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

801–810 of 1001 posts

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

#801

Post by nailer »

nashashmi wrote: post #693
nailer wrote: post #673

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Except homeland has been Egypt before it was Palestine. And Jews lived in both places peacefully after the Arabs established peace. Antisemitism is not what you want to make it out to be. It is as much a hatred against Arabs as it is against Jews, as Zionist Christians want to fill the land with Jews just so the end of the world is near, without any consideration for what happens to the Arab natives of the region.

Arabs never ‘established peace’ - historians largely agree that Islam was spread through conquest. Under Arab colonisation Jewish people either lived as Dhimmis, which are second class citizens, or were subject to outright violence (you can find many incidences of this before 1948), or both.

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

#802

Post by nailer »

ringeryless wrote: post #769
nailer wrote: post #667

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Have you no hesitation, even at this late juncture? Read everyone elses comment above, and try to stretch your critical thinking ability just a bit. Trump is our Caesar, we have ceased to be a constitutional republic, and you defend this with blithely pretending that 2 months of pure power-madness have not been occurring in plain view of the entire world? I suspect that such discourse as we have will not be "permitte…

No, I have no hesitation. How are you not finding it obvious that the government are trying to end racially based admittance programs?

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

#803

Post by nailer »

etchalon wrote: post #792
nailer wrote: post #667

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

So long as they're their viewpoints. You don't see letters going out to conservative institutions demanding they hire gender ideology professors or communists.

I’m not sure the government is funding many conservative institutions.

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

#804

Post by InDubioProRubio »

anonfordays wrote: post #592
UncleMeat wrote: post #477

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It makes sense if you understand that they aren't focused on general principles. Diversity is bad when it involves non-whites, women, gay people or research involving these groups. Diversity is good when it involves "race realists." Free speech is bad when students are advocating for divestment initiatives. Free speech is good when a professor calls somebody the n-word online. The goal is white supremacy and antifemi…

[flagged]

The problem is- they are not anti-racist honest. You are either nurture or nature, but if its all nurture, they refuse to discuss that part, compare those parts, work out the problematic parts and compose better societal models. They just idealise, bigott stay quiet and adverse engage only with those who respond civilized. Its all lies and damned lies and statistics.

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

#805

Post by TrackerFF »

porphyra wrote: post #261

Merit-based admission sounds good to me. Harvard is vigorously defending its "right" to continue to deny admissions to highly qualified Asian applicants out of nothing but pure racism, and somehow they are the good guys?

If the Trump admin could directly control admission, I truly believe future classes would consist of close to 100% far right leaning ("anti-woke") WASP types.

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

#806

Post by yieldcrv »

> For three-quarters of a century, the federal government has awarded grants and contracts to Harvard and other universities

yep. stop doing that. your university is nearly half a millennium old, and everything from the last century will be a footnote. you are a networking ground for upper class society, not an upwards mobility machine for the plebians. just go back to your roots and you won't have any of these issues.

> These partnerships are among the most productive and beneficial in American history.

privately fund it now that its a proven method. this obviously won't be controversial in the future. if its economically impossible then it won't happen, the end.

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

#807

Post by intended »

OhioMan2943 wrote: post #735
bpicolo wrote: post #619

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems like it could mean death for Columbia as a desirable college honestly

Probably not, they'll just pump up international student numbers to recoup and basically gut the domestic student experience. There's near infinite demand for American universities overseas even now.

Intl students are not mad. Who is going to pay the US intl student premium, to add the Columbia tag. Intl students are paying for very specific future life paths.

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

#808

Post by yieldcrv »

hnburnsy wrote: post #655
robocat wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Republicans Are Floating Plans To Raise the Endowment Tax. Here’s What You Need To Know : https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2025/2/11/increasing-endo... Proposed College Endowment Tax Hike: What to Know : https://thecollegeinvestor.com/52851/proposed-college-endowm... College endowments are typically tax-exempt, but a 2017 law imposed a 1.4% tax on investment income for a small group of wealthy private universities.…

>A new proposal seeks to increase the endowment tax rate to 14% That would be great that Harvard pays %14 on investment income on its 50 billion fund, considering I pay a minimum of 20% on my 'way less than $50 billion' in taxable investments, which was funded by my already taxed earnings, where as Harvard gets much of its endowment funds gifted to it.

if your argument is "but they're not getting screwed equally" then its a completely flawed argument benefiting the government

you should be questioning why you are getting screwed at all. it doesn't solve the government's revenue problems or even make a dent.

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

#810

Post by intended »

Loughla wrote: post #509
bhouston wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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?

It will take a majority of states, and their military backing, forcefully overthrowing Trump. I really hate to be alarmist, but it does feel more and more that we're headed to massive, coordinated state against state violence.

Or you could find illegal conduct for congress people, have them sued in criminal courts, and then hold elections to elect people (republican or democrat) who will make congress function as it is meant to.

Perhaps someone can provide security services to republican congress people who are threatened with violence if they dont toe the line, so that they are safe enough to stand up to trump. (This is an actual reason given for their cowardice)

Post reply on HN