Many in the mainstream media and academia are cheering on Harvard University as this storied institution has, in the words of the New York Times, 'decided to fight the Trump administration.'
I don’t think Trump ever said Harvard or private universities can’t teach whatever they like, but that taxpayers should not be forced to endorse their views by funding them.
Not sure why it’s ok for Harvard to demand public funding while they curtail viewpoint diversity and thereby constrain free exchange of ideas. The gov isn’t trying to constrain speech, but saying that the university’s constraints on speech disqualify it from taxpayer support of a kind.
They don't demand public funding. They receive public funding because they do many things that are beneficial to society, things that government either cannot do or cannot do as well. Eliminating government funding because of "wokeness" or some such nonsense only hurts society far more than it helps it. Besides which, universities are supposed to be a place where the widest range of views may be exchanged freely. This is a blatant attempt to restrict free expression and to turn universities into extensions of the state.
But how wide can the exchange be if the university restricts diversity of opinion. And how does such construction support the public good? It seems to me that even if some of the research is useful, the overall damage done to the social good by prohibiting speech should disqualify them from public support. Funding isn’t a right, the gov that gives is the gov that can take away. Precedent was established in 1976 when gov barred funding for bob jones university for their admittedly asinine opinions. Nevertheless, this isn’t the first time the gov has said if you’re not serving the public good you should not receive public support.
Again, the good things universities do far outweigh any negative factors. Besides which, the negative factors are largely internal to the universities. Per the constitution, with very limited exceptions, the government has no role in regulating speech, and again this is a blatant attempt to suppress speech Trump doesn't like. Trump is not a king.
Could probably make the case the gov should not have any role in funding private institutions from a constitutional perspective. Regardless indoctrination isn’t free speech and especially for a college that produces the country’s “elite”, the damage done by their anti social indoctrination is widespread and enduring.
The universities allow suppression of speech that does not support progressive ideology. Dershowitz, for example, could not lecture about Israel on campus for fear of assault. Try wearing an Israeli flag t shirt on campus and let us know how that goes. Better yet, a MAGA ball cap
I think you meant to say 'the good things that SOME universities do MAY outweigh SOME of their negative factors. Have to be careful on this subject/topic and not drink the university kool-aid.
You have missed the whole point of Professor Dershowitz's columns: Harvard does not promote nor allow divers thought, and no this has nothing to do with 'the free exchange of ideas', its about Harvard's discrimination against observant Jews.
Again, I implore you to do some research before making your conclusions. Read both the letter of demands from the government, and the letter Harvard sent in reply.
Harvard has humbly admitted to the things they did wrong, and has taken steps over the past year to correct them, including the anti-semetism.
Trumps letter should be disturbing to anybody who values free speech, and understands government over-reach and the thought control listed in their letter.
Trump's policies have nothing to do with anti-semitism. That is only a pretext for oppression. And it is not the government's right to impose diverse views.
The expression of support for Jews is restricted because of the danger those who speak that support face. Obviously, they are not only restricting free expression they are making that particular expression dangerous. There’s no university where I would send a child that keeps other students out, or berates them because of their religion. And the USA by funding this school is co-signing this discriminatory and despicable behavior.
Again, I implore you to do some research before making your conclusions. Read both the letter of demands from the government, and the letter Harvard sent in reply.
Harvard has humbly admitted to the things they did wrong, and has taken steps over the past year to correct them, including the anti-semetism.
Trumps letter should be disturbing to anybody who values free speech, and understands government over-reach and the thought control listed in their letter.
Harvard is not keeping anyone out, or berating them, because of their religion. Anyone who commits act of violence, vandalism, appropriation of school property without permission, etc., is subject to disciplinary and legal action.
We could only wish that Harvard, Columbia or any other elite university had subjected any of the students to disciplinary or legal actions when they first crossed the lines. If they had controlled this from the start we wouldn’t be here.
It looked to most of us that Jewish students were being berated, bullied and mistreated as they listened to “From the River to the Sea” chants as well as those Yelling Free Palestine; this after Hamas had raped, beheaded and killed so many of their youth at an October 7th daylight function. Not keeping people out? It’s how they treat people unfairly.
The part about “eliminating government funding because of ‘wokeness’ or some such nonsense only hurts society far more than it helps it.”
How can you definitively claim this? What value do you place on the presence of conservative opinions on campus; on having a faculty with diverse values and beliefs; on funding scholarship for studies that don’t necessarily support your point of view?
Look at efforts to silence economics professor Roland Fryer at Harvard after he published his study on racial bias and police shootings that didn’t echo the “woke” narrative. What about the loss of Asian students who couldn’t gain admission solely because of their race?
And I haven’t even mentioned the harms caused by antisemitism. These costs are immeasurable.
My tax dollars do not have to go to any university or college, nor should they. Let the market decide, and without wealthy parents willing to foot the bill places like Harvard and Columbia will move to the center in a heartbeat.
You are trying to corerce the government into supporting a private institution with public funds. That same research can be done by government employees and not advancing Harvard's political agenda.
Not a chance that government employees can do all the research that is done today at every good university, and at many teaching hospitals / medical schools.
We don't have those kind of government employees, and the ones that we did have have been fired, and moved on to a European school where they are valued.
Every economically developed nation calls upon its university grad students, and extensive infrastructure of specific labs, to do this important research.
The government of every economically developed nation sponsors this university and other independent research, with the top five spending more of their GDP than America does.I've asked chatgpt to help me to communicate all the important reasons concisely. I hope you can be unbiased enough to comprehend these valuable reasons why we MUST continue funding independent research.
