'Harvard will not accept the government's terms'
April 14, 2025 4:43 PM Subscribe
After Columbia University capitulated to Trump Administration demands, only to see $400 million in federal research grants remain suspended, the Ivy League may be finding its spine. Today, Harvard University replied (WaPo gift) to the administration's five pages of demands to cave on DEI, admissions policy and academic freedom in general -- or lose $9 billion in research money -- by saying, essentially, hell no. And other Ivies are signalling that they too will fight back.
Harvard did initially make some cuts (Middle East program, ties to a West Bank university, more) in hopes of appeasing the administration. But last week the univeristy signalled it would be pushing back, announcing it would issue $750 million in bonds as part of a contingency plan for dealing with administration demands. And today the college responded with a letter from its attorneys to the administration, and a letter from its president, Alan Garber, including this statement: "No government—regardless of which party is in power—should dictate what private universities can teach, whom they can admit and hire, and which areas of study and inquiry they can pursue."
Other Ivy League presidents are also stepping forward. Last week, in a lengthy NYT podcast interview headlined "The University President Willing to Fight Trump," Princeton's president, Christopher Eisgruber, said (at about the 26-minute mark) that Princeton would make no concessions: "I believe it is essential for us to protect academic freedom." Asked if the administration demanded something as severe as putting a department under academic receivership, or lose its funding, he said, "We would not do that. We believe that would be unlawful and we would contest that in court."
The administration has also targeted $510 million in grants to Brown University. While the college says it is still awaiting the administration's demands, Brown president Christina Paxson said in March that the university would resist: "Brown will always defend academic freedom and freedom of expression, for the University as an institution and for individual members of our community." Referring to Columbia's situation, she wrote: "If Brown faced such actions directly impacting our ability to perform essential academic and operational functions, we would be compelled to vigorously exercise our legal rights to defend these freedoms."
Trump and Co. have also threatened $1 billion in funding at Cornell and $175 million at Penn (Trump's alma mater). Dartmouth and Yale have not been targeted for overall funding freezes but expect to lose million in NIH grants. So far, those universities are saying, in general, that they are in discussions with the administration or awaiting details.
Could we finally, finally be seeing some institutions actually living up to their ideals and putting their multi-billion-dollar endowments to good use? (Surely this!) Or are we destined once again to see them turn craven? Time will tell.
One fun note: The Harvard attorneys are William A. Burck and Robert K. Hur. Burck was special counsel and deputy counsel to President George W. Bush and worked in the Bush White House. And in 2017, before coming back to private practice, Hur was nominated by Trump (and confirmed by the Senate) as U.S. Attorney for the district of Maryland.
Their closing argument: "The university will not surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights. Neither Harvard nor any other private university can allow itself to be taken over by the federal government. Accordingly, Harvard will not accept the government’s terms as an agreement in principle."
Harvard did initially make some cuts (Middle East program, ties to a West Bank university, more) in hopes of appeasing the administration. But last week the univeristy signalled it would be pushing back, announcing it would issue $750 million in bonds as part of a contingency plan for dealing with administration demands. And today the college responded with a letter from its attorneys to the administration, and a letter from its president, Alan Garber, including this statement: "No government—regardless of which party is in power—should dictate what private universities can teach, whom they can admit and hire, and which areas of study and inquiry they can pursue."
Other Ivy League presidents are also stepping forward. Last week, in a lengthy NYT podcast interview headlined "The University President Willing to Fight Trump," Princeton's president, Christopher Eisgruber, said (at about the 26-minute mark) that Princeton would make no concessions: "I believe it is essential for us to protect academic freedom." Asked if the administration demanded something as severe as putting a department under academic receivership, or lose its funding, he said, "We would not do that. We believe that would be unlawful and we would contest that in court."
The administration has also targeted $510 million in grants to Brown University. While the college says it is still awaiting the administration's demands, Brown president Christina Paxson said in March that the university would resist: "Brown will always defend academic freedom and freedom of expression, for the University as an institution and for individual members of our community." Referring to Columbia's situation, she wrote: "If Brown faced such actions directly impacting our ability to perform essential academic and operational functions, we would be compelled to vigorously exercise our legal rights to defend these freedoms."
Trump and Co. have also threatened $1 billion in funding at Cornell and $175 million at Penn (Trump's alma mater). Dartmouth and Yale have not been targeted for overall funding freezes but expect to lose million in NIH grants. So far, those universities are saying, in general, that they are in discussions with the administration or awaiting details.
Could we finally, finally be seeing some institutions actually living up to their ideals and putting their multi-billion-dollar endowments to good use? (Surely this!) Or are we destined once again to see them turn craven? Time will tell.
One fun note: The Harvard attorneys are William A. Burck and Robert K. Hur. Burck was special counsel and deputy counsel to President George W. Bush and worked in the Bush White House. And in 2017, before coming back to private practice, Hur was nominated by Trump (and confirmed by the Senate) as U.S. Attorney for the district of Maryland.
Their closing argument: "The university will not surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights. Neither Harvard nor any other private university can allow itself to be taken over by the federal government. Accordingly, Harvard will not accept the government’s terms as an agreement in principle."
Columbia: the Dane Cook of the ivy league
posted by logicpunk at 4:57 PM on April 14 [28 favorites]
posted by logicpunk at 4:57 PM on April 14 [28 favorites]
The Trump administration said in March that it was examining about $256 million in federal contracts for Harvard, and an additional $8.7 billion in what it described as “multiyear grant commitments.”
I'm not usually a cheerleader for Harvard, but in this case I'm hoping that its endowment of over $50 billion will enable it to give the Trumpsyndicate administration a well earned "FUCK YOU".
posted by Joan Rivers of Babylon at 5:08 PM on April 14 [36 favorites]
I'm not usually a cheerleader for Harvard, but in this case I'm hoping that its endowment of over $50 billion will enable it to give the Trump
posted by Joan Rivers of Babylon at 5:08 PM on April 14 [36 favorites]
But [Harvard announced] it would issue $750 million in bonds...That definitely helps!
posted by kickingtheground at 5:10 PM on April 14 [2 favorites]
No government—regardless of which party is in power—should dictate what private universities can teach, whom they can admit and hire, and which areas of study and inquiry they can pursue."
This should be the case, even more so, for publicly funded universities as well.
The NYT podcast The Daily had a really bone-chilling edition a few days ago (ungated link) with "Christopher Rufo, who led the conservative critique of, and assault on, critical race theory and diversity, equity and inclusion efforts."
I am usually "know thine enemy" but I could only make it half way through listening to this snivelling reactionary. But even there, I got the impression the attack on universities is a much deeper problem fired by much greater ambition than I realized.
posted by Rumple at 5:18 PM on April 14 [18 favorites]
This should be the case, even more so, for publicly funded universities as well.
The NYT podcast The Daily had a really bone-chilling edition a few days ago (ungated link) with "Christopher Rufo, who led the conservative critique of, and assault on, critical race theory and diversity, equity and inclusion efforts."
I am usually "know thine enemy" but I could only make it half way through listening to this snivelling reactionary. But even there, I got the impression the attack on universities is a much deeper problem fired by much greater ambition than I realized.
posted by Rumple at 5:18 PM on April 14 [18 favorites]
I wonder if the faculty have considered, say, revoking the degrees of anyone associated with the administration. Can you practice law without the credentials? It would be petty and possibly meaningless, but also amusing. Maybe professional organizations should consider revoking certifications.
posted by GenjiandProust at 5:21 PM on April 14 [40 favorites]
posted by GenjiandProust at 5:21 PM on April 14 [40 favorites]
I think the citizens of People's Republic of Cambridge would burn Harvard to the ground if they didn't draw a line.
posted by berkshiredogs at 5:25 PM on April 14 [13 favorites]
posted by berkshiredogs at 5:25 PM on April 14 [13 favorites]
I am having a hard time with timelines but wasn't it during the Biden administration that they witch-hunted a few presidents right out of town? Including Harvard's first Black (woman) president? This is better than nothing but the elites of the US of A are going to find out real soon. The Fucking Around is long gone.
posted by ginger.beef at 5:28 PM on April 14 [20 favorites]
posted by ginger.beef at 5:28 PM on April 14 [20 favorites]
Oh and exactly this morning I spoke with my AVP Equity Diversity and Inclusion and we are in Canada and this shit in the States is totally casting a long shadow. Pending the outcome of the provincial election, they're gone. Total fucking war, you dumb fucks, but you might just get your heads out of your asses in time to see it's over.
posted by ginger.beef at 5:32 PM on April 14 [11 favorites]
posted by ginger.beef at 5:32 PM on April 14 [11 favorites]
I'm hoping that its endowment of over $50 billion will enable it to give the Trump syndicate administration a well earned "FUCK YOU".
If not now, when?
posted by Toddles at 5:34 PM on April 14 [13 favorites]
If not now, when?
posted by Toddles at 5:34 PM on April 14 [13 favorites]
Could we finally, finally be seeing some institutions actually living up to their ideals and putting their multi-billion-dollar endowments to good use? (Surely this!) Or are we destined once again to see them turn craven?
This is How Universities Can Escape From Trump's Trap, If They Dare: (NYT ungated)
This is How Universities Can Escape From Trump's Trap, If They Dare: (NYT ungated)
"So this is my radical proposal for universities: Act like universities, not like businesses. Spend your endowments. Accept more, not fewer students. Open up your campuses and expand your reach not by buying real estate but by bringing education to communities. Create a base. Become a movement."posted by JoeZydeco at 5:40 PM on April 14 [66 favorites]
The times get darker and darker and it feels weirder and weirder to keep posting through it, but: THIS is the reason why I think the Trump administration is not evil masterminds playing tenth dimensional chess with an unstoppable plan to install fascism, because the smart thing to do would have been to give Columbia back the money. Columbia rolls over, the money starts flowing again immediately, everyone else will roll over to keep the research dollars coming. Columbia rolls over and they still don't get their money back, people start asking themselves what the point is.
With the Harvard demands, it is incredibly obvious that Harvard will never be able to meet them to the standards of the Trump administration. It's not just that they're "hire far right professors and admit more DOGE intern types", it's the obviously, obviously, obviously, even if Harvard hired more rightists and admitted a bunch of little incels, it would never be done to the satisfaction of the Trump administration.
It would have been far, far smarter to present universities with a list of clear demands that could be met and then turn the money back on.
What happens is that when university vice presidents, regents, etc know that the money is probably never coming back, they are much, much more willing to listen to the faculty and others who don't want to roll over.
