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

341–350 of 1001 posts

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

#341

Post by glial »

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]

Question for you - if you don't exercise due process, how do you know if any individual is one of those 10 million you speak of, or someone who is here legally, or for that matter, a citizen?

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

#342

Post by skyyler »

AlexandrB wrote: post #300
skyyler wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I agree, each UK citizen is infused with the original sin of being a colonizer and their opinion should be discarded until they purge this sin from their bodies through appropriate cleansing rituals. Perhaps some form of self-flagelation or bloodletting?

Goodness gracious. Invoking religious self-harm imagery in response to mild criticism feels wildly out of pocket. Do you genuinely think anti-colonial activism demands this or anything even resembling this of post-colonial states?

It feels like a really silly way to deflect from the concept that maybe average UK citizens do benefit in some way from their colonial past.

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

#343

Post by beloch »

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…

The section on "Student Discipline Reform and Accountability" is explicitly fascist. Harvard police must prevent/crush serious protests that cause disruption. Student groups must be vetted so that they don't violate orthodoxy. Masking (even for valid medical reasons) is banned. (This lets you know that this has nothing to do with facts or diversity of viewpoints and everything to do with the supremacy of theirs.) The "Whistleblower Reporting and Protections" section is basically a demand for a hotline, direct to the government, to inform on anyone not toeing the line. The "Transparency and Monitoring" section makes it clear the government intends to monitor foreign students at Harvard closely.

This isn't quite 1930's Germany yet, but it's getting there. The next step to watch for would be any laws passed that regulate who can serve as faculty in universities or attempts to impose different leadership on universities that don't comply with demands.

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

#344

Post by areoform »

ren_engineer wrote: post #272
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…

the judge you are quoting literally worked in FDR's admin when they were deporting millions of Mexicans, regardless of whether they were born in the US. They didn't get due process

That judge was against the interment of Japanese Americans. He took a stand against anyone deprived of due process throughout his life.

The US came close to losing its democracy status with FDR, which is why after he died, the 22nd Amendment was quickly created - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-second_Amendment_to_the...

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

#345

Post by bitcoin_anon »

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…

I agree. Also, the quality and independence of the research will improve when it is funded outside of government influence.

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

#346

Post by Symbiote »

cm2187 wrote: post #295
thrance wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you really believe that then I don't know what to tell you. You've been successfully brainwashed. I hope one day you're able to hold a 5 minutes conversation with an actual student and clear that bullshit out of your head.

Yeah, I must be hallucinating with "bullshit in my head". https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-00240-9 https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/black-lives-ma... https://www.maths.ox.ac.uk/node/70845

Would you like to further colonise mathematics?

Algebra could be renamed Chestering, to credit the Englishman who did the real work of translating Al-Khwarizmi's text from Arabic into Latin.

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

#347

Post by roxolotl »

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]

I was brought up as an American to believe that most important American value inscribed in the constitution was that the government cannot control your speech. So regardless of what Harvard does or does not do that quote, coming from the government especially, is simply unAmerican on its face.

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

#349

Post by duxup »

nine_k wrote: post #205
duxup wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The governments conditions are not unlimited. Their proposed "viewpoint diversity" is absurd at face value.

Indeed. I wish the government side was more reasonable, but it's hard to expect now; they are into running a TV show :(

I think this administration never had the intent to be "reasonable".

If they were concerned about out of control diversity efforts, I might even semi agree with them.

But this administration and the GOP doesn't value free speech. Despite their complaints they're not the least bit opposed to the government enforcing their viewpoints on people, in fact they just want to do it in spades.

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

#350

Post by lupusreal »

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…

[flagged]
Post reply on HN