Economically developed nations invest in life-saving medical research for several key reasons:
Public Health and Productivity: A healthier population means a more productive workforce. Preventing or curing disease reduces the long-term costs of healthcare, increases life expectancy, and boosts economic output.
National Security and Stability: Disease outbreaks can destabilize entire economies and strain national security systems. Investing in research helps prevent pandemics and keeps healthcare systems resilient.
Global Influence and Innovation Leadership: Leading in medical research enhances a country’s global standing, attracting top talent, investments, and partnerships. Breakthroughs in medicine are also lucrative intellectual property, generating economic returns.
Moral Responsibility and Social Equity: Democracies often operate on the principle that all citizens deserve access to life-saving care. Investing in research ensures vulnerable populations are not left behind and reinforces societal values of compassion and justice.
Cost Savings Over Time: Prevention and early intervention save enormous healthcare costs in the long run. For example, developing a vaccine or targeted therapy is far less expensive than decades of chronic disease management.
Preparedness for the Unknown: Diseases evolve, and new threats emerge. Constant medical research ensures preparedness for future health crises, protecting both national and global populations.
It's quite easy to have them: hire those who Harvard fired. Since the research people probably aren't the anti-Semitics, they shouldn't be a problem, and if they are as smart as claimed, they will have observed that being a hater will hurt you economically at least.
Our tax dollars fund many things that are very beneficial to society. You want to deny that to society because it might also happen to fund some expression you do not like.
You aren't understanding the situation at all. I suggest you read both the letters the government demands to Harvard, as well as Harvards response.
Harvard took responsibility for their past mistakes, and provided an extensive summary of everything they have done in the past year to correct these mistakes.
What the government was demanding was ridiculous. It was clearly more about controlling the ideas, and every aspect of hiring, accepting students, and controlling what subjects they could and could not teach.
Without reading these two letters you can only be ignorant of what is truly at stake here
If you support Ham ... Harvard so much, donate YOUR money to it! That's the freedom of choice we have. I chose to have my tax dollars going to fixing the roads.
The government of every economically developed nation sponsors university and other independent research, with the top five spending more of their GDP than America does.I've asked chatgpt to help me to communicate all the important reasons concisely.
Economically developed nations invest in life-saving medical research for several key reasons:
Public Health and Productivity: A healthier population means a more productive workforce. Preventing or curing disease reduces the long-term costs of healthcare, increases life expectancy, and boosts economic output.
National Security and Stability: Disease outbreaks can destabilize entire economies and strain national security systems. Investing in research helps prevent pandemics and keeps healthcare systems resilient.
Global Influence and Innovation Leadership: Leading in medical research enhances a country’s global standing, attracting top talent, investments, and partnerships. Breakthroughs in medicine are also lucrative intellectual property, generating economic returns.
Moral Responsibility and Social Equity: Democracies often operate on the principle that all citizens deserve access to life-saving care. Investing in research ensures vulnerable populations are not left behind and reinforces societal values of compassion and justice.
Cost Savings Over Time: Prevention and early intervention save enormous healthcare costs in the long run. For example, developing a vaccine or targeted therapy is far less expensive than decades of chronic disease management.
Preparedness for the Unknown: Diseases evolve, and new threats emerge. Constant medical research ensures preparedness for future health crises, protecting both national and global populations.
We elect political representatives to make funding decisions. Those representatives do not have the authority to use funding decisions to deny us our constitutional rights. Trump is not defending anyone's rights. He is using funding to coerce private institutions in order to deny them the right to freedom of expression. Furthermore, it is Congress that makes funding decisions, not the president.
The government of every economically developed nation sponsors university and other independent research, with the top five spending more of their GDP than America does.I've asked chatgpt to help me to communicate all the important reasons concisely.
Economically developed nations invest in life-saving medical research for several key reasons:
Public Health and Productivity: A healthier population means a more productive workforce. Preventing or curing disease reduces the long-term costs of healthcare, increases life expectancy, and boosts economic output.
National Security and Stability: Disease outbreaks can destabilize entire economies and strain national security systems. Investing in research helps prevent pandemics and keeps healthcare systems resilient.
Global Influence and Innovation Leadership: Leading in medical research enhances a country’s global standing, attracting top talent, investments, and partnerships. Breakthroughs in medicine are also lucrative intellectual property, generating economic returns.
Moral Responsibility and Social Equity: Democracies often operate on the principle that all citizens deserve access to life-saving care. Investing in research ensures vulnerable populations are not left behind and reinforces societal values of compassion and justice.
Cost Savings Over Time: Prevention and early intervention save enormous healthcare costs in the long run. For example, developing a vaccine or targeted therapy is far less expensive than decades of chronic disease management.
Preparedness for the Unknown: Diseases evolve, and new threats emerge. Constant medical research ensures preparedness for future health crises, protecting both national and global populations.
You are trying to corerce the government into funding a private company's political agenda with public funds. The research you are worried about can be done by government employees without advancing Harvard's agenda
Not a chance that government employees can do all the research that is done today at every good university, and at many teaching hospitals / medical schools.
We don't have those kind of government employees, and the ones that we did have have been fired, and moved on to a European school where they are valued.
Every economically developed nation calls upon its university grad students, and extensive infrastructure of specific labs, to do this important research.
The government of every economically developed nation sponsors this university and other independent research, with the top five spending more of their GDP than America does.I've asked chatgpt to help me to communicate all the important reasons concisely. I hope you can be unbiased enough to comprehend these valuable reasons why we MUST continue funding independent research.
Economically developed nations invest in life-saving medical research for several key reasons:
Public Health and Productivity: A healthier population means a more productive workforce. Preventing or curing disease reduces the long-term costs of healthcare, increases life expectancy, and boosts economic output.