When I think that a scant few months ago things were...if not normal and great, about as normal and great as they were likely to be in these United States. And now look at us.
posted by Frowner at 5:40 PM on April 14 [75 favorites]
With the Harvard demands, it is incredibly obvious that Harvard will never be able to meet them to the standards of the Trump administration. It's not just that they're "hire far right professors and admit more DOGE intern types", it's the obviously, obviously, obviously, even if Harvard hired more rightists and admitted a bunch of little incels, it would never be done to the satisfaction of the Trump administration.
It would have been far, far smarter to present universities with a list of clear demands that could be met and then turn the money back on.
What happens is that when university vice presidents, regents, etc know that the money is probably never coming back, they are much, much more willing to listen to the faculty and others who don't want to roll over.
When I think that a scant few months ago things were...if not normal and great, about as normal and great as they were likely to be in these United States. And now look at us.
posted by Frowner at 5:40 PM on April 14 [75 favorites]
"Oh wait, I think they're serious, darling."
posted by Smedly, Butlerian jihadi at 5:41 PM on April 14 [15 favorites]
posted by Smedly, Butlerian jihadi at 5:41 PM on April 14 [15 favorites]
Even if you hate Harvard or think it gets too much attention, this is good news. Other universities follow Harvard the way US cities follow NYC’s lead.
And yes, I would love to see the elite colleges expand their undergrad programs—and bridge the gaps between open enrollment programs like their extension schools and online classes and the traditional program.
posted by smelendez at 5:48 PM on April 14 [20 favorites]
And yes, I would love to see the elite colleges expand their undergrad programs—and bridge the gaps between open enrollment programs like their extension schools and online classes and the traditional program.
posted by smelendez at 5:48 PM on April 14 [20 favorites]
I am just saying, imagine if no one, however tangentially associated with Trump, had better than a high school diploma. That might make some of the foot soldiers think.
posted by GenjiandProust at 5:53 PM on April 14 [2 favorites]
posted by GenjiandProust at 5:53 PM on April 14 [2 favorites]
It would not.
posted by Slackermagee at 5:54 PM on April 14 [37 favorites]
posted by Slackermagee at 5:54 PM on April 14 [37 favorites]
Columbia rolls over and they still don't get their money back, people start asking themselves what the point is
Trump is a creature of instinct. His instinct is to inflict as much humiliation as possible on the "New York liberal elite" that he knows holds him in contempt. If that immediate gratification ends up costing him more enduring rewards later, he'll get by.
posted by Lemkin at 6:01 PM on April 14 [10 favorites]
Trump is a creature of instinct. His instinct is to inflict as much humiliation as possible on the "New York liberal elite" that he knows holds him in contempt. If that immediate gratification ends up costing him more enduring rewards later, he'll get by.
posted by Lemkin at 6:01 PM on April 14 [10 favorites]
Trump is a creature of instinct.
He's a sadist and a bully - and their predictable response to any display of weakness is to keep punching.
You really get a strong sense of the alpha-types that sit at the top of university administrations (especially now that they've been thoroughly financialized). That they've never been on the receiving end of this kind of treatment before in their lives, and they don't know how to navigate it.
posted by reedbird_hill at 6:05 PM on April 14 [24 favorites]
He's a sadist and a bully - and their predictable response to any display of weakness is to keep punching.
You really get a strong sense of the alpha-types that sit at the top of university administrations (especially now that they've been thoroughly financialized). That they've never been on the receiving end of this kind of treatment before in their lives, and they don't know how to navigate it.
posted by reedbird_hill at 6:05 PM on April 14 [24 favorites]
Indeed, any perceived slight to a narcissist is personal and the end goal is revenge, no matter the cost if they have the means. The coffers here are very, very deep.
posted by ashbury at 6:09 PM on April 14 [5 favorites]
posted by ashbury at 6:09 PM on April 14 [5 favorites]
I think the citizens of People's Republic of Cambridge would burn Harvard to the ground if they didn't draw a line.
indeed. my post was getting really lengthy and out of control and also I was really hungry so... but I spotted these two stories in the Harvard student newspaper:
City Leaders Increase Pressure on Harvard To Reject Trump With New Petition
At Rally on Cambridge Common, Hundreds Call On Harvard To Defy Trump
I'm hoping that its endowment of over $50 billion...
Yep. The other Ivies are pretty well positioned, too, though Brown is not quite in the same neighborhood. (Disclosure, my son's at Brown, and has a research grant, so I'm watching this kinda closely.)
posted by martin q blank at 6:15 PM on April 14 [14 favorites]
indeed. my post was getting really lengthy and out of control and also I was really hungry so... but I spotted these two stories in the Harvard student newspaper:
City Leaders Increase Pressure on Harvard To Reject Trump With New Petition
At Rally on Cambridge Common, Hundreds Call On Harvard To Defy Trump
I'm hoping that its endowment of over $50 billion...
Yep. The other Ivies are pretty well positioned, too, though Brown is not quite in the same neighborhood. (Disclosure, my son's at Brown, and has a research grant, so I'm watching this kinda closely.)
posted by martin q blank at 6:15 PM on April 14 [14 favorites]
NYT:
The Trump administration acted quickly on Monday to punish Harvard University after it refused to comply with a list of demands from the federal government that the school said were too onerous.posted by Lemkin at 6:27 PM on April 14 [7 favorites]
On Monday afternoon, Harvard became the first university to refuse to comply with the administration’s requirements, setting up a showdown between the federal government and the nation’s wealthiest university. By the evening, federal officials said they would freeze $2.2 billion in multiyear grants to Harvard, along with a $60 million contract.
oh, and sorry to threadsit, but Trumpy has responded to Harvard's letter by announcing he's freezing $2.2 billion in grants. Which they note seems to refer only to Harvard and not its affiliates, like the med school. Maybe Mr. Tough Guy blinked. And $2.2 B is just 4% of Harvard's endowment. Couch cushion change!
*kidding. I worked in higher ed, I know they never want to spend a dime of principal. Anyway...
oops. A Coke to Lemkin.
posted by martin q blank at 6:30 PM on April 14 [5 favorites]
*kidding. I worked in higher ed, I know they never want to spend a dime of principal. Anyway...
oops. A Coke to Lemkin.
posted by martin q blank at 6:30 PM on April 14 [5 favorites]
The folks at Electoral Vote suggest using the endowments to fund the fight:
The private universities could each donate, say, 2% of their endowment to a fund to protect higher education. That would create a fund with $5 billion in it, just from the top 10 schools. The next 10 schools could up that to $7 billion. Then when a university was threatened, it could borrow what it needed to keep the lights on from the fund and sue Trump.posted by kristi at 6:32 PM on April 14 [15 favorites]
And $2.2 B is just 4% of Harvard's endowment. Couch cushion change!
I could see the copy machine budget getting trimmed. But Harvard has no choice here. It's fight or die.
posted by Lemkin at 6:33 PM on April 14 [4 favorites]
I could see the copy machine budget getting trimmed. But Harvard has no choice here. It's fight or die.
posted by Lemkin at 6:33 PM on April 14 [4 favorites]
Children are terrorists. I don't negotiate with terrorists.
Fascists are terrorists. and childish
posted by es_de_bah at 6:37 PM on April 14 [4 favorites]
Fascists are terrorists. and childish
posted by es_de_bah at 6:37 PM on April 14 [4 favorites]
The private universities could each donate, say, 2% of their endowment to a fund to protect higher education. That would create a fund with $5 billion in it, just from the top 10 schools. The next 10 schools could up that to $7 billion. Then when a university was threatened, it could borrow what it needed to keep the lights on from the fund and sue Trump.
A fine idea. The problem with it is that most American colleges and universities despise collaborating with each other. They see themselves as competitors first and foremost, especially the elite.
posted by doctornemo at 6:46 PM on April 14 [8 favorites]
A fine idea. The problem with it is that most American colleges and universities despise collaborating with each other. They see themselves as competitors first and foremost, especially the elite.
posted by doctornemo at 6:46 PM on April 14 [8 favorites]
If this post is about the Ivy League, how about letting one of the "Little Ivies" in?
Wesleyan University's president, Michael Roth, has been hitting Trump every week since the inauguration. He's been writing up a storm: here, here, here, here.
Politico interview
New Yorker article
Washington Post article
Wesleyan student paper article
posted by doctornemo at 6:52 PM on April 14 [47 favorites]
Wesleyan University's president, Michael Roth, has been hitting Trump every week since the inauguration. He's been writing up a storm: here, here, here, here.
Politico interview
New Yorker article
Washington Post article
Wesleyan student paper article
posted by doctornemo at 6:52 PM on April 14 [47 favorites]
I've spent years criticizing the Haavahd worship within academia and in the broader world, and often find their arrogance hilarious, but I applaud this stance. May they succeed - and, more importantly, inspire the rest of higher ed.
posted by doctornemo at 7:04 PM on April 14 [19 favorites]
posted by doctornemo at 7:04 PM on April 14 [19 favorites]
Yeah, that last thing. Inspire the rest of higher ed.
That’s what I am so pissed at Columbia about— they think they are supposed to be leaders, so they should act like it. Obeying in advance is not exactly leadership.
For what it’s worth if my own Alma mater actually stood up and considered creating a fund of the type kristi mentioned above, I might actually donate to them. (I generally don’t, they’re not an ivy but have plenty of endowment.)
posted by nat at 8:09 PM on April 14 [5 favorites]
That’s what I am so pissed at Columbia about— they think they are supposed to be leaders, so they should act like it. Obeying in advance is not exactly leadership.
For what it’s worth if my own Alma mater actually stood up and considered creating a fund of the type kristi mentioned above, I might actually donate to them. (I generally don’t, they’re not an ivy but have plenty of endowment.)
posted by nat at 8:09 PM on April 14 [5 favorites]
OK, so seriously, WTF is with this bullshit where Trump is arbitrarily changing the budget? Did the lawsuits just vanish or something? I mean, the President is not supposed to have the power to decide, on a whim, that he gets to stop funding for A and increase funding for B.
I realize that saying "that's not how this works" is silly at this point, but it seems really disturbing to me that the general tone in the news and from the Democrats is that Trump can do this and it's objectionable only in that they disagree with his targets not in that they see anything wrong with the President usurping the budget power of Congress.
I'm glad Harvard is fighting, don't get me wrong, but WTF is going on that Trump hasn't been stopped by anything?
posted by sotonohito at 8:24 PM on April 14 [29 favorites]
I realize that saying "that's not how this works" is silly at this point, but it seems really disturbing to me that the general tone in the news and from the Democrats is that Trump can do this and it's objectionable only in that they disagree with his targets not in that they see anything wrong with the President usurping the budget power of Congress.
