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

Federal agencies continue terminating all funding to Harvard

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 154 posts

Re: Federal agencies continue terminating all funding to Harvard

#71

Post by uhhhd »

Braxton1980 wrote: post #54
uhhhd wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That Harvard chose to settle this lawsuit rather than litigate it. https://www.kasowitz.com/media/unxcnvpo/harvard-complaint.pd...

How is that evidence when entities settle suits all the time to avoid the cost and time of litigation?

Because the reputational damage to Harvard would probably exceed the minimal cost of litigating this (given its endowment) if they thought they would win. It's not evidence in legal sense, but it's a strong suggestion of culpability. Harvard isn't some kid that was arrested on false charges and settles because they're facing jail time. This is a massive institution with a 50B purse. Litigating this is peanuts for them.

Re: Federal agencies continue terminating all funding to Harvard

#72

Post by uhhhd »

Braxton1980 wrote: post #50
uhhhd wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you prefer a summary: Key Allegations: 1. Hostile Environment: The complaint describes a campus atmosphere where pro-Hamas students and faculty have organized demonstrations featuring antisemitic slogans and calls for violence against Jews and Israel. These protests have reportedly disrupted classes and occupied campus spaces, creating an environment of fear and intimidation for Jewish students. 2. Administrative…

These protests were mostly against the state of Israel which isn't a violation of Title IX.I know there were specific instances of Anti-Semitism, which were wrong and should be punished, but is there evidence Harvard didn't take action for those? ----- My concern is that Anti-Zionism is being conflated with Anti-Semitism by the complainants in order to 1. Bolster their case wrongfully by increasing the number of inci…

"I know there were specific instances of Anti-Semitism, which were wrong and should be punished, but is there evidence Harvard didn't take action for those?" That is literally the allegation made in the lawsuit. And calling these protests merely "anti-Israel" is intentionally obtuse — it ignores the blatant anti-Jewish bigotry that was plainly on display.

Re: Federal agencies continue terminating all funding to Harvard

#73

Post by landl0rd »

Braxton1980 wrote: post #64
landl0rd wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Defense was about 12% of last year's spending. I think we should cut the other 88% a lot. Raise defense spending a little. Work hard on bringing down defense costs because we are throwing money at the primes for what.

>Defense was about 12% of last year's spending. I think we should cut the other 88% a lot. It's not a contradiction to believe in cutting spending due to a fear of the deficit EXCEPT you make exceptions, like defense, which you provided an explanation to. However that means you can't use the general rule alone as the reason for cutting social programs (or better asked as) "Why not make an exception for social program…

Defense is existential and welfare is not.

Defense is also an enumerated power of the feds and welfare is not.

Defense must be handled at the national welfare and welfare need not be.

My "general rule" is there is a pretty small list of things the feds should do. It is also a "general rule" that when you are worried about overspending you look at the bigger line items first.

Primes are the prime contractors: boeing, northrop, lockheed, rtx. The guys who do a lot of stuff on cost-plus. The guys who systems-integrate most of the smaller manufacturers' stuff.

Re: Federal agencies continue terminating all funding to Harvard

#74

Post by uhhhd »

Braxton1980 wrote: post #50
uhhhd wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you prefer a summary: Key Allegations: 1. Hostile Environment: The complaint describes a campus atmosphere where pro-Hamas students and faculty have organized demonstrations featuring antisemitic slogans and calls for violence against Jews and Israel. These protests have reportedly disrupted classes and occupied campus spaces, creating an environment of fear and intimidation for Jewish students. 2. Administrative…

These protests were mostly against the state of Israel which isn't a violation of Title IX.I know there were specific instances of Anti-Semitism, which were wrong and should be punished, but is there evidence Harvard didn't take action for those? ----- My concern is that Anti-Zionism is being conflated with Anti-Semitism by the complainants in order to 1. Bolster their case wrongfully by increasing the number of inci…

References to Israel are not unnecessary details when protestors call for the elimination of the only existing Jewish state. Anti-Zionism isn't criticism of Israel. Its eliminationist rhetoric and plainly bigoted.

Re: Federal agencies continue terminating all funding to Harvard

#75

Post by uhhhd »

pasttense01 wrote: post #61
uhhhd wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not try to do the minimum amount of research before complaining about it online? Here's a complaint from a recent lawsuit by a collection of Jewish Harvard students against the university. It's a good starting point. https://www.kasowitz.com/media/unxcnvpo/harvard-complaint.pd...

The President of Harvard University is a Jew. Do you really think he is going to allow Harvard to engage in anti-Jewish policies?

[flagged]

Re: Federal agencies continue terminating all funding to Harvard

#76

Post by 1659447091 »

landl0rd wrote: post #62
jknoepfler wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's exactly what the entire campaign platform you voted for was: unprincipled, random bullshit designed to stoke an angry, bigoted, ignorant base. I can respect principled patriotism and fiscal conservativism, but voting for an icon of xenophobia, illiteracy, and graft and expecting anything but that is kinda... Also if you actually gave a shit about containing China, it would probably be in your best interests to v…

I voted mostly against harris. I don't really like trump. I've voted against him in every primary I could. I voted libertarian in 2020 because I figured biden would lose. I do not believe harris will be any better at containing china. probably worse. Trump is not particularly effective but he at least pretends to care.