National Security and Stability: Disease outbreaks can destabilize entire economies and strain national security systems. Investing in research helps prevent pandemics and keeps healthcare systems resilient.
Global Influence and Innovation Leadership: Leading in medical research enhances a country’s global standing, attracting top talent, investments, and partnerships. Breakthroughs in medicine are also lucrative intellectual property, generating economic returns.
Moral Responsibility and Social Equity: Democracies often operate on the principle that all citizens deserve access to life-saving care. Investing in research ensures vulnerable populations are not left behind and reinforces societal values of compassion and justice.
Cost Savings Over Time: Prevention and early intervention save enormous healthcare costs in the long run. For example, developing a vaccine or targeted therapy is far less expensive than decades of chronic disease management.
Preparedness for the Unknown: Diseases evolve, and new threats emerge. Constant medical research ensures preparedness for future health crises, protecting both national and global populations.
Not to coerce speech. In fact, to ensure and protect neutrality. No university should be a breeding farm and militant enforcer of antisemitic far left ideology.
Oh obviously. I was wondering when you were going to pull the Jewish card as if you were so expertly lining that up as a tactic to 'surprise' us all with. Lol.
But, the government is NOT trying to coerce speech, but they are trying to get Harvard to treat everyone fairly and equally. DEI does NOT treat all people fairly and allowing the intimidating anti-Israeli protestors to harass those that don’t agree with them amounts to supporting a form of terrorism. These “woke” institutions should have the government all of their tax payer support pulled.
You are blind. All of Trump’s words and actions in this matter speak of an effort to curtail speech, exact retribution, and exert unconstitutional control over private parties.
I’m not the one who’s blind here. DEI is the most racist ideology around. Liberals love it because they can be racist and get pats on the back for “looking out for minorities.” If they really wanted to look out for minorities, they’d help them to become competent enough to win positions on their own merits rather than continually offering them crutches. Haven’t seen too many people actually win a foot race on crutches and no one really gets ahead in life (personally or career-wise) unless they learn how to stand on their own two feet. As far as the protestors are concerned, most of these ivy-league universities have been giving these wannabe terrorists too much free rein.
Right. DEI, which seeks to protect equality for all, is more racist than racism against blacks, hispanics, jews, orientals. Some perspective you’ve got there.
Well, you’re definitely showing your colors. Why can’t any of you guys get it through your heads that when you select one individual over another based on ethnic background or skin color that’s the definition of racism. You cannot actually help someone by giving them favorable status without merit. While the United States is not a perfect country, it offers everyone the opportunity to succeed. Sure, some have more advantages than others to start with, but everyone has the opportunity to succeed if they apply themselves. However, if you give those that you determine are disadvantaged because of skin color or ethnic background an advantage without merit, you set them up for failure and keep them looking for another crutch to keep them upright. What happens when someone who doesn’t earn their position makes an honest mistake (due to their lack of ability), how do you correct that issue? How do you explain that to those who are negatively affected by that poor decision. Do you really want your surgeon working on you based on his skin color or his experience? I mean let’s just see how far you’d personally be willing to take this. As for me, my last surgeon happened to be black and he did an excellent job. But, I selected him because he was the one that all of the medical staff said was the best. I’m really color-blind when it comes to most things, but I want to see who’s the best at it.
Besides freedom of speech, there is also freedom of association. One can tell anything they want, but another is free to support or not support them financially or otherwise.
The school administrations and local law enforcement can deal with that if and when it happens. This is not enforcing black childrens’ right to go to public schools.
Many of his closest family members are Jewish. People grow up and change by life experience. I’ve seen this in him but didn’t matter what I think. It only matters that he is standing with Israel, the American worker, standup people in the cabinet and doing what he feels is best for America. There’s a clear and thorough explanation by Victor Davis Hansen that clearly states what President Trump is doing, and it is circulating on the internet. I hope you see it.
Fuck Victor Davis Hanson. And Dershowitz appears to only care about attracting new business, from what I see. He is trolling for clients, especially ones from the Trump camp, since they are going to need legal representation with all the criming they have been doing.
Yes I agree. Let Harvard do whatever it please. Cut funding anyway because with the tax free profit on 50 billion dollars Harvard does not need the money. Cutting the money is not punishment for the views of the faculty, it is a practical solution for wasting Taxpayer money on very wealthy institutions. In fact Most endowed Universities are plenty rich that the need no federal funds. By the way, what are these so called imported earth grants funding. Is it science or social?
I was told by an exec within the university system today that cancer research is going on in a vast way in so many other places that we can lose Harvard for a minute. I don’t know if that’s true.
Most all the funding being held hostage is research funding and has basically nothing to do with the DEI viewpoint concerns. The Trump Administration is not using a carrot and stick approach but a carrot and cannon. It seems that if Dershowitz was a major speaker on campus up until the fall of 2023, that it appears his problems occurred after that. Not exactly long time entrenched.
Maybe he had more than he could swallow! Like many dems who moved to the right: musk, trump, Kennedy, tulsi, you guys keep drifting left! More moving as you lose 6-8 reps in 4 states in the house! And your tax base.. a few more nudges and silicon valley will be in tx and tn
Have you seen all of his hotels, golf courses, and apartment buildings? Yes sometimes they went south. But he didn’t give up. I like that because a lot of men lose their business and they are completely crushed and it’s understandable. But a strong entrepreneur keeps at it and I admire that myself. I also really admire Victor David Hansen and Jorden Peterson. I know Alan loved to sell books. But a guys gotta make a living. Lol
You are ignorant, like all MAGA. Trump licenses his name, which he started after becoming famous through The Apprentice. He has largely been a failure at real estate development and ownership. His father was a success at that and Trump squandered all the money he inherited, which you would know if you bothered to learn Trump's history, instead of falling for his con.