I'm glad Harvard is fighting, don't get me wrong, but WTF is going on that Trump hasn't been stopped by anything?
posted by sotonohito at 8:24 PM on April 14 [29 favorites]
Recent podcast for those who believe university endowments are giant pools of money that can be drawn from and applied generally to shore up federal funding gaps. (Spoiler: nope)
Marketplace 3/26/25
posted by jerome powell buys his sweatbands in bulk only at 8:33 PM on April 14 [10 favorites]
Marketplace 3/26/25
posted by jerome powell buys his sweatbands in bulk only at 8:33 PM on April 14 [10 favorites]
Please let my alma mater do the same when it's our turn.
posted by gentlyepigrams at 8:33 PM on April 14
posted by gentlyepigrams at 8:33 PM on April 14
I think what's happening is the admin is losing the court cases but still doing it anyway. Like they still haven't unfrozen some of those NSF and NIH grants. They were counting on the Supreme Court backing them up and declaring the Impoundment Act unconstitutional, AFAIK that didn't happen, but then they just... Didn't comply. With the court orders. Including the one that said they can't change the funding formula for indirect research grants to universities. Maybe someone else has a more precise answer.
posted by subdee at 8:36 PM on April 14 [7 favorites]
posted by subdee at 8:36 PM on April 14 [7 favorites]
These aides have spoken privately of toppling a high-profile university to signal their seriousness, said two people familiar with the conversations.
It's possible the federal government's demands were outrageous because the goal was for Harvard to reject them, starting a fight they believe they'll win.
posted by subdee at 8:48 PM on April 14 [1 favorite]
It's possible the federal government's demands were outrageous because the goal was for Harvard to reject them, starting a fight they believe they'll win.
posted by subdee at 8:48 PM on April 14 [1 favorite]
Frowner: "because the smart thing to do would have been to give Columbia back the money. Columbia rolls over, the money starts flowing again immediately, everyone else will roll over to keep the research dollars coming. Columbia rolls over and they still don't get their money back, people start asking themselves what the point is. "
Columbia: Keel over, give up, meet the demands, get NOTHING! Harvard: don't keel over, don't give up, don't meet the demands, lose all the money just like Columbia!
Seriously, there's no point in bowing down when it gets you nothing. There was some (NYT?) article last week about how all the tech guys are bowing down to Trump and getting fuckall, too.
posted by jenfullmoon at 9:09 PM on April 14 [11 favorites]
Columbia: Keel over, give up, meet the demands, get NOTHING! Harvard: don't keel over, don't give up, don't meet the demands, lose all the money just like Columbia!
Seriously, there's no point in bowing down when it gets you nothing. There was some (NYT?) article last week about how all the tech guys are bowing down to Trump and getting fuckall, too.
posted by jenfullmoon at 9:09 PM on April 14 [11 favorites]
There was some (NYT?) article last week about how all the tech guys are bowing down to Trump and getting fuckall, too.
Let them eat cake.
posted by Toddles at 9:24 PM on April 14 [4 favorites]
Let them eat cake.
posted by Toddles at 9:24 PM on April 14 [4 favorites]
It was a damned shame when Columbia caved in to the ridiculous demands thrown at it and I wasn't at all surprised when the funding was taken away anyway because this is how bullies work (and the heads of Columbia should have known that). I hope Harvard maintains in what will quickly become a dirty fight, because Trump and his demons won't like being told 'no'. I hope other institutions, now that they know there's no way to win anyway, will stand beside Harvard and that Columbia will be one of them.
Trump can win against one or two or three of the big universities if he gets to fight them one-on-one, but if they all unite they'll be unstoppable. These are rich institutions that know they only have to fight for a few years at most and a fight like that won't hurt any of them too much. The best thing they can all do is to refuse any and all these demands and spend what's needed to not only survive but to prosper. There's nothing a bully hates more than seeing people they hate being successful.
posted by dg at 10:39 PM on April 14 [15 favorites]
Trump can win against one or two or three of the big universities if he gets to fight them one-on-one, but if they all unite they'll be unstoppable. These are rich institutions that know they only have to fight for a few years at most and a fight like that won't hurt any of them too much. The best thing they can all do is to refuse any and all these demands and spend what's needed to not only survive but to prosper. There's nothing a bully hates more than seeing people they hate being successful.
posted by dg at 10:39 PM on April 14 [15 favorites]
Trump is evil, but I find the whole "but our academic freedom" by these deans to be deeply disingenuous: sure, Trump is witholding NSF money for the (stupid) reason that DEI is discriminatory (and he's doing this to gain power over American academia).
But, we would not be saying the same if the state were withholding money for, like, scientology churches or whatever for (good) reasons like, they engage in very discriminatory practices.
So, in a sane universe it actually is on the recipient to show that their institution complies with federal requirements, in order to receive federal funds. For Harvard/Princeton—two major private universities after weeks of other less famous public universities falling over to the White House's demands—is a subtly elitist take and of course it is the neoliberal ideologues, like the NYTimes, who are playing that narrative.
It is American academia's own missing stairwell. By enacting highly progressive admissions and hiring policies—that are controversial, that don't have democratic buy-in with the American public as a whole—they've set up their own eventual confrontation should one, inevitable day that an unsympathetic federal government come into power. Anyone who is for some notion of reparations ought to have seen this coming. For the deans to performatively turn into activists is itself the irony.
posted by polymodus at 11:31 PM on April 14 [4 favorites]
But, we would not be saying the same if the state were withholding money for, like, scientology churches or whatever for (good) reasons like, they engage in very discriminatory practices.
So, in a sane universe it actually is on the recipient to show that their institution complies with federal requirements, in order to receive federal funds. For Harvard/Princeton—two major private universities after weeks of other less famous public universities falling over to the White House's demands—is a subtly elitist take and of course it is the neoliberal ideologues, like the NYTimes, who are playing that narrative.
It is American academia's own missing stairwell. By enacting highly progressive admissions and hiring policies—that are controversial, that don't have democratic buy-in with the American public as a whole—they've set up their own eventual confrontation should one, inevitable day that an unsympathetic federal government come into power. Anyone who is for some notion of reparations ought to have seen this coming. For the deans to performatively turn into activists is itself the irony.
posted by polymodus at 11:31 PM on April 14 [4 favorites]
I'm glad they are standing up.
And yet, I can already hear my neighbors saying "why do private universities like Harvard get federal funding in the first place?" And I don't know the answer, really. Some for tuition aid, I suppose, but the rest is, what, research funding?
And yes, I know that research funding is important, but just know that for blue collar folks that might not know how much important research happens at universities, and might not question their first reaction anyhow? It's going to play differently.
(I'm on side, before anybody starts snapping at me. I know the money is a tool to get at DEI stuff. And I agree that defending that and the concept of -as opposed to execution of, which is problematic often- academic freedom is important. Just. Like many, it's an issue that will play much better for tfg in areas like mine than you'd think, even among folks of color and queer folks)
posted by Vigilant at 12:54 AM on April 15 [1 favorite]
And yet, I can already hear my neighbors saying "why do private universities like Harvard get federal funding in the first place?" And I don't know the answer, really. Some for tuition aid, I suppose, but the rest is, what, research funding?
And yes, I know that research funding is important, but just know that for blue collar folks that might not know how much important research happens at universities, and might not question their first reaction anyhow? It's going to play differently.
(I'm on side, before anybody starts snapping at me. I know the money is a tool to get at DEI stuff. And I agree that defending that and the concept of -as opposed to execution of, which is problematic often- academic freedom is important. Just. Like many, it's an issue that will play much better for tfg in areas like mine than you'd think, even among folks of color and queer folks)
posted by Vigilant at 12:54 AM on April 15 [1 favorite]
So this is my radical proposal for universities: Act like universities, not like businesses. Spend your endowments. Accept more, not fewer students. Open up your campuses and expand your reach not by buying real estate but by bringing education to communities. Create a base. Become a movement
This is making me feel like I did back when it seemed like the pandemic might prompt a bit of good societal reorganization, but: Imagine if this was the thing that finally reversed universities' trend towards financialization and bloated, unnecessary administrative layers and costs at the expense of students and academics.
In reality, I guess admin's less likely to cut itself.
posted by trig at 1:27 AM on April 15 [6 favorites]
This is making me feel like I did back when it seemed like the pandemic might prompt a bit of good societal reorganization, but: Imagine if this was the thing that finally reversed universities' trend towards financialization and bloated, unnecessary administrative layers and costs at the expense of students and academics.
In reality, I guess admin's less likely to cut itself.
posted by trig at 1:27 AM on April 15 [6 favorites]
Um they are private universities who get public $$. They can’t demand independence from the government or the public voice. This government is horrible so get that argument. Perhaps it leads to a much needed true independence.
posted by skepticallypleased at 2:35 AM on April 15 [1 favorite]
posted by skepticallypleased at 2:35 AM on April 15 [1 favorite]
I'm in favor of independence but I think it's also worth insisting on the idea of government that does minimal dictating of thought.
You know, that thing America used to believe in.
As for "the public voice" - which public?
posted by trig at 2:38 AM on April 15 [3 favorites]
You know, that thing America used to believe in.
As for "the public voice" - which public?
posted by trig at 2:38 AM on April 15 [3 favorites]
Perhaps it leads to a much needed true independence.
Part of the point of this is to contribute to making the public broadly, and academics specifically, equate federal funds w/threat and negative control. We need to think pretty hard about the many costs of that before we embrace it.
posted by reedbird_hill at 2:57 AM on April 15 [7 favorites]
Part of the point of this is to contribute to making the public broadly, and academics specifically, equate federal funds w/threat and negative control. We need to think pretty hard about the many costs of that before we embrace it.
posted by reedbird_hill at 2:57 AM on April 15 [7 favorites]
Setting aside all minor and other issues people have with Harvard, I am really finally proud to say I went there. Them b*tches stood up.
posted by berkshiredogs at 3:22 AM on April 15 [4 favorites]
posted by berkshiredogs at 3:22 AM on April 15 [4 favorites]
… imagine if no one, however tangentially associated with Trump, had better than a high school diploma. That might make some of the foot soldiers think.