> I do not believe harris will be any better at containing china.

But she would probably be better at keeping the US position in the world and with our allies in good standing; instead of selling it off for personal gain.

> Trump is not particularly effective but he at least pretends to care.

Good point, at least he pretends to care. I mean he is getting the US a "free" jet that will cost the american tax payer almost a billion dollars to retrofit that will be finished at the end of his term and then given to his library for his personal use. But since he pretends to care about Americans, I guess we can also pretend to believe his dealing with the middle east and all his crypto is totally not selling the country out for his, his business partners and his family's benefit.

At least you are honest about voting for someone who only pretends to care, instead of voting for someone who does care about the country and it's people, even if some domestic policies views differ -- I can appreciate that honesty.

Re: Federal agencies continue terminating all funding to Harvard

#77

Post by Braxton1980 »

firesteelrain wrote: post #70
Braxton1980 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What evidence do you have of political indoctrination or social activism?

[1] https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2024/6/4/dei-faculty-hiri... “ Harvard’s Faculty of Arts and Sciences will stop requiring a diversity, inclusion, and belonging statement as part of its faculty hiring process” Professor Randall Kennedy of Harvard Law School described these statements as "ideological pledges of allegiance" that pressure candidates to conform to specific viewpoints, potentially discouraging those…

[8,9 dup] checked the course catalog and there are classes on topics that I think most would consider social activism.

The CS professor just running a word search is a poor experiment but this doesn't negate your point.

[1] The DEI intitive is social activism [2] True but not an official school policy but a professor

[3] Independent organization [4] Article on protests and mentions faculty support them [5-6] Accusations [7] True

These are good examples. What about indoctrination though and is it wrong for Harvard to be social activists?

Re: Federal agencies continue terminating all funding to Harvard

#78

Post by tptacek »

pasttense01 wrote: post #56
tptacek wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They should use their endowment to mitigate this. People should be concerned about that. But (1) other schools aren't in that position, and (2) whether or not the Harvard admin makes the right calls, we either are or aren't funding cancer research; we should be angry at anybody compromising that.

They will to a certain extent, but the substantial majority of the funds are restricted (for example buy art for the museum).

They have over $10Bn in unrestricted endowments, and both the unrestricted and restricted funds grow with the market.

Re: Federal agencies continue terminating all funding to Harvard

#79

Post by Braxton1980 »

uhhhd wrote: post #71
Braxton1980 wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is that evidence when entities settle suits all the time to avoid the cost and time of litigation?

Because the reputational damage to Harvard would probably exceed the minimal cost of litigating this (given its endowment) if they thought they would win. It's not evidence in legal sense, but it's a strong suggestion of culpability. Harvard isn't some kid that was arrested on false charges and settles because they're facing jail time. This is a massive institution with a 50B purse. Litigating this is peanuts for the…

>This is a massive institution with a 50B purse. Litigating this is peanuts for them.

Companies, large ones, settle all the time even if not at fault to avoid a lengthy trial which damages their reputation. It can have nothing to do with culpability.

3% of civil cases reach a verdict.

https://arizonabusinesslawyeraz.com/when-to-litigate-and-whe...

Settlements are also a known fixed cost controlled by the business instead of a jury. Considering how Republicans are attacking Harvard I would say the desire to get this out the public spotlight as fast as possible is important

Re: Federal agencies continue terminating all funding to Harvard

#80

Post by firesteelrain »

Braxton1980 wrote: post #77
firesteelrain wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[1] https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2024/6/4/dei-faculty-hiri... “ Harvard’s Faculty of Arts and Sciences will stop requiring a diversity, inclusion, and belonging statement as part of its faculty hiring process” Professor Randall Kennedy of Harvard Law School described these statements as "ideological pledges of allegiance" that pressure candidates to conform to specific viewpoints, potentially discouraging those…

[8,9 dup] checked the course catalog and there are classes on topics that I think most would consider social activism. The CS professor just running a word search is a poor experiment but this doesn't negate your point. [1] The DEI intitive is social activism [2] True but not an official school policy but a professor [3] Independent organization [4] Article on protests and mentions faculty support them [5-6] Accusati…

The computer science professor isn’t some nobody either - long time faculty, graduated in 1968, former Dean.

In the case of the curriculum, it suggests an institutional preference for particular ideological narratives

Harvard selectively aligned with or tolerated specific activist ideologies while suppressing or distancing themselves from others

For DEI (which is just rebranded now honestly), it suggests that Harvard pushes only progressive policies and indoctrinated their students in this ideology.

They shouldn’t indoctrinate any students whatsoever

Post reply on HN