As someone who has ties to Harvard and know Dershowitz I can say that while there is a lot of talk and rhetoric there is unfortunately not much feel of change. Going through all the available information the percent of Jewish students at Harvard is 10% give or take not 35. By meritocracy it would be 35%. And Alan is a traditional democrat not a Republican.
And if you replace Jews with any other minority except Asiansthere would be a huge difference in how Harvard would handle things.
I understand Dershowitz's nominal political affiliation, but my strong impression is that his public statements on matters impinging on public policy are not out a genuine concern with the public interest and are merely shilling for more business.
Trump's letter to Harvard is right out of the fascist playbook. It is not a sincere effort to deal with anti-semitism, and is merely a ruse in pursuit of authoritarian goals, from which jews would suffer as much as anyone else. However distasteful, people have a right to express criticism of Israel and support for Palestinians. Violence and vandalism can be dealt with at the institutional and local police levels. This is not like civil rights for blacks in the 1950s and 1960s, where there was entrenched systemic discrimination that the states would not deal with.
Dershowitz has freedom of speech, like anyone else. And I am free to criticize his speech. Yes, I think Dershowitz is feigning concern for the public welfare in order to attract clients.
I'm wondering what a Conservative Sociologist would look like? Would they mostly be blaming the individual for their problems? Any examples of how their thinking might differ?
Mostly individuals are to blame for their problems. It is only when someone says to himself ‘I did this to myself’ he can begin to heal. If someone else did it to you, you have no agency, and you are stuck.
They would properly BALANCE the factors that impact people, and NOT propagate the idiocy that ALL problems are external, and require an inefficient, ineffective, and overly expensive Government “solution.”
For example… in 1840… we could all agree most problems the a black person had were external… now empowered by laws, regulations and much changed society… it’s time to recognize blacks are empowered more than ever.
Ergo…Supreme Court & California have BOTH banned affirmative action.
Good point. State sponsored discrimination through Jim Crow. The state, the Supreme Court and Executive acted to end the ignorance. In NYC, during the immigration influx of the Irish, signs in windows of businesses, "INNA," Irish need not apply. Also signs in the parks to stay off the lawns.
Do you actually think many conservatives would even choose that to major in? I am pretty sure most of them would find it a waste of an education. And a field that is superfluous. And, BTW, why is it the universities fault if conservatives do not choose that study and career path?
Best analysis yet. Thanks for being a voice of sanity from the inside. Hope the art of the deal makes Harvard more ideologically diverse, but the rot is so deep. How does Claudine Gay still make a million per year? How many other DEI commissars are on the payroll openly violating federal law? What actions will be taken instead of just paying lip service to reopen the federal funding spigots?
Its a racket, once one gets in, they multiply like roaches.. then it out of control They just keep hiring each other and promoting each other till they are over their heads!
Well said! Harvard is a disgrace and needs to pay a price for its unveiled hate and bigotry. Given his constituency, Harvard's President is in a pickle. But, choosing between hate and true inclusivity where everyone is treated with dignity and respect is a matter of principle, not politics. We'll soon know if he has the courage to reject hatred, backlash be damned.
And, thank you for always providing a voice of wisdom, courage, and clarity.
I remember the many years Dershowitz was on the other side.. i envied his positioning as well thought out even if it was against my side.. i always wished he was on my side.. now he is!!!
Those radical left professors who teach oppressor and oppressor matrix narrative ( and in large part the western USA as the enemy evil doer) and Israel bashing the never ending enemy is entrenched: Also the Muslim brotherhood and Qatar funding which ( no doubt ) helps facilities this anti USA and anti Israel narrative in USA yet no one is objectively tackling this enough as it needs to be combated too as well as the rise in vile anti Jewish anti semitism / anti Zionism ( vile worse form of anti semitism ) which is all part of it - I will never forget the ripping down of Oct 7 victims and the cheering on Oct 7 on USA streets and campuses ever and the targeting of Jewish American Israeli students and Jewish American owned businesses .. so utterly unacceptable and vile
In the end the Islamic students and faculty practicing Islam will eat the DEI woke students/faculty. They are useful idiots. A “faith” in support of slavery, women beatings, sight erasure of women, child rape and murder of anyone not of Islam is the anthesis of academic collegiate discourse.
Bravo Mr. Dershowitz for telling it like it is, from the inside. Perhaps it’s time to rethink taxpayer dollars going to colleges that have a wealth of private funds at their disposal (Harvard has a $50 billion dollar endowment!). These colleges would be just fine on their own and should take responsibility for their own actions without a government handout. Harvard’s a self sustaining money machine and taxpayers are fed up paying for their nonsense.
So your child watches a TV show you don't like and your punishment is to prevent him from volunteering every week reading to elementary children. Totally unrelated and harming the children at the same time.
It's irrelevant what the funding is for. That's just bookkeeping. I don't want any of my tax dollars going to Harvard. Why should my money be used to subsidize some kids' college degrees - or, excuse me, "research"?
The government of every economically developed nation sponsors university and other independent research, with the top five spending more of their GDP than America does.I've asked chatgpt to help me to communicate all the important reasons concisely.
Economically developed nations invest in life-saving medical research for several key reasons:
Public Health and Productivity: A healthier population means a more productive workforce. Preventing or curing disease reduces the long-term costs of healthcare, increases life expectancy, and boosts economic output.
National Security and Stability: Disease outbreaks can destabilize entire economies and strain national security systems. Investing in research helps prevent pandemics and keeps healthcare systems resilient.