The foot soldiers have been raised to distrust “educated elites.” Everyone only having high school diplomas would simply endear them further to the foot soldiers. Make them “one of us,” as it were.
posted by Thorzdad at 3:37 AM on April 15 [4 favorites]
The foot soldiers have been raised to distrust “educated elites.” Everyone only having high school diplomas would simply endear them further to the foot soldiers. Make them “one of us,” as it were.
posted by Thorzdad at 3:37 AM on April 15 [4 favorites]
Fight fiercely, Harvard! (As Tom Lehrer would say)
posted by Brachinus at 5:16 AM on April 15 [9 favorites]
posted by Brachinus at 5:16 AM on April 15 [9 favorites]
I'm pretty sure we can end discussion at "if Trump is doing it, it's wrong," but to venture a guess, the country gives money to private research institutions as an investment in the future of the country, which, to date, had been paying off (in discoveries, in attracting talented people from outside of the country, in benefiting the communities around those institutions). maybe much of that research leads to nothing of economic reward, but that's not entirely how research works, so that shouldn't really be a problem?
like so many things in this country, many people seem to have strong opinions about things they know nothing about or they want complex systems to be simpler than they possibly can be.
posted by kokaku at 5:18 AM on April 15 [15 favorites]
like so many things in this country, many people seem to have strong opinions about things they know nothing about or they want complex systems to be simpler than they possibly can be.
posted by kokaku at 5:18 AM on April 15 [15 favorites]
but then they just... Didn't comply.
Right around this time (or other times) other politicians elsewhere like the South Koreans would not be sitting at home. Or in a fundraiser.
And as for the academic institutions, this is where the rabble rousers in the alumni and the teaching staff would shine wouldn't it, with clever hidden campaigns or overt, if the bodies themselves haven't been self-selecting for spinelessness for the last year.
But thank God Harvard is stepping up.
posted by cendawanita at 5:21 AM on April 15 [3 favorites]
Right around this time (or other times) other politicians elsewhere like the South Koreans would not be sitting at home. Or in a fundraiser.
And as for the academic institutions, this is where the rabble rousers in the alumni and the teaching staff would shine wouldn't it, with clever hidden campaigns or overt, if the bodies themselves haven't been self-selecting for spinelessness for the last year.
But thank God Harvard is stepping up.
posted by cendawanita at 5:21 AM on April 15 [3 favorites]
Harvard updated its homepage to highlight the research it does to highlight what it does with the federal funds it receives. I think it is a great move.
posted by ceejaytee at 5:30 AM on April 15 [16 favorites]
posted by ceejaytee at 5:30 AM on April 15 [16 favorites]
Just in case anyone is unclear on this: universities get federal funding to do research that is valuable but uneconomical for corporations to do. The majority is literally valuable, in that it is basic sciences research, translational research, trials, training scientists, etc. Some of it is deemed culturally valuable and hence in this country will be more debatable since we do not value culture or history, but many people would consider simply accruing deep background knowledge on historical, sociological or artistic questions to be useful since it informs both pop culture bestsellers and various types of social planning.
Universities have access to an enormous pool of talented undergrads, graduate students and early career scientists, the like of which would be unaffordable to private corporations, and so they can consider questions on the level of "viruses, how do they work" that are extremely useful to medicine but too general and long-term to be affordable for big pharma. These same undergrads, grad students, junior crystallographers, etc, emerge from the university fully trained and ready to be hired by big corporations, ditto for medical specialists of all kinds. Without the training and basic sciences functions of universities, private medical research and the healthcare sector in general are going to run into big, big trouble in a few years.
It's not just that the US is "ahead" in research or that we're the best in the world in the aggregate or something, it's that there are actual, practical consequences to our society that will happen quite soon if our system for doing basic sciences research and generating skilled workers is broken.
This is not something that any amount of donations, endowments or private charity will make up for. The whole reason for developing this university infrastructure is that it brings down costs. We do with tax dollars what is too expensive to do at all without them.
Now, certainly, there will be an upside to this if universities end up with more autonomy and more academic-minded administrations (although really, we're just as likely to end up with the Elon Musk School of Anti-Woke Medicine TM, no women students allowed, as we are a leaner and more independent university). But the best of all worlds is simply that our tax dollars go to support the missions of training and medicine and that is what we had until our incredibly stupid, venal society elected some of history's worst, dumbest sadists.
posted by Frowner at 5:50 AM on April 15 [61 favorites]
Universities have access to an enormous pool of talented undergrads, graduate students and early career scientists, the like of which would be unaffordable to private corporations, and so they can consider questions on the level of "viruses, how do they work" that are extremely useful to medicine but too general and long-term to be affordable for big pharma. These same undergrads, grad students, junior crystallographers, etc, emerge from the university fully trained and ready to be hired by big corporations, ditto for medical specialists of all kinds. Without the training and basic sciences functions of universities, private medical research and the healthcare sector in general are going to run into big, big trouble in a few years.
It's not just that the US is "ahead" in research or that we're the best in the world in the aggregate or something, it's that there are actual, practical consequences to our society that will happen quite soon if our system for doing basic sciences research and generating skilled workers is broken.
This is not something that any amount of donations, endowments or private charity will make up for. The whole reason for developing this university infrastructure is that it brings down costs. We do with tax dollars what is too expensive to do at all without them.
Now, certainly, there will be an upside to this if universities end up with more autonomy and more academic-minded administrations (although really, we're just as likely to end up with the Elon Musk School of Anti-Woke Medicine TM, no women students allowed, as we are a leaner and more independent university). But the best of all worlds is simply that our tax dollars go to support the missions of training and medicine and that is what we had until our incredibly stupid, venal society elected some of history's worst, dumbest sadists.
posted by Frowner at 5:50 AM on April 15 [61 favorites]
The foot soldiers have been raised to distrust “educated elites.” Everyone only having high school diplomas would simply endear them further to the foot soldiers
While of course continuing to elect Republicans from those same exact elite universities, the hypocrisy remains incoherent and boundless.
posted by aspersioncast at 5:50 AM on April 15 [5 favorites]
While of course continuing to elect Republicans from those same exact elite universities, the hypocrisy remains incoherent and boundless.
posted by aspersioncast at 5:50 AM on April 15 [5 favorites]
Private institutions get government money because they apply for a grant and then use the grant to fund research according to the grant guidelines. The government can tell you what to do with the money from the grant but it’s ridiculous to tell them what to do with parts of the institution that have nothing to do with the research you’re funding. That’s not how grants work. You don’t apply for a $2,000 grant to fund new lab equipment and get told, “We’re taking this back unless your make all of your history undergrads wear pink polos.” Receiving public money doesn’t mean “and now the government gets to dictate everything you do.” Only what you do with money for THAT grant on THAT project, which is already defined in excruciating detail.
posted by brook horse at 6:08 AM on April 15 [27 favorites]
posted by brook horse at 6:08 AM on April 15 [27 favorites]
Here's the blog (from a University of Michigan professor) that the NPR Marketplace piece on endowments (that jerome powell... posted above) is based on.
The TL, DR is that university endowments aren't one giant bank account, but a collection of thousands of small funds, often with highly restricted purposes. But the author notes that endowments also usually have a large chunk of unrestricted funds that can be spent on anything (in UMich's case, about 25% of the endowment). So, yes, Harvard doesn't have a $50 billion piggy bank, but it likely has several billion dollars relatively accessible.
While typically the income from that principal is dedicated to certain purposes in the budget, the college technically could cash in some of that principal. We actually did that at the college where I worked when there was an unexpected shortfall one year (thanks, Florida Republicans). It's not ideal, and definitely not sustainable long term, but it's feasible in an emergency. Which this is.
posted by martin q blank at 6:12 AM on April 15 [11 favorites]
The TL, DR is that university endowments aren't one giant bank account, but a collection of thousands of small funds, often with highly restricted purposes. But the author notes that endowments also usually have a large chunk of unrestricted funds that can be spent on anything (in UMich's case, about 25% of the endowment). So, yes, Harvard doesn't have a $50 billion piggy bank, but it likely has several billion dollars relatively accessible.
While typically the income from that principal is dedicated to certain purposes in the budget, the college technically could cash in some of that principal. We actually did that at the college where I worked when there was an unexpected shortfall one year (thanks, Florida Republicans). It's not ideal, and definitely not sustainable long term, but it's feasible in an emergency. Which this is.
posted by martin q blank at 6:12 AM on April 15 [11 favorites]
Also: funds that come (came? hopefully will to continue to fund) from federal research grants have a quite large administrative burden that comes with the money. You regularly report progress, update budgets, there are meetings, site visits, panel reviews. These are not just blank checks given out to labs; the research is reviewed before it even starts.
posted by armacy at 6:18 AM on April 15 [9 favorites]
posted by armacy at 6:18 AM on April 15 [9 favorites]
And an interesting take from the WaPo's Catherine Rampell (a Princeton economics grad, iirc):
"President Donald Trump says he wants to reduce our trade deficit. Yet he’s destroying one of our winningest exports: higher education. Colleges and universities are among America’s most competitive international exporters. In dollar terms, last year, the United States sold more educational services to the rest of the world than it sold in natural gas and coal combined." Gift link.
posted by martin q blank at 6:24 AM on April 15 [39 favorites]
"President Donald Trump says he wants to reduce our trade deficit. Yet he’s destroying one of our winningest exports: higher education. Colleges and universities are among America’s most competitive international exporters. In dollar terms, last year, the United States sold more educational services to the rest of the world than it sold in natural gas and coal combined." Gift link.
posted by martin q blank at 6:24 AM on April 15 [39 favorites]
One of the things I do for my job is acquire rare books and manuscripts for Harvard's main special collections library (which is open to literally anybody with freshly washed hands and a photo ID). The money I have to spend on that comes from about 30 different endowments that pay out money each year. They range in size but most of them are good for just a couple of purchases every year, since the kind of things I buy tend to be expensive. Each one has a specific set of terms, sometimes extremely restrictive ones, about how the money can be spent, that represents a contract Harvard made with the donor whenever it accepted the money, and it would be illegal for us to violate those terms by spending it on other things or spending down the principal.
Obviously I am not asking anybody to feel sorry for me; I'm lucky to have resources lots of other librarians don't, I just want to help clarify what the "Harvard endowment" is and isn't, primarily that there's no such single thing.
I also want to say that I have often have mixed feelings about the institution I work for and its status as the emblem and lightning rod for elite higher education, but yesterday was a proud day for me working here.
posted by Horace Rumpole at 6:35 AM on April 15 [47 favorites]
Obviously I am not asking anybody to feel sorry for me; I'm lucky to have resources lots of other librarians don't, I just want to help clarify what the "Harvard endowment" is and isn't, primarily that there's no such single thing.
