). When elected to office they regularly used they official powers to supress political opponents, partisan enmity was endemic and the levels of corruption were pretty extreme (of course there was only so much money to go around due to very low taxes). Trump is unhinged of course but some of the founders or early US politicians weren't too far off...

The constitution was more of an aspirational ideal than a binding document back then since there were very limited ways too enforce it (e.g. the only way to repeal the Alien and Sedition Acts was by electing a new president/congress). The First Amendment was also interpreted and viewed extremely different that it is now before the 1900s...

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

#332

Post by stemlord »

ghusto wrote: post #33

This is the only correct response, but I don't think I'm being overly cynical in thinking they're being opportunistic either. They're quite happy to turn a blind eye to unfashionable political views being silenced, so there's a pinch of hypocrisy in making such a show of standing for openness. All in all though, I'm happy to see this.

It's my understanding that the issue is not that they're "espousing the right views" but rather that they have the constitutional right as a private institution to espouse whatever views their students and faculty want under the first amendment.

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

#333

Post by ziddoap »

surge wrote: post #231
areoform wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

[flagged]

As soon as you carve out exceptions for who should and shouldn't have their basic rights, you've lost the plot. Someone with a little bit of authority only needs to claim that you are a part of that group that shouldn't have their rights, and then you get to experience a flight to El Salvador wondering where it all went wrong.

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

#334

Post by TheGuyWhoCodes »

breadwinner wrote: post #258
settrans wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

If anything negative you can say about Israel is equated to antisemitism then Israel gets a free pass. Hamas engaged in terrorism, but Israel's response was out of proportion. Saying that aloud doesn't make one antisemitic. The ICC and UN are not antisemitic organizations for ordering arrest of Netanyahu and condemning Israel's use of excessive force.

What would have been a proportional response? Is it a numbers game? lets do 2x? 5x? 10x? In the gilad shalit deal Palestinians established the proportion of 1 Israeli to 1027 Palestinians. So on Oct 7 - 1,195 were murdered, by your standards Israel should have killed 1,227,265 Palestinians.

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

#335

Post by jawilson2 »

surge wrote: post #231
areoform wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

[flagged]

Just to be clear, you are suggesting that it is fine to kidnap and send American citizens, ANY AMERICAN CITIZEN, to foreign prisons. They could come take you or any family member for any reason, and all they have to say is they thought you are a dangerous gang member. They don't even have to say anything! Once you are on that plane, it is a black hole, and they are grinning about the fact that you can't do a thing about it. That is why we have due process. This isn't about immigrants or cheap labor or anything. This is about disappearing political enemies for any reason. Flick off a Tesla driver? Gulag. Post on facebook that maybe we should be nice to gay people? Gulag. Trying to enter the USA on vacation with too much melanin? Guess what, gulag.

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

#336

Post by [deleted] »

Always42 wrote: post #302
kweingar wrote: post #224

The aggregate demands of the administration are confusing and contradictory. They seem to be simultaneously asking for: - an end to diversity initiatives - a new diversity initiative for diverse points of view - a new policy of not admitting international students with certain points of view - ending speech-control policies - auditing the speech of certain departments and programs - ending discipline of students who…

[flagged]

[deleted]

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

#337

Post by guywithahat »

TrevorAustin wrote: post #144
WalterBright wrote: post #35

[flagged]

A demand letter that said only "Harvard may not use race, gender, or national origin as criteria for admissions and hiring" would be a lot more defensible, and much harder to oppose. But the government's list of demands includes all kinds of stuff that would be mildly insane even if offered in good faith. And we have seen enough already that any independent organization would be very irresponsible to assume good fait…

> the government's list of demands includes all kinds of stuff that would be mildly insane even if offered in good faith

And their demands are so insane you couldn't name one. I've gone through it and it all seems incredibly reasonable

https://www.harvard.edu/research-funding/wp-content/uploads/...

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

#338

Post by settrans »

churchill wrote: post #287
settrans wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

[flagged]

1. OK, great: this is a legitimate argument against the existence of Israel. So we can then expect Israel to be the focus of 0.5% of anti-nationalist protests, since it is one of ~200 countries.

2. What is the "correct" number of fatalities when fighting a defensive war against an enemy committed to annihilating your country? And besides, even Hamas now admits that 72% of combat-aged fatalities they have recorded were men.

3. I never said carte blanche; I just find it curious that people find so much time in their day to protest against Israel, but when Alawites are massacred in Syria, civilians slaughtered in Sudan, or hundreds of thousands of children starve in Yemen, nobody says "boo". Surely you value the lives of innocent Muslims everywhere the same?

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

#339

Post by nine_k »

settrans wrote: post #281
dclowd9901 wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

[flagged]

I'm not an expert, but definitely there were Jewish thinkers who opposed the idea of rebuilding Israel (Mt Zion and all) and argued that living as a diaspora is a better way. A quick web search / AI inquiry gives a variety of examples.

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

#340

Post by allturtles »

jiriknesl wrote: post #285
kweingar wrote: post #224

The aggregate demands of the administration are confusing and contradictory. They seem to be simultaneously asking for: - an end to diversity initiatives - a new diversity initiative for diverse points of view - a new policy of not admitting international students with certain points of view - ending speech-control policies - auditing the speech of certain departments and programs - ending discipline of students who…

The demands are simple and not confusing at all. - Stop promoting Democrats' agendas as the ultimate truth; stop bullying people for non-Democratic views - Allow Republicans' agendas to be equally represented Is it really so difficult to understand? Out of many bad things Trump has done, this isn't really bad for anyone except core Democrats voters. The US academia has become hostile to anyone except one particular c…

Conservatives should start their own universities, if they aren't happy with the existing ones. The federal government has no business enforcing conformity to certain ideological demands in private institutions. It's right there in the very first amendment.
Post reply on HN