Global Influence and Innovation Leadership: Leading in medical research enhances a country’s global standing, attracting top talent, investments, and partnerships. Breakthroughs in medicine are also lucrative intellectual property, generating economic returns.
Moral Responsibility and Social Equity: Democracies often operate on the principle that all citizens deserve access to life-saving care. Investing in research ensures vulnerable populations are not left behind and reinforces societal values of compassion and justice.
Cost Savings Over Time: Prevention and early intervention save enormous healthcare costs in the long run. For example, developing a vaccine or targeted therapy is far less expensive than decades of chronic disease management.
Preparedness for the Unknown: Diseases evolve, and new threats emerge. Constant medical research ensures preparedness for future health crises, protecting both national and global populations.
Both public & private university administrations charge abusive overhead on government grants, up to ~50% of the grant. Valid overhead rates are about half that. Thus the extra funds subsidize other university costs/objectives and the bureaucracy.
The government of every economically developed nation sponsors university and other independent research, with the top five spending more of their GDP than America does.I've asked chatgpt to help me to communicate all the important reasons concisely.
Economically developed nations invest in life-saving medical research for several key reasons:
Public Health and Productivity: A healthier population means a more productive workforce. Preventing or curing disease reduces the long-term costs of healthcare, increases life expectancy, and boosts economic output.
National Security and Stability: Disease outbreaks can destabilize entire economies and strain national security systems. Investing in research helps prevent pandemics and keeps healthcare systems resilient.
Global Influence and Innovation Leadership: Leading in medical research enhances a country’s global standing, attracting top talent, investments, and partnerships. Breakthroughs in medicine are also lucrative intellectual property, generating economic returns.
Moral Responsibility and Social Equity: Democracies often operate on the principle that all citizens deserve access to life-saving care. Investing in research ensures vulnerable populations are not left behind and reinforces societal values of compassion and justice.
Cost Savings Over Time: Prevention and early intervention save enormous healthcare costs in the long run. For example, developing a vaccine or targeted therapy is far less expensive than decades of chronic disease management.
Preparedness for the Unknown: Diseases evolve, and new threats emerge. Constant medical research ensures preparedness for future health crises, protecting both national and global populations.
These woke academics are frauds. They claim to be against racism and for inclusion and diversity, but they promote and enable violent prejudice against Jews, Asians, and whites. The Marxist indoctrination of students is academic fraud. As academic standards fall and admission standards fall, the elite universities concentrate more on anti-America, anti-Western and anti-Semitic indoctrination. Social engineering experiments take precedence over solid education.
Harvard has destroyed its brand. Claudine Gay, a plagiarist and a person who chose to contextualize violence against Jews on campus in order to make radicals happy, is still employed at Harvard after being forced to step down as President. She is making $900,000 a year. Her scholarship is dreadful. Similarly, Columbia and other “elite” institutions have trashed their reputations. These are unforced errors. The administrators are cowards or Communists. Appeasing their racist Marxist idiotically woke faculty takes precedence over student civil rights. Intimidating, harassing, and assaulting Jewish students and faculty is not protected speech. I hope the Trump
administration withdraws all federal funding to any institution of higher education that has enabled large scale discrimination and violence against Jewish students. I hope civil rights violators who committed criminal acts are prosecuted and jailed.
Even a good Jewish lawyer will have trouble arguing against Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which prohibits federal financial assistance to organizations who allow discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin, which include ancestry or ethnicity. The best way to combat Harvard’s refusal to protect their Jewish students from ongoing harassment and threats is to pull their IRS 501c3 status. Not only does Harvard financially benefit from this huge federal tax break, but tens of thousands of Americans who contribute to Harvard benefit by deducting their 501c3 contribution from their income tax.
The very smart people at Harvard don’t seem to remember that the Supreme Court has already told them that discriminating on the basis of race is unconstitutional and yet they have promised to continue to do so. I hope the Feds drop the hammer on them.
There is a systematic lack of respect for education within the black community. Tolerance of disruptive students by black school administrators and lack of effective discipline hinders learning in many black majority schools, stifling students’ potential achievement. The simple answer is to expel repeat offenders so that those who desire to learn can learn. Once you set a high standard the number of offenses should quickly decline.
There is a casual acceptance of criminal behavior within the black community that results in a failure to cooperate with police in solving crimes. Until this is reversed there will be zero economic development within their neighborhoods.
Finally, someone must find a way to make black fathers love and care for their children and especially their boy children. One terrible result is that young black men (25-34) who are just 2% of the nation’s population commit about half of our homicides. A rate an astounding 50 times higher than the average American. The lack of a father’s involvement in raising their sons is at the heart of this problem yet few within the community are willing to acknowledge it and seek answers to it. Where the hell are the middle and upper class blacks (and especially black politicians) who even publicly acknowledge this problem?
Yes, Those are all problems in that Community, but also in poor White communities. You mention the middle class Blacks should be helping, and I think helping more Blacks getting into college or Trade schools will help a great deal to stabilize them. But it appears there is a concerted effort by the anti DEI folks to keep them down.
As you mentioned the way you help blacks without unconstitutional discrimination against Asians and whites is to focus your efforts on poor people without regard to their race. You also don’t undermine the accomplishments of those black Americans who are successful without government intervention. DEI is simply a terrible way to go about helping people.
Based on what the anti DEI folks are enacting, it can be guaranteed that very few Blacks will go to college and the whole community will stay an underbelly of society. But I guess those anti DEI folks really don't care the damage they do as long as the Whites are on top.
What have the Dem years done but worsen that underbelly, encourage divisions and resentment, and discriminate against the millions of whites without money or power?