I also want to say that I have often have mixed feelings about the institution I work for and its status as the emblem and lightning rod for elite higher education, but yesterday was a proud day for me working here.
posted by Horace Rumpole at 6:35 AM on April 15 [47 favorites]
Yep.
My small way of fighting back.. I'm compiling a list of things that were invented in university research labs that people use every day. FM radio, seatbelts, LED everything, etc. So that when I do hear the inevitable comments, I can gently counter with real examples of the value the public gets.
In my neighborhood, concrete examples go over better. Not because I live in an especially stupid neighborhood, but because everybody is busy and exhausted all the time. And then if somebody does ask for sources, thanks to y'all, I have them to share.
posted by Vigilant at 6:40 AM on April 15 [13 favorites]
My small way of fighting back.. I'm compiling a list of things that were invented in university research labs that people use every day. FM radio, seatbelts, LED everything, etc. So that when I do hear the inevitable comments, I can gently counter with real examples of the value the public gets.
In my neighborhood, concrete examples go over better. Not because I live in an especially stupid neighborhood, but because everybody is busy and exhausted all the time. And then if somebody does ask for sources, thanks to y'all, I have them to share.
posted by Vigilant at 6:40 AM on April 15 [13 favorites]
Another take:
Why Harvard's endowment won't save it from Trump
posted by thecincinnatikid at 6:40 AM on April 15 [2 favorites]
Why Harvard's endowment won't save it from Trump
posted by thecincinnatikid at 6:40 AM on April 15 [2 favorites]
Frowner said: The times get darker and darker and it feels weirder and weirder to keep posting through it, but: THIS is the reason why I think the Trump administration is not evil masterminds playing tenth dimensional chess with an unstoppable plan to install fascism, because the smart thing to do would have been to give Columbia back the money. Columbia rolls over, the money starts flowing again immediately, everyone else will roll over to keep the research dollars coming. Columbia rolls over and they still don't get their money back, people start asking themselves what the point is.
The point is to destroy the enemy classes, which we have already heard from the likes of J.D. Vance is the academy itself.
If they bargain and accede to the initial demands, then demand more and more. Either they rebel, which demonstrates that they are the enemy and gives you license to smash them utterly. Or they suffer one demoralizing capitulation after another until they are not only a hollowed-out puppet of the fascist power, but one that will not be able to come back from this because the institution or the group has repeatedly proven helpless in the face of the will to power, volunteering for its effective destruction and remaking so that it is a thing one cannot imagine fighting for, let along from.
We can look at new College in Florida. The program was not simply to force an ideological change, but to turn a once well-reputed school into a money-losing, athletics-oriented farce. The DeSantis crew and the Rufo bunch didn't want to claim the prestige of New College in service to their ideology or take over a new power center.
Rather, they wanted to demonstrate that a state college or university cannot claim any prestige to begin with, and is merely there to prop up those things that should have prestige: sports, the right-wing state government, and the reputations of its destroyers as forceful, powerful, and clever. And look where Christopher Rufo is now!
This spectacle of strength wielded agains enemies, either as endless humiliations or as swift destruction, is fundamental to the aesthetic appeal of fascism for its adherents.
posted by kewb at 6:46 AM on April 15 [27 favorites]
The point is to destroy the enemy classes, which we have already heard from the likes of J.D. Vance is the academy itself.
If they bargain and accede to the initial demands, then demand more and more. Either they rebel, which demonstrates that they are the enemy and gives you license to smash them utterly. Or they suffer one demoralizing capitulation after another until they are not only a hollowed-out puppet of the fascist power, but one that will not be able to come back from this because the institution or the group has repeatedly proven helpless in the face of the will to power, volunteering for its effective destruction and remaking so that it is a thing one cannot imagine fighting for, let along from.
We can look at new College in Florida. The program was not simply to force an ideological change, but to turn a once well-reputed school into a money-losing, athletics-oriented farce. The DeSantis crew and the Rufo bunch didn't want to claim the prestige of New College in service to their ideology or take over a new power center.
Rather, they wanted to demonstrate that a state college or university cannot claim any prestige to begin with, and is merely there to prop up those things that should have prestige: sports, the right-wing state government, and the reputations of its destroyers as forceful, powerful, and clever. And look where Christopher Rufo is now!
This spectacle of strength wielded agains enemies, either as endless humiliations or as swift destruction, is fundamental to the aesthetic appeal of fascism for its adherents.
posted by kewb at 6:46 AM on April 15 [27 favorites]
Thanks for linking the letter, and the replies. Reading from the UK - this is utterly spine-chillingly terrifying.
posted by paduasoy at 6:49 AM on April 15 [3 favorites]
posted by paduasoy at 6:49 AM on April 15 [3 favorites]
I genuinely think part of the problem for the current administration is that Trump is not really in charge. It's a collection of assholes and sadists who all have different sets of grievances and goals and policy is determined by who last appealed to Trump's awful instincts. This leads to wildly inconsistent and contradictory policies chosen off a cheesecake factory menu by an angry doddering fool.
His early moves showed he could easily cow the elites into submission partly through monetary threats and through appeals to the already largely conservative leadership of most university boards who clearly never really liked administration critical free speech from the left to start with. They could have achieved many of their putative goals (excluding perhaps the ridiculously soviet/nazi appointment of political officers though that did already work pretty effectively for the right in the major dotcom corporations). But alas for the facists it was not to be because of the ideological incoherence of his coalition which was based in a large part on a non-strategic resentment of elites which demands that rather than successfully co-opting elite institutions to their ends, the elites must be punished and broken. So the resentment-driven terms for submission are too humiliating for either institutional survival or the reputational survival of the leadership giving them the choice of either suicide or battle. Only one of which gives the possibility of positive outcomes. Basically, the MAGA coalition members are not even remotely game theorists.
In the future a lot of people (Whitmer) and groups (columbia, tesla, various law firms, etc) are going to have the terms Vichy and Quisling attached to them if we come out the other side of this. Of course it being America those labels will be disappeared immediately into the political and cultural amnesia that is probably the most frustrating and defining character of America goldfish brained media.
posted by srboisvert at 6:55 AM on April 15 [7 favorites]
His early moves showed he could easily cow the elites into submission partly through monetary threats and through appeals to the already largely conservative leadership of most university boards who clearly never really liked administration critical free speech from the left to start with. They could have achieved many of their putative goals (excluding perhaps the ridiculously soviet/nazi appointment of political officers though that did already work pretty effectively for the right in the major dotcom corporations). But alas for the facists it was not to be because of the ideological incoherence of his coalition which was based in a large part on a non-strategic resentment of elites which demands that rather than successfully co-opting elite institutions to their ends, the elites must be punished and broken. So the resentment-driven terms for submission are too humiliating for either institutional survival or the reputational survival of the leadership giving them the choice of either suicide or battle. Only one of which gives the possibility of positive outcomes. Basically, the MAGA coalition members are not even remotely game theorists.
In the future a lot of people (Whitmer) and groups (columbia, tesla, various law firms, etc) are going to have the terms Vichy and Quisling attached to them if we come out the other side of this. Of course it being America those labels will be disappeared immediately into the political and cultural amnesia that is probably the most frustrating and defining character of America goldfish brained media.
posted by srboisvert at 6:55 AM on April 15 [7 favorites]
The point is to destroy the enemy classes, which we have already heard from the likes of J.D. Vance is the academy itself.
Perhaps. But if so, that's not a smart plan. And don't "but project 2025" at me - the guy who WROTE project 2025 didn't expect it to be adopted and was surprised when it was and Project 2025 is manifestly the work of an amateur spitballing without much actual idea of how things work. I could write a "Project 2028" where I just made up how I thought things should work using language that sounded plausible and someone could in fact try to implement it, but that would not mean it was an effective long term plan. For that matter, I could write a better "how to rule from a throne of blood for a thousand years" plan than Trump has, including reducing the universities to obedient worker-factories and a handful of elite branding institutions.
We have GOT to avoid being hypnotized by all this stuff and start looking for opportunities. Right now, what I mostly hear from people boils down to "there is an unstoppable fascist plan and any contradictions or weaknesses in the plan are actually intended parts of the even cleverer subtextual plan hidden in the original". They're not. This stuff is stupid. If you want a thousand year reich, you can't just think "how can I flail around with a baseball bat and smash everything because if I do that a new regime will arise automatically from the ashes". Flailing around with a bat and smashing everything is extremely bad and destructive and provides many, many opportunities to bad actors and it is a horrible nightmare making life on this planet worse for millions and millions of people - my point is NOT that people are overestimating how bad it is. I'm not even saying that fixing things will be easy or even possible. We're just overestimating how coherent, clever and durable it is.
It is very, very easy to be a nihilistic edgelord with some stupid martian dream. Childishly easy - it's just like when I'd sit around with friends daydreaming about how "after the revolution" everything would be just like an Ursula Le Guin novel, except it's for selfish people who secretly hate themselves. Going from "I am a nihilistic edgelord who throws my money around in stupid but harmful ways" to "I am building a functional fascist society that no one can hack or overthrow" is a LOT harder.
This is really a bad situation and I, at least, am still mourning my regular degular life plans that will now never be. What is going to happen? Am I going to eke out a living under worsening conditions until something ordinary kills me? Is something worse and more dramatic going to happen? What kind of fighting can I do and how will I do it? I am not sure yet. But I AM sure that these people aren't unstoppable. We will never get back what we had six months ago - the new really is struggling to be born and are we specifically going to live to see it, who knows? - but these people are not immortal genius demons who will rule us all for a thousand years. They are defeatable, even if at great cost.
posted by Frowner at 7:05 AM on April 15 [50 favorites]
Perhaps. But if so, that's not a smart plan. And don't "but project 2025" at me - the guy who WROTE project 2025 didn't expect it to be adopted and was surprised when it was and Project 2025 is manifestly the work of an amateur spitballing without much actual idea of how things work. I could write a "Project 2028" where I just made up how I thought things should work using language that sounded plausible and someone could in fact try to implement it, but that would not mean it was an effective long term plan. For that matter, I could write a better "how to rule from a throne of blood for a thousand years" plan than Trump has, including reducing the universities to obedient worker-factories and a handful of elite branding institutions.
