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

351–360 of 1001 posts

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

#351

Post by settrans »

nine_k wrote: post #339
settrans wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[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.

Yes, they are called Neturei Karta, and there are maybe 100 of them out there.

But it doesn't matter who is espousing the idea: just because a Jew says something doesn't make it _not_ antisemitic. I have yet to hear an argument that convinces me that it is not bigoted to selectively deny the Jewish people a right to a state from which to defend themselves.

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

#352

Post by oehtXRwMkIs »

rocqua wrote: post #14

Harvard just earned some reputation with me. It was already a place with great research. But now, it is also in institution with actual moral fiber.

I don't know, is it moral to give legitimacy and a platform to someone like J. Mark Ramseyer (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Mark_Ramseyer)? Less clear example would be keeping around Roland Fryer.

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

#353

Post by disqard »

TimorousBestie wrote: post #283
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…

It’s a good strategy. Even if Harvard had attempted to satisfy every bullet point, the govt could still retort that their demands were not satisfied.

Hmmm, is this akin to what Russia means, when it says "we do not negotiate with terrorists"?

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

#354

Post by duxup »

clivestaples wrote: post #147

Likely I'm very naive. But here goes... It seems that taxpayers fund a lot of research. This research is very valuable and lucrative. It finds its way into the hands of those who know how to profit from it. The taxpayer is again screwed paying exorbitant prices for said breakthroughs. Insulin is one area of interest to me and it very much seems to be the case in the diabetes world. This was how NAFTA was sold. Move c…

I don't think your concept her is bad at all.

But I also don't think your concept has anything to do with the situation at Harvard.

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

#355

Post by ren_engineer »

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…

those endowments, especially for the Ivy League schools, aren't liquid at all. They'd take a massive haircut if they had to start pulling funds from it

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

#356

Post by settrans »

jsheard wrote: post #286
settrans wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> Where are the pro-Palestinian activists who are standing up for the Gazans who have the courage to risk their lives by protesting against Hamas? If you can find me a western government or institution they should be protesting for actively collaborating with Hamas then I'll grant you that hypocrisy. They don't need to because it's already a federal crime to materially support Hamas in any way whatsoever.

If the Palestinians are risking their lives to protest against Hamas in Gaza, why can't the alleged pro-Palestinian protesters demonstrate in support of this viewpoint?

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

#357

Post by AlexandrB »

outside1234 wrote: post #256
AlexandrB wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

General strike when >50% of those who voted wanted this? What world are you living in? Edit: I stand corrected, 49.81%. It doesn't change the point much. Especially when that ~49% includes many "working class"[1] voters. Who's going to participate in this general strike? A bunch of office workers? [1] https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trumps-return-power-fueled-...

I suspect much less than 50% actually wanted legal residents of the United States disappeared to El Salvador. Also, research tells us that it only takes 3.5% to overthrow a government.

> Also, research tells us that it only takes 3.5% to overthrow a government.

You're describing a coup or revolution. Isn't that highly anti-democratic considering this president just won an election? Why should the 50% be under the thumb of the 3.5%?

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

#358

Post by matwood »

repeekad wrote: post #159
thinkingtoilet wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> that we can have a conversation about how much money is leaking out of our tax dollars Of course. It's clear you didn't read the letter because Harvard addresses this specifically. The Trump admin is literally refusing to have a conversation. This is 100% politically motivated and it's obvious to anyone who is not in the Trump cult. This is particularly disgusting because their doing it under the guise of 'antisemi…

nope, just a random stranger trying to add some random noise into these often one sided conversations, I of course support public academic investment and Trump is bad for the country, but I worry we've fully mapped one to one trump and nazis, and it just doesn't resonate with me as much as it seems it does everyone else. I'm from small town America, I know that the federal government doesn't care about my hometown, s…

> it's hard for me to not think that's crazy and why can't that money go to average americans

The democrats have been trying to pass universal healthcare and free higher education it feels like forever. UBI has even come up a few times. Nothing that Trump is doing is for anyone but himself and his rich friends.

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

#359

Post by janalsncm »

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]

Whether or not they should is irrelevant. What is relevant is the government cannot infringe on Harvard’s speech.

Also this has nothing to do with immigration. It would be the same situation if everyone at Harvard were 10th generation Americans.

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

#360

Post by thechao »

allturtles wrote: post #340
jiriknesl wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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