All people are equal or none are. Dems steal from affirmative action and DEI programs to enrich themselves.
It's not about money. That always gets stolen from the top. It's about literacy programs that work and education dept and schools that are accountable. First and foremost. Cultural reform. Expectations. Welfare that works to build people up not leave them stuck and helpless. Most teachers in the poorest schools have the worst administrations. An educational overhaul that uses AI tools. Elon needs to make that his next project.
Thank you for your insightful analysis—consistently relevant, principled, and on point. This approach exemplifies how to intellectually address any topic, particularly one centered on cultural balance and educational excellence. It applies equally to small institutions and giants like Harvard, the cornerstone of American academia. The ship is turning, but the tremors feel unsettlingly reminiscent of the Titanic. Let’s hope Harvard avoids a similar fate.
Dear Prof. Dershowitz: please comment on Harvard's handling of antisemitism in light of their failure to aid the prosecution of Ibrahim Bharmal and Elom Tettley-Tamaklo
If Harvard and the rest of these elitist progressive pro-jihadist institutions want true “freedom” then they should be forging the scissors that cut their ties and be “free” of taxpayer funding. A $ 50-billion, with a B , endowment in the hands of Harvard’s brilliant, successful and wealthy alum and its vaunted administration should be able to replace a few hundred million, with an M, dollars of federal funding.
Put another way, those who see Trump as attacking free speech, are mistaken. Although the government cannot interfere with the academy’s “freedom” the first amendment does not require the government to actively fund it. Receiving federal money is a contractual issue. School A seeks the money. The feds say we have it and will transfer it under certain conditions. One condition is Title VI. If school A violates those conditions, it’s in breach of contract . School A can choose the “freedom” of remaining in breach. But that relieves the government from paying its side of the contract.
Many objectors on the left don’t understand this. Probably because their schools and universities fail,as does Harvard, to teach civics. I had to deal with that deficiency debating a corespondent who, in my response to explaining why what campus rioters did was not protected speech any more than looting is protected speech, responded with “but the first amendment is absolute.” These are the same folks who don’t know the definition of “genocide” but that’s a discussion for another time
Diversity at Harvard and most campuses means “we all think alike here, so no one with critical thinking skills should apply”. As a result the quality of education is low, certainly not worth $60,000 to $90,000 per year. Government grants and student loans along with preferential tax treatment are subsidizing the excessive prices as well as socialist and pro terrorist indoctrination. So all government funding, loans, and tax breaks should be eliminated.
I don’t think Trump ever said Harvard or private universities can’t teach whatever they like, but that taxpayers should not be forced to endorse their views by funding them.
I agree.
Harvard spun this into an issue about academic freedom.
Most of the Trump demands were reasonable.
Certainly Harvard can ask to exclude a few demands in exchange for agreeing to others.
Exactly and perfect retort 👏
The government is explicitly using funding to try to coerce speech. That is an entirely different matter.
Not sure why it’s ok for Harvard to demand public funding while they curtail viewpoint diversity and thereby constrain free exchange of ideas. The gov isn’t trying to constrain speech, but saying that the university’s constraints on speech disqualify it from taxpayer support of a kind.
They don't demand public funding. They receive public funding because they do many things that are beneficial to society, things that government either cannot do or cannot do as well. Eliminating government funding because of "wokeness" or some such nonsense only hurts society far more than it helps it. Besides which, universities are supposed to be a place where the widest range of views may be exchanged freely. This is a blatant attempt to restrict free expression and to turn universities into extensions of the state.
But how wide can the exchange be if the university restricts diversity of opinion. And how does such construction support the public good? It seems to me that even if some of the research is useful, the overall damage done to the social good by prohibiting speech should disqualify them from public support. Funding isn’t a right, the gov that gives is the gov that can take away. Precedent was established in 1976 when gov barred funding for bob jones university for their admittedly asinine opinions. Nevertheless, this isn’t the first time the gov has said if you’re not serving the public good you should not receive public support.
Again, the good things universities do far outweigh any negative factors. Besides which, the negative factors are largely internal to the universities. Per the constitution, with very limited exceptions, the government has no role in regulating speech, and again this is a blatant attempt to suppress speech Trump doesn't like. Trump is not a king.
Could probably make the case the gov should not have any role in funding private institutions from a constitutional perspective. Regardless indoctrination isn’t free speech and especially for a college that produces the country’s “elite”, the damage done by their anti social indoctrination is widespread and enduring.
BS"D
So what is your "solution," Mr. Eichler?
I smell something bad
The universities allow suppression of speech that does not support progressive ideology. Dershowitz, for example, could not lecture about Israel on campus for fear of assault. Try wearing an Israeli flag t shirt on campus and let us know how that goes. Better yet, a MAGA ball cap
I think you meant to say 'the good things that SOME universities do MAY outweigh SOME of their negative factors. Have to be careful on this subject/topic and not drink the university kool-aid.
You have missed the whole point of Professor Dershowitz's columns: Harvard does not promote nor allow divers thought, and no this has nothing to do with 'the free exchange of ideas', its about Harvard's discrimination against observant Jews.
Again, I implore you to do some research before making your conclusions. Read both the letter of demands from the government, and the letter Harvard sent in reply.
Harvard has humbly admitted to the things they did wrong, and has taken steps over the past year to correct them, including the anti-semetism.
Trumps letter should be disturbing to anybody who values free speech, and understands government over-reach and the thought control listed in their letter.
Trump's policies have nothing to do with anti-semitism. That is only a pretext for oppression. And it is not the government's right to impose diverse views.