We have GOT to avoid being hypnotized by all this stuff and start looking for opportunities. Right now, what I mostly hear from people boils down to "there is an unstoppable fascist plan and any contradictions or weaknesses in the plan are actually intended parts of the even cleverer subtextual plan hidden in the original". They're not. This stuff is stupid. If you want a thousand year reich, you can't just think "how can I flail around with a baseball bat and smash everything because if I do that a new regime will arise automatically from the ashes". Flailing around with a bat and smashing everything is extremely bad and destructive and provides many, many opportunities to bad actors and it is a horrible nightmare making life on this planet worse for millions and millions of people - my point is NOT that people are overestimating how bad it is. I'm not even saying that fixing things will be easy or even possible. We're just overestimating how coherent, clever and durable it is.
It is very, very easy to be a nihilistic edgelord with some stupid martian dream. Childishly easy - it's just like when I'd sit around with friends daydreaming about how "after the revolution" everything would be just like an Ursula Le Guin novel, except it's for selfish people who secretly hate themselves. Going from "I am a nihilistic edgelord who throws my money around in stupid but harmful ways" to "I am building a functional fascist society that no one can hack or overthrow" is a LOT harder.
This is really a bad situation and I, at least, am still mourning my regular degular life plans that will now never be. What is going to happen? Am I going to eke out a living under worsening conditions until something ordinary kills me? Is something worse and more dramatic going to happen? What kind of fighting can I do and how will I do it? I am not sure yet. But I AM sure that these people aren't unstoppable. We will never get back what we had six months ago - the new really is struggling to be born and are we specifically going to live to see it, who knows? - but these people are not immortal genius demons who will rule us all for a thousand years. They are defeatable, even if at great cost.
posted by Frowner at 7:05 AM on April 15 [50 favorites]
I've seen a lot of cheerleading for Harvard (and MIT, which made a similar announcement) but far, far less on the legality of Trump's actions. What I have seen seems to suggest he doesn't have the authority to do what he's threatening, but I'd like more clarity on that.
posted by CheeseDigestsAll at 7:16 AM on April 15 [1 favorite]
posted by CheeseDigestsAll at 7:16 AM on April 15 [1 favorite]
If this were on the up and up they’d sue them for violating the Civil Rights Act of 1964. But it’s not.
posted by girlmightlive at 7:53 AM on April 15 [2 favorites]
posted by girlmightlive at 7:53 AM on April 15 [2 favorites]
To clarify, I don't think it's a smart plan, either. Indeed, it's not really a "plan" for anything except causing a certain kind of irreparable harm to groups that this administration and its supporters have demonized as inimical to their superficial, impractical, and irrational sense of "the American nation."
It's a long series of dominance displays that feel good to the people supporting the movement and that feel like meaningful victories to the people at the top of it. Even the top folks, and not just Trump, are somewhere between trying to steer things and being carried along happily by the larger emotional tide of the movement.
So these folks are really more like opportunistic assholes than brilliantly clever sorts. It's why they have to do so many about-faces when one of their ideas hurts their own base and the base actually notices. But as long as the u-turn happens, everyone gets to go right back to riding that sweet, sweet wave of feeling powerful by degrading and brutalizing the enemy.
Their successes, then, are mostly the result of bringing on an endless series of outrages that produce initial shock and then exhaustion, and on a series of ad hoc, contradictory lies that only have to work long enough to enable the next outrage, enable the movement's adherents to pretend that it's all going well, and buy time until the next lie.
Steve Bannon's "flood the zone with shit" is crudely effective in this way. But it's still shit that's being thought and spouted and enacted. Fast, brutal, vicious stupidity is the name of the game. It works because there are a lot of stupid, vicious, brutal ideas and plenty of people who've absorbed them.
They benefit from that and from the inertia and fractiousness of their opponents, which aren't really part of their ideology other than being recoded unthinkingly as the usual "powerful, conniving enemy who is simultaneously weak and stupid."
This does not mean that they are incapable of harming others, doing lasting and in many cases irreparable damage, or marshaling considerable resources for their stupid, vicious, brutal goals.
posted by kewb at 7:54 AM on April 15 [3 favorites]
It's a long series of dominance displays that feel good to the people supporting the movement and that feel like meaningful victories to the people at the top of it. Even the top folks, and not just Trump, are somewhere between trying to steer things and being carried along happily by the larger emotional tide of the movement.
So these folks are really more like opportunistic assholes than brilliantly clever sorts. It's why they have to do so many about-faces when one of their ideas hurts their own base and the base actually notices. But as long as the u-turn happens, everyone gets to go right back to riding that sweet, sweet wave of feeling powerful by degrading and brutalizing the enemy.
Their successes, then, are mostly the result of bringing on an endless series of outrages that produce initial shock and then exhaustion, and on a series of ad hoc, contradictory lies that only have to work long enough to enable the next outrage, enable the movement's adherents to pretend that it's all going well, and buy time until the next lie.
Steve Bannon's "flood the zone with shit" is crudely effective in this way. But it's still shit that's being thought and spouted and enacted. Fast, brutal, vicious stupidity is the name of the game. It works because there are a lot of stupid, vicious, brutal ideas and plenty of people who've absorbed them.
They benefit from that and from the inertia and fractiousness of their opponents, which aren't really part of their ideology other than being recoded unthinkingly as the usual "powerful, conniving enemy who is simultaneously weak and stupid."
This does not mean that they are incapable of harming others, doing lasting and in many cases irreparable damage, or marshaling considerable resources for their stupid, vicious, brutal goals.
posted by kewb at 7:54 AM on April 15 [3 favorites]
"President Donald Trump says he wants to reduce our trade deficit. Yet he’s destroying one of our winningest exports: higher education.
Yes. US has enrolled more and more international students over the past few decades. They now constitute a significant chunk of total enrollment. We could see that drop seriously over the next year.
(Ironically, this is at a moment when American higher ed was well positioned to enroll even more international students, since Canada, Australia, and the UK cut theirs)
On a personal note... the clear majority of students in my program are international, as in around 85%. I'm very concerned about fall classes.
Also, several incoming students have reached out to me to ask if they're going to be safe when they come to the US.
posted by doctornemo at 8:09 AM on April 15 [9 favorites]
Yes. US has enrolled more and more international students over the past few decades. They now constitute a significant chunk of total enrollment. We could see that drop seriously over the next year.
(Ironically, this is at a moment when American higher ed was well positioned to enroll even more international students, since Canada, Australia, and the UK cut theirs)
On a personal note... the clear majority of students in my program are international, as in around 85%. I'm very concerned about fall classes.
Also, several incoming students have reached out to me to ask if they're going to be safe when they come to the US.
posted by doctornemo at 8:09 AM on April 15 [9 favorites]
Trump on Truth Social just now:
Perhaps Harvard should lose its Tax Exempt Status and be Taxed as a Political Entity if it keeps pushing political, ideological, and terrorist inspired/supporting “Sickness?” Remember, Tax Exempt Status is totally contingent on acting in the PUBLIC INTEREST!
posted by doctornemo at 8:25 AM on April 15 [3 favorites]
Perhaps Harvard should lose its Tax Exempt Status and be Taxed as a Political Entity if it keeps pushing political, ideological, and terrorist inspired/supporting “Sickness?” Remember, Tax Exempt Status is totally contingent on acting in the PUBLIC INTEREST!
posted by doctornemo at 8:25 AM on April 15 [3 favorites]
I think the citizens of People's Republic of Cambridge would burn Harvard to the ground if they didn't draw a line.
(I grew up there) Nah, they didn't say much about Claudine Gay.
posted by Melismata at 8:38 AM on April 15 [3 favorites]
(I grew up there) Nah, they didn't say much about Claudine Gay.
posted by Melismata at 8:38 AM on April 15 [3 favorites]
Perhaps Harvard should lose its Tax Exempt Status and be Taxed as a Political Entity if it keeps pushing political, ideological, and terrorist inspired/supporting “Sickness?” Remember, Tax Exempt Status is totally contingent on acting in the PUBLIC INTEREST!
As the IRS is now Trump’s lapdog, this is not an idle threat.
posted by Lemkin at 8:53 AM on April 15 [4 favorites]
As the IRS is now Trump’s lapdog, this is not an idle threat.
posted by Lemkin at 8:53 AM on April 15 [4 favorites]
501c3 revocation would be rough. Non-profits that don't have 501c3 status not only can't offer donors a tax deduction, they can't deduct their expenses from their revenues for taxable income purposes ... thus every dollar of donations, grants, tuition, and healthcare services fees would be subject to a 21% federal tax. Harvard would have to raise prices by 27% to make up for that (since the incremental revenue would also be taxed), the endowment net income would be lower by some mid-20% range (accounting for the mix of ordinary and long-term capital income), and donors would have to give 60% more in pre-tax terms to get to the same after tax effects. The endowment would suffer a further big, if one time only, hit on repositioning (potentially into the billions) because it is fundamentally positioned in reliance upon the tax exemption of its gains.
posted by MattD at 8:55 AM on April 15 [5 favorites]
posted by MattD at 8:55 AM on April 15 [5 favorites]
Harvard would actually be better off converting to a for-profit corporation in that situation, because it would gain deductibility of its expenses. The Harvard Corporation would no longer be in name only, albeit with some supervoting shares to prevent the inevitable private equity takeover.
posted by MattD at 8:57 AM on April 15 [4 favorites]
posted by MattD at 8:57 AM on April 15 [4 favorites]
So these folks are really more like opportunistic assholes than brilliantly clever sorts.
Taps sign:
"The truth is, these are not very bright guys and things got out of hand"
posted by nangua at 10:25 AM on April 15 [9 favorites]
Taps sign:
"The truth is, these are not very bright guys and things got out of hand"
posted by nangua at 10:25 AM on April 15 [9 favorites]
the guy who WROTE project 2025 didn't expect it to be adopted
Check the complete authorship of the document and note the institutions they come from. The document would be apologetics if it wasn't supposed to be a set of policy recommendations.
posted by JoeXIII007 at 10:30 AM on April 15
Check the complete authorship of the document and note the institutions they come from. The document would be apologetics if it wasn't supposed to be a set of policy recommendations.
posted by JoeXIII007 at 10:30 AM on April 15
doctornemo: "(Ironically, this is at a moment when American higher ed was well positioned to enroll even more international students, since Canada, Australia, and the UK cut theirs)"
Australia hasn't cut overseas student numbers. Yet. The incumbent government tried to and was thwarted by a combination of the industry coming together (finally!) and strongly opposing the proposed measures along with the opposition party and the Greens refusing to support them. The Greens refused to support the measures because they were unfair and unworkable, but the opposition (right-wing) party opposed them because they have their own, far more destructive, plans for cutting overseas students if they get elected in May. Behind the plans of both left and right-wing parties is pure and simple racism. Export education is one of Australia's largest export earners - more than wheat, wool and beef combined, but it involves mostly people of colour coming to Australia and stealing everyone's jobs and houses, apparently. Also, overseas students don't get to vote and farmers do. Not to mention that, without migrants, Australia has no way to address the critical skills shortages it faces.
