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

371–380 of 1001 posts

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

#371

Post by overfeed »

enaaem wrote: post #250
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.

> If Trump was a black woman he would never get away with half the things he is doing now.

It sounds like you're aware of the present reality of race and how it impacts how one is treated in America just for being who they are.

> I have never been a "woke" person

I have news for you!

Edit: to be clear, I'm certain you don't match the the adversarially bastardized caricature of what a "woke person" is, but it sounds like match the original, well-meaning definition.

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

#372

Post by outer_web »

goatlover wrote: post #315
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Although the president was caught on mic musing about deporting American citizens The canaries in our coal mine are permanent residents. Anything that can legally be done to a permanent resident can basically be done to a "bad" citizen. Trump is trying to run roughshod over permanent residents' habeus corpus rights. Courts are currently pushing back; I expect he will defy them. That, for me, will be the line at whi…

"Bad" citizen can end up meaning anything Trump doesn't like, such as criticism. Even the most conservative person should be worried about this.

Especially the most conservative person.

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

#373

Post by [deleted] »

bhouston wrote: post #210
greasegum wrote: post #76

It's just words, obviously contradicted by many of Harvard's recent actions, but all I can think is what a fucking lay-up. If only Columbia's administration had half a spine they would have responded similarly.

> all I can think is what a fucking lay-up I am nervous about the US right now. So many cases are going to end up at the Supreme Court that is controlled by conservatives. It may not be the lay-up you think it is. Also what happens if Trump just decides to ignore a court loss as he did with the recent deportation of Kilmar Garcia?

[deleted]

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

#374

Post by nickpsecurity »

So, many of these universities were taken over in positions of power by people promoting intersectionality which also promotes systematic discrimination (eg DEI) against specific groups. That's a highly-divisive philosophy with no proven benefits that's similar to Marxism which killed 50 million people and wrecked countries. They did this while describing themselves as open-minded institutions commited to everyone's success.

In the degree programs, they forced these beliefs on students in "diversity" classes, rewarded those on their side, and canceled or limited people with differing views. Those who make it through the process are more likely to force it on others in government and business, which they often do. Worse, being federally funded means taxpayers are paying for students' indoctrination in intersectionality and systematically discrimination it claimed to oppose.

Yeah, I want their funding cut entirely since theyre already rich as can be. I also would like to see those running it take it back to what it used to be. That's a Christian school balancing character and intellectual education. Also, one where many views can be represented with no cancel culture. That is worth federal funding.

On top of it, how about these schools with billions in endowments put their money where their mouth is on social issues and start funding high-quality, community colleges and trade schools and Udemy-like programs everywhere? Why do they talk so much and take in so much money but do so little? (Credit to MIT for EdX and Harvard for its open courses.)

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

#375

Post by unclebucknasty »

SoftTalker wrote: post #303
alabastervlog wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He may issue an EO against them similar to the ones he's successfully used to bring major law firms he doesn't like to heel: ban consideration of former Harvard employees (... maybe also graduates?) for Federal jobs, revoke clearances held by anyone employed by Harvard, and ban them from Federal property. Maybe with some other creative terms thrown in to mess with universities in particular.

That is always a risk of working for the government. Your job exists more or less at the whims of the currently governing administration.

>Your job exists more or less at the whims of the currently governing administration.

Perhaps in theory, but not in practice as a historical norm. And, certainly not for "standard" non-appointed, bureaucratic roles.

It's important that we don't normalize what we're seeing here, in terms of quality or degree.

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

#376

Post by churchill »

settrans wrote: post #338
churchill wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[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 wer…

[flagged]

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

#377

Post by sys32768 »

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.

Harvard admitted it needs to "...broaden the intellectual and viewpoint diversity within our community..."

This is a no-brainer considering only 2.3% of their faculty identifies as conservative.

https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2023/5/22/faculty-survey-...

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

#378

Post by allturtles »

thechao wrote: post #360
allturtles wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Conservatives have started their own Universities. No one likes going to those schools, and they end up bankrupt, with students who are functionally uneducated.

So, there you go, the market has spoken.

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

#379

Post by nine_k »

guax wrote: post #218
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…

The government does not have all that right tho. First amendment and all. I would invite you to read the government letter if you have not, but look at each demand and put yourself in the position of the recently affected but also try to see if you can hold a "controversial" view of the world that should be fine but would be put in danger by these demands: https://www.harvard.edu/research-funding/wp-content/uploads/.…

I don't think that the government's demands are all reasonable, or even permissible. Some things read like they were written in the height of the civil rights movement in 1960s:

> By August 2025, the University must adopt and implement merit-based hiring policies, and cease all preferences based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin throughout its hiring, promotion, compensation, and related practices

Some though read as if they were written in an advent to a totalitarian dystopia:

> Harvard will immediately report to federal authorities, including the Department of Homeland Security and State Department, any foreign student, including those on visas and with green cards, who commits a conduct violation.

To my mind Harvard is right in bringing this to the public attention. It's also free to walk away from governmental financing programs that stipulate such conditions (if they are even found legitimate), and is even in a position to do so.

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

#380

Post by mcphage »

squigz wrote: post #275
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…

> the more they will accelerate down a path where there is no coming back from. Why do you say this? At practically every point in history where a government or dictator goes too far, we've come back from it.

> we've come back from it

We as a species have come back from it, yes. But generally after millions of victims are killed, and what is left over is very different than what existed prior.

Post reply on HN