The expression of support for Jews is restricted because of the danger those who speak that support face. Obviously, they are not only restricting free expression they are making that particular expression dangerous. There’s no university where I would send a child that keeps other students out, or berates them because of their religion. And the USA by funding this school is co-signing this discriminatory and despicable behavior.
Again, I implore you to do some research before making your conclusions. Read both the letter of demands from the government, and the letter Harvard sent in reply.
Harvard has humbly admitted to the things they did wrong, and has taken steps over the past year to correct them, including the anti-semetism.
Trumps letter should be disturbing to anybody who values free speech, and understands government over-reach and the thought control listed in their letter.
Harvard would not have admitted or corrected anything without being forced to do so. Potential Loss of funding is the only motivator that works
Harvard is not keeping anyone out, or berating them, because of their religion. Anyone who commits act of violence, vandalism, appropriation of school property without permission, etc., is subject to disciplinary and legal action.
We could only wish that Harvard, Columbia or any other elite university had subjected any of the students to disciplinary or legal actions when they first crossed the lines. If they had controlled this from the start we wouldn’t be here.
It looked to most of us that Jewish students were being berated, bullied and mistreated as they listened to “From the River to the Sea” chants as well as those Yelling Free Palestine; this after Hamas had raped, beheaded and killed so many of their youth at an October 7th daylight function. Not keeping people out? It’s how they treat people unfairly.
That’s just an opinion unless you can quantify that the helping is greater than the harming.
It is exactly what Trump's letter to Harvard entails, and that is far from being just my view.
The part about “eliminating government funding because of ‘wokeness’ or some such nonsense only hurts society far more than it helps it.”
How can you definitively claim this? What value do you place on the presence of conservative opinions on campus; on having a faculty with diverse values and beliefs; on funding scholarship for studies that don’t necessarily support your point of view?
Look at efforts to silence economics professor Roland Fryer at Harvard after he published his study on racial bias and police shootings that didn’t echo the “woke” narrative. What about the loss of Asian students who couldn’t gain admission solely because of their race?
And I haven’t even mentioned the harms caused by antisemitism. These costs are immeasurable.
Of course others share your view, which is just another opinion, which was my criticism to begin with.
You are living in a dream world. The ‘widest range of views may be exchanged freely’? Seriously?
The widest range of views is certainly not what Trump wants.
What about the vax? Was it safe and effective? What happened to those who correctly spoke against it?
My tax dollars do not have to go to any university or college, nor should they. Let the market decide, and without wealthy parents willing to foot the bill places like Harvard and Columbia will move to the center in a heartbeat.
You are trying to corerce the government into supporting a private institution with public funds. That same research can be done by government employees and not advancing Harvard's political agenda.
Not a chance that government employees can do all the research that is done today at every good university, and at many teaching hospitals / medical schools.
We don't have those kind of government employees, and the ones that we did have have been fired, and moved on to a European school where they are valued.
Every economically developed nation calls upon its university grad students, and extensive infrastructure of specific labs, to do this important research.
The government of every economically developed nation sponsors this university and other independent research, with the top five spending more of their GDP than America does.I've asked chatgpt to help me to communicate all the important reasons concisely. I hope you can be unbiased enough to comprehend these valuable reasons why we MUST continue funding independent research.
Economically developed nations invest in life-saving medical research for several key reasons:
Public Health and Productivity: A healthier population means a more productive workforce. Preventing or curing disease reduces the long-term costs of healthcare, increases life expectancy, and boosts economic output.
National Security and Stability: Disease outbreaks can destabilize entire economies and strain national security systems. Investing in research helps prevent pandemics and keeps healthcare systems resilient.
Global Influence and Innovation Leadership: Leading in medical research enhances a country’s global standing, attracting top talent, investments, and partnerships. Breakthroughs in medicine are also lucrative intellectual property, generating economic returns.
Moral Responsibility and Social Equity: Democracies often operate on the principle that all citizens deserve access to life-saving care. Investing in research ensures vulnerable populations are not left behind and reinforces societal values of compassion and justice.
Cost Savings Over Time: Prevention and early intervention save enormous healthcare costs in the long run. For example, developing a vaccine or targeted therapy is far less expensive than decades of chronic disease management.
Preparedness for the Unknown: Diseases evolve, and new threats emerge. Constant medical research ensures preparedness for future health crises, protecting both national and global populations.
It's quite easy to have them: hire those who Harvard fired. Since the research people probably aren't the anti-Semitics, they shouldn't be a problem, and if they are as smart as claimed, they will have observed that being a hater will hurt you economically at least.
Our tax dollars fund many things that are very beneficial to society. You want to deny that to society because it might also happen to fund some expression you do not like.
You aren’t paying attention to what we are saying.
Correct. He’s not listening at all.
You aren't understanding the situation at all. I suggest you read both the letters the government demands to Harvard, as well as Harvards response.
Harvard took responsibility for their past mistakes, and provided an extensive summary of everything they have done in the past year to correct these mistakes.
What the government was demanding was ridiculous. It was clearly more about controlling the ideas, and every aspect of hiring, accepting students, and controlling what subjects they could and could not teach.
Without reading these two letters you can only be ignorant of what is truly at stake here
Sure I am. It looks like typical MAGA-speak. Tell me you are not MAGA, and maybe we have something to discuss. Otherwise, piss off.
Your tolerance and understanding of other viewpoints is inspiring.
If you support Ham ... Harvard so much, donate YOUR money to it! That's the freedom of choice we have. I chose to have my tax dollars going to fixing the roads.
Nobody gets to choose where their tax dollars go.
The government of every economically developed nation sponsors university and other independent research, with the top five spending more of their GDP than America does.I've asked chatgpt to help me to communicate all the important reasons concisely.