But the threats to this market were met with unprecedented opposition from the education sector, with hundreds of people flocking to Canberra (including me) to point out to (mostly) Senators how much damage the proposed measures would cause and how poorly thought-out they were. They also wouldn't work. In a conversation with a member of the lower house that was part of the relevant legislative committee, I was surprised to hear that none of the members of that committee were aware that overseas student numbers are already capped per campus of each institution and the government could simply adjust the caps to achieve their stated purpose. But that wouldn't give them any media talking points to show everyone what they are doing about the housing crisis.
All that is to say that, if they work together, the colleges of the US can convince government representatives that wiping out large swathes of the sector will not, in fact, win them votes and is more likely to lose them votes because so many people that vote would lose their jobs. There's little value (except maybe in a very immediate sense for specific decisions) in trying to convince the government as a whole, but there are plenty of people who depend on the voting public for their own jobs and can be influenced. It's a longer game, for sure. but they're not going to win this game just by taking on Trump, who is really nothing more than a figurehead for cowards to hide behind.
posted by dg at 2:50 PM on April 15 [6 favorites]
Australia hasn't cut overseas student numbers. Yet. The incumbent government tried to and was thwarted by a combination of the industry coming together (finally!) and strongly opposing the proposed measures along with the opposition party and the Greens refusing to support them. The Greens refused to support the measures because they were unfair and unworkable, but the opposition (right-wing) party opposed them because they have their own, far more destructive, plans for cutting overseas students if they get elected in May. Behind the plans of both left and right-wing parties is pure and simple racism. Export education is one of Australia's largest export earners - more than wheat, wool and beef combined, but it involves mostly people of colour coming to Australia and stealing everyone's jobs and houses, apparently. Also, overseas students don't get to vote and farmers do. Not to mention that, without migrants, Australia has no way to address the critical skills shortages it faces.
But the threats to this market were met with unprecedented opposition from the education sector, with hundreds of people flocking to Canberra (including me) to point out to (mostly) Senators how much damage the proposed measures would cause and how poorly thought-out they were. They also wouldn't work. In a conversation with a member of the lower house that was part of the relevant legislative committee, I was surprised to hear that none of the members of that committee were aware that overseas student numbers are already capped per campus of each institution and the government could simply adjust the caps to achieve their stated purpose. But that wouldn't give them any media talking points to show everyone what they are doing about the housing crisis.
All that is to say that, if they work together, the colleges of the US can convince government representatives that wiping out large swathes of the sector will not, in fact, win them votes and is more likely to lose them votes because so many people that vote would lose their jobs. There's little value (except maybe in a very immediate sense for specific decisions) in trying to convince the government as a whole, but there are plenty of people who depend on the voting public for their own jobs and can be influenced. It's a longer game, for sure. but they're not going to win this game just by taking on Trump, who is really nothing more than a figurehead for cowards to hide behind.
posted by dg at 2:50 PM on April 15 [6 favorites]
> One of the things I do for my job is acquire rare books and manuscripts for Harvard's main special collections library (which is open to literally anybody with freshly washed hands and a photo ID).
Oh, hey! Pardon my digression, but: when I was in high school and my photo teacher told me to check out Larry Clark's work because she thought I'd like it and the Web didn't exist yet, a librarian at your library declared me a "visiting scholar" and let me sit and look through Clark's Tulsa. I didn't have photo ID, so instead they kept one of my sneakers behind the desk until I returned the book.
posted by The corpse in the library at 3:42 PM on April 15 [41 favorites]
Oh, hey! Pardon my digression, but: when I was in high school and my photo teacher told me to check out Larry Clark's work because she thought I'd like it and the Web didn't exist yet, a librarian at your library declared me a "visiting scholar" and let me sit and look through Clark's Tulsa. I didn't have photo ID, so instead they kept one of my sneakers behind the desk until I returned the book.
posted by The corpse in the library at 3:42 PM on April 15 [41 favorites]
Thank you for the update, dg. Glad to hear it. And hey, maybe Australia takes steps to become the world international higher ed leader.
posted by doctornemo at 5:03 PM on April 15
posted by doctornemo at 5:03 PM on April 15
am just saying, imagine if no one, however tangentially associated with Trump, had better than a high school diploma. That might make some of the foot soldiers think.
Ontario had a conservative government in Erich no one (if i recall correctly) in the cabinet had an undergrad degree. The minister of education was a high school dropout. Conservatives don't care.
posted by If only I had a penguin... at 6:33 PM on April 15 [4 favorites]
Ontario had a conservative government in Erich no one (if i recall correctly) in the cabinet had an undergrad degree. The minister of education was a high school dropout. Conservatives don't care.
posted by If only I had a penguin... at 6:33 PM on April 15 [4 favorites]
[Harvard getting a] 501c3 revocation would be rough
Tax nerd question from the expert who just finished the boss level of TurboTax 2024. Could Harvard transfer their endowment to another 501c3 to manage it on a tax advantaged basis?
posted by zippy at 12:37 AM on April 16 [1 favorite]
Tax nerd question from the expert who just finished the boss level of TurboTax 2024. Could Harvard transfer their endowment to another 501c3 to manage it on a tax advantaged basis?
posted by zippy at 12:37 AM on April 16 [1 favorite]
zippy: if we’re at the point where they need to, the mad king would charge them with tax evasion, break the new trust, or both. Democrats are stopped by legal maneuvers because they follow the law even when it’s politically disadvantageous, but he is out for revenge.
posted by adamsc at 4:32 AM on April 16 [1 favorite]
posted by adamsc at 4:32 AM on April 16 [1 favorite]
posted by The corpse in the library
Non-epyponomous I hope. Unless all your stories have been ghost stories.
posted by rochrobbb at 4:58 AM on April 16 [4 favorites]
Non-epyponomous I hope. Unless all your stories have been ghost stories.
posted by rochrobbb at 4:58 AM on April 16 [4 favorites]
OK, and I know that YET fucking AGAIN we're at "but he can't do that", but seriously, WTF? Does the US President actually and officially have the power to just randomly revoke tax exempt status or is this another of the "lulz it doesn't matter if he officially has the power, who's going to stop him" things?
And the next Democratic President of course won't revoke the fuck out of the tax exempt status of Oral Roberts U, every megachurch, the CATO institute, RAND Corp, and the other tax exempt far right wing shitholes right?
posted by sotonohito at 5:08 AM on April 16 [5 favorites]
And the next Democratic President of course won't revoke the fuck out of the tax exempt status of Oral Roberts U, every megachurch, the CATO institute, RAND Corp, and the other tax exempt far right wing shitholes right?
posted by sotonohito at 5:08 AM on April 16 [5 favorites]
> And the next Democratic President of course won't revoke the fuck out of the tax exempt status of Oral Roberts U, every megachurch, the CATO institute, RAND Corp, and the other tax exempt far right wing shitholes right?
Man, I wish I could believe they would.
posted by postcommunism at 6:08 AM on April 16 [8 favorites]
Man, I wish I could believe they would.
posted by postcommunism at 6:08 AM on April 16 [8 favorites]
In the future a lot of people (Whitmer) and groups (columbia, tesla, various law firms, etc) are going to have the terms Vichy and Quisling attached to them if we come out the other side of this. Of course it being America those labels will be disappeared immediately into the political and cultural amnesia that is probably the most frustrating and defining character of America goldfish brained media.
Maybe people will remember “Lando”?
posted by condour75 at 9:56 AM on April 16 [1 favorite]
Maybe people will remember “Lando”?
posted by condour75 at 9:56 AM on April 16 [1 favorite]
the mad king would charge them with tax evasion, break the new trust, or both.
Oh absolutely, I meant that question for the timeline where laws apply, and not the one we're in.
posted by zippy at 1:07 PM on April 16 [1 favorite]
Oh absolutely, I meant that question for the timeline where laws apply, and not the one we're in.
posted by zippy at 1:07 PM on April 16 [1 favorite]
And in our worst timeline, from 1 hour ago: US IRS planning to rescind Harvard's tax-exempt status amid Trump feud. (CNN, via Reuters)
posted by zippy at 5:25 PM on April 16 [4 favorites]
posted by zippy at 5:25 PM on April 16 [4 favorites]
I think Harvard, as an institution, should prove its independence by opening a second campus in Europe or just picking up and moving to Europe altogether. They already have a European campus at Villa I Tatti near Florence, Italy.
Any scholar from Cambridge who wants to relocate, could do so and I'm thinking the EU/Italy would have no problem making that process easy. Students would have a choice of campuses too. Most non-American students would likely opt for the Italy campus. Perhaps even many American students.
posted by vacapinta at 2:38 AM on April 17 [4 favorites]
Any scholar from Cambridge who wants to relocate, could do so and I'm thinking the EU/Italy would have no problem making that process easy. Students would have a choice of campuses too. Most non-American students would likely opt for the Italy campus. Perhaps even many American students.
posted by vacapinta at 2:38 AM on April 17 [4 favorites]
And the next Democratic President of course won't revoke the fuck out of the tax exempt status of Oral Roberts U, every megachurch, the CATO institute, RAND Corp, and the other tax exempt far right wing shitholes right?
Before Trump vs. Harvard, this is what a university had to do to lose its tax-exempt status. This is from the Boston Globe today (limited free articles). Bob Jones University lost their tax status in the early 1970s because they refused to admit Blacks, and then admitted only married Blacks for a while because their chief concern was possible inter-racial dating and babies. They only regained their status in 2017.
It continues to annoy me how the media keeps sanewashing *waves around everything.* Like not even mentioning how nutty a university Bob Jones is, and comparing it to Harvard without commenting on this.
posted by Melismata at 9:16 AM on April 17 [10 favorites]
Before Trump vs. Harvard, this is what a university had to do to lose its tax-exempt status. This is from the Boston Globe today (limited free articles). Bob Jones University lost their tax status in the early 1970s because they refused to admit Blacks, and then admitted only married Blacks for a while because their chief concern was possible inter-racial dating and babies. They only regained their status in 2017.
It continues to annoy me how the media keeps sanewashing *waves around everything.* Like not even mentioning how nutty a university Bob Jones is, and comparing it to Harvard without commenting on this.
posted by Melismata at 9:16 AM on April 17 [10 favorites]
It's been a liberal dream to take away the tax-exempt status of the churches that operate as extensions of the Republican party. Guess this is why we never did that.
Revoking Harvard's status hasn't happened yet, aren't there any influential Harvard alumni who don't want to see their intuitions rep completely destroyed who can do anything to stop this?
posted by subdee at 11:31 AM on April 17 [1 favorite]
Revoking Harvard's status hasn't happened yet, aren't there any influential Harvard alumni who don't want to see their intuitions rep completely destroyed who can do anything to stop this?
posted by subdee at 11:31 AM on April 17 [1 favorite]
It continues to annoy me how the media keeps sanewashing *waves around everything.* Like not even mentioning how nutty a university Bob Jones is, and comparing it to Harvard without commenting on this.
Me too, and I don't know what to do about it.
I've had more than one conversation with people who are fine with Donald Trump being President where they've said "all politicians are corrupt" (so my guy is OK) and "all news is biased" (so Fox News is better than all other sources, combined).
The statement always ignores scale and is uncritical of claims.
It's like hearing "everyone breaks the speed limit" as a perfectly sane and normal justification for running over children with your car.
posted by zippy at 11:48 AM on April 17 [8 favorites]
Me too, and I don't know what to do about it.
I've had more than one conversation with people who are fine with Donald Trump being President where they've said "all politicians are corrupt" (so my guy is OK) and "all news is biased" (so Fox News is better than all other sources, combined).
The statement always ignores scale and is uncritical of claims.
It's like hearing "everyone breaks the speed limit" as a perfectly sane and normal justification for running over children with your car.
posted by zippy at 11:48 AM on April 17 [8 favorites]
Not quite sure what to make of this: Trump Officials Blame Mistake for Setting Off Confrontation With Harvard (NYTimes).
They're saying the demand letter shouldn't have been sent, but...they're also not rescinding those demands, or pointing to anything in the letter that they'd now decry, so it doesn't seem to be changing anything.
Seems like either: a) people were wrong about them wanting to provoke the very reaction they got from Harvard, or b) they didn't anticipate what other schools would then do?, or c) I guess the canniest version of this would be a belated attempt to wriggle out of the unconstitutionality of the letter's demands, now that it's going to trial?
posted by nobody at 7:38 PM on April 18 [2 favorites]
They're saying the demand letter shouldn't have been sent, but...they're also not rescinding those demands, or pointing to anything in the letter that they'd now decry, so it doesn't seem to be changing anything.
Seems like either: a) people were wrong about them wanting to provoke the very reaction they got from Harvard, or b) they didn't anticipate what other schools would then do?, or c) I guess the canniest version of this would be a belated attempt to wriggle out of the unconstitutionality of the letter's demands, now that it's going to trial?
posted by nobody at 7:38 PM on April 18 [2 favorites]
Seems like an abuser tactics to me. "Actually it's your fault for not realizing that I didn't mean to abuse you like that!
posted by subdee at 8:21 PM on April 18 [3 favorites]
posted by subdee at 8:21 PM on April 18 [3 favorites]
The Trump administration is being run by people like Stephen Miller and yes, Donald Trump whose every mistake they've ever made has been covered up by money from their parents or now their wealthy friends. They think saying "it was a mistake", whether that's sending someone to a concentration camp and now the courts are mad at you or sending an obviously ridiculous escalating letter that completely backfired, makes whatever you did no longer a problem, because that's always worked for them in the past. In their world, saying "I made a mistake" is a magic bullet get out of jail free card. They don't understand that the rest of us live in a world where our mistakes have consequences, sometimes quite uncomfortable consequences, that we have to deal with.
posted by hydropsyche at 4:11 AM on April 19 [3 favorites]
posted by hydropsyche at 4:11 AM on April 19 [3 favorites]
"Any time I had a problem, and I threw a Molotov cocktail, boom! Right away, I had a different problem."
posted by rochrobbb at 4:27 AM on April 19 [6 favorites]
posted by rochrobbb at 4:27 AM on April 19 [6 favorites]
I don’t disagree that the “mistake” here may simply be a pretense, but given the Signal fiasco, I absolutely can’t dismiss the possibility that someone intending to circulate it internally sent it to Harvard instead.
posted by Horace Rumpole at 8:33 AM on April 19 [3 favorites]
posted by Horace Rumpole at 8:33 AM on April 19 [3 favorites]
a belated attempt to wriggle out of the unconstitutionality of the letter's demands, now that it's going to trial?
Discovery is going to be LIT!
posted by mikelieman at 2:16 PM on April 19 [4 favorites]
Discovery is going to be LIT!
posted by mikelieman at 2:16 PM on April 19 [4 favorites]
The Trump administration plans to slash another $1 billion in federal grants and contracts for health research to Harvard, on top of an existing $2.2 billion cut, the Wall Street Journal reported on Sunday... Citing the two anonymous sources, the Journal reported that the Trump administration saw the release as a breach of a confidential negotiation process.
posted by Horace Rumpole at 6:13 AM on April 21
posted by Horace Rumpole at 6:13 AM on April 21
Harvard sued the Trump administration in federal court on Monday over its multibillion dollar cuts to the University’s research funding, accusing the White House of undertaking an arbitrary and unconstitutional campaign to “punish Harvard for protecting its constitutional rights.”
posted by Horace Rumpole at 2:20 PM on April 21 [3 favorites]
posted by Horace Rumpole at 2:20 PM on April 21 [3 favorites]
a confidential negotiation process
Is that what we're calling it now?
But yeah they absolutely can't have their victims banding together, sharing notes, going public, organizing collectively, etc.
posted by subdee at 12:00 AM on April 22 [2 favorites]
Is that what we're calling it now?
But yeah they absolutely can't have their victims banding together, sharing notes, going public, organizing collectively, etc.
posted by subdee at 12:00 AM on April 22 [2 favorites]
Surely this?
It’s so fucked dealing with powerful liars, with limitless funds, who thrive in chaos and who will face no accountability. How do you even “win” in court when “law” no longer has an agreed-upon meaning, and when there is no enforcement? There has been a coup. Nobody is coming to save you, us, or Harvard. I just don’t see Harvard to actually getting the promised federal funds back. Real talk: I also don’t see much preventing the feds or DOGE from seizing and taking Harvard’s endowment if they wanted to. What army will stop them?
Trying to see things from the reasonable (ha - does that even exist?) government lawyer’s view here for a moment, maybe they had a point about wishing Harvard had back-channeled a bit longer: like the way lawyers sometimes communicate with opposing counsel the wish to keep an informal line of communication open while not violating the attorney-client privilege, with some in-between the lines reading, to the effect of:
“Ya’ll know my client [is batshit crazy] has instructed me to remind you he has a clear mandate to deliver, so please do us both a favor and [leave your own giant reactive egos at the door, to help me help you by calming him down and pacing him during his predictable decompensation cycle - how the fuck do ya’ll not get it by now?] pick up the phone next time?” These lawyers must on some level know they’re at risk for getting Cohen and Giuliani’d.
We know the cruelty remains the point, and to effectuate that cruelty, the chaos is the means here. Nobody fully knows who the decision maker even is in this administration. Right hand has no idea what the left hand is doing; the new crop of enablers are willfully blind etc. Lawyers tend to keep assuming the rule of law is the law of rules. That court orders still have power. I’m not so sure of those norms anymore.
Harvard’s leadership is not used to being treated like this. The Claudine Gay debacle should have been a call for serious introspection and tactical planning for future assaults - it felt to me then like Harvard capitulated and did the thing we’re taught never to do with fascists and “complied in advance.” Good for Harvard for fighting - it sends a strong example for others to do so.
I wouldn’t even begin to know what the next right move is here. There is a non-zero possibility however, Harvard will not be allowed to survive as a US institution. I feel so many of the pundits haven’t really thought that notion through because it seems way too incomprehensible.
If democracy can be eliminated in the US, so can Harvard. I hope Harvard develops some sort of a safety plan for itself, with a focus on international and online campuses.
posted by edithkeeler at 7:00 AM on April 22 [4 favorites]
It’s so fucked dealing with powerful liars, with limitless funds, who thrive in chaos and who will face no accountability. How do you even “win” in court when “law” no longer has an agreed-upon meaning, and when there is no enforcement? There has been a coup. Nobody is coming to save you, us, or Harvard. I just don’t see Harvard to actually getting the promised federal funds back. Real talk: I also don’t see much preventing the feds or DOGE from seizing and taking Harvard’s endowment if they wanted to. What army will stop them?
Trying to see things from the reasonable (ha - does that even exist?) government lawyer’s view here for a moment, maybe they had a point about wishing Harvard had back-channeled a bit longer: like the way lawyers sometimes communicate with opposing counsel the wish to keep an informal line of communication open while not violating the attorney-client privilege, with some in-between the lines reading, to the effect of:
“Ya’ll know my client [is batshit crazy] has instructed me to remind you he has a clear mandate to deliver, so please do us both a favor and [leave your own giant reactive egos at the door, to help me help you by calming him down and pacing him during his predictable decompensation cycle - how the fuck do ya’ll not get it by now?] pick up the phone next time?” These lawyers must on some level know they’re at risk for getting Cohen and Giuliani’d.
We know the cruelty remains the point, and to effectuate that cruelty, the chaos is the means here. Nobody fully knows who the decision maker even is in this administration. Right hand has no idea what the left hand is doing; the new crop of enablers are willfully blind etc. Lawyers tend to keep assuming the rule of law is the law of rules. That court orders still have power. I’m not so sure of those norms anymore.
Harvard’s leadership is not used to being treated like this. The Claudine Gay debacle should have been a call for serious introspection and tactical planning for future assaults - it felt to me then like Harvard capitulated and did the thing we’re taught never to do with fascists and “complied in advance.” Good for Harvard for fighting - it sends a strong example for others to do so.
I wouldn’t even begin to know what the next right move is here. There is a non-zero possibility however, Harvard will not be allowed to survive as a US institution. I feel so many of the pundits haven’t really thought that notion through because it seems way too incomprehensible.
If democracy can be eliminated in the US, so can Harvard. I hope Harvard develops some sort of a safety plan for itself, with a focus on international and online campuses.
posted by edithkeeler at 7:00 AM on April 22 [4 favorites]
« Older Australian academics refuse to attend US... | The World's Worst Humanitarian Crisis Deepens Newer »
posted by Lemkin at 4:50 PM on April 14 [24 favorites]