Economically developed nations invest in life-saving medical research for several key reasons:
Public Health and Productivity: A healthier population means a more productive workforce. Preventing or curing disease reduces the long-term costs of healthcare, increases life expectancy, and boosts economic output.
National Security and Stability: Disease outbreaks can destabilize entire economies and strain national security systems. Investing in research helps prevent pandemics and keeps healthcare systems resilient.
Global Influence and Innovation Leadership: Leading in medical research enhances a country’s global standing, attracting top talent, investments, and partnerships. Breakthroughs in medicine are also lucrative intellectual property, generating economic returns.
Moral Responsibility and Social Equity: Democracies often operate on the principle that all citizens deserve access to life-saving care. Investing in research ensures vulnerable populations are not left behind and reinforces societal values of compassion and justice.
Cost Savings Over Time: Prevention and early intervention save enormous healthcare costs in the long run. For example, developing a vaccine or targeted therapy is far less expensive than decades of chronic disease management.
Preparedness for the Unknown: Diseases evolve, and new threats emerge. Constant medical research ensures preparedness for future health crises, protecting both national and global populations.
You used AI to write your answer. Hmmm ... I'm not engaging with a computer
We elect political representatives to make funding decisions. Those representatives do not have the authority to use funding decisions to deny us our constitutional rights. Trump is not defending anyone's rights. He is using funding to coerce private institutions in order to deny them the right to freedom of expression. Furthermore, it is Congress that makes funding decisions, not the president.
Only problem is, Harvard is a private company, not public. Your argument is in valid.
The government of every economically developed nation sponsors university and other independent research, with the top five spending more of their GDP than America does.I've asked chatgpt to help me to communicate all the important reasons concisely.
Economically developed nations invest in life-saving medical research for several key reasons:
Public Health and Productivity: A healthier population means a more productive workforce. Preventing or curing disease reduces the long-term costs of healthcare, increases life expectancy, and boosts economic output.
National Security and Stability: Disease outbreaks can destabilize entire economies and strain national security systems. Investing in research helps prevent pandemics and keeps healthcare systems resilient.
Global Influence and Innovation Leadership: Leading in medical research enhances a country’s global standing, attracting top talent, investments, and partnerships. Breakthroughs in medicine are also lucrative intellectual property, generating economic returns.
Moral Responsibility and Social Equity: Democracies often operate on the principle that all citizens deserve access to life-saving care. Investing in research ensures vulnerable populations are not left behind and reinforces societal values of compassion and justice.
Cost Savings Over Time: Prevention and early intervention save enormous healthcare costs in the long run. For example, developing a vaccine or targeted therapy is far less expensive than decades of chronic disease management.
Preparedness for the Unknown: Diseases evolve, and new threats emerge. Constant medical research ensures preparedness for future health crises, protecting both national and global populations.
And the students who are paid for from outside the US.. they want those
cash tuitions
You are trying to corerce the government into funding a private company's political agenda with public funds. The research you are worried about can be done by government employees without advancing Harvard's agenda
Not a chance that government employees can do all the research that is done today at every good university, and at many teaching hospitals / medical schools.
We don't have those kind of government employees, and the ones that we did have have been fired, and moved on to a European school where they are valued.
Every economically developed nation calls upon its university grad students, and extensive infrastructure of specific labs, to do this important research.
The government of every economically developed nation sponsors this university and other independent research, with the top five spending more of their GDP than America does.I've asked chatgpt to help me to communicate all the important reasons concisely. I hope you can be unbiased enough to comprehend these valuable reasons why we MUST continue funding independent research.
Economically developed nations invest in life-saving medical research for several key reasons:
Public Health and Productivity: A healthier population means a more productive workforce. Preventing or curing disease reduces the long-term costs of healthcare, increases life expectancy, and boosts economic output.
National Security and Stability: Disease outbreaks can destabilize entire economies and strain national security systems. Investing in research helps prevent pandemics and keeps healthcare systems resilient.
Global Influence and Innovation Leadership: Leading in medical research enhances a country’s global standing, attracting top talent, investments, and partnerships. Breakthroughs in medicine are also lucrative intellectual property, generating economic returns.
Moral Responsibility and Social Equity: Democracies often operate on the principle that all citizens deserve access to life-saving care. Investing in research ensures vulnerable populations are not left behind and reinforces societal values of compassion and justice.
Cost Savings Over Time: Prevention and early intervention save enormous healthcare costs in the long run. For example, developing a vaccine or targeted therapy is far less expensive than decades of chronic disease management.
Preparedness for the Unknown: Diseases evolve, and new threats emerge. Constant medical research ensures preparedness for future health crises, protecting both national and global populations.
Not to coerce speech. In fact, to ensure and protect neutrality. No university should be a breeding farm and militant enforcer of antisemitic far left ideology.
You are badly deluded. That is only a pretext for oppression. Trump's policies are harmful to the interests of jews and the rest of society.
You engage in an awful lot of evidence-free claims.
Actually, that would be Trump and his supporters, whose intentions are all too clear.
Oh obviously. I was wondering when you were going to pull the Jewish card as if you were so expertly lining that up as a tactic to 'surprise' us all with. Lol.
To coerce speech…or to ENSURE SPEECH?
Evidence of suppression abound.
But, the government is NOT trying to coerce speech, but they are trying to get Harvard to treat everyone fairly and equally. DEI does NOT treat all people fairly and allowing the intimidating anti-Israeli protestors to harass those that don’t agree with them amounts to supporting a form of terrorism. These “woke” institutions should have the government all of their tax payer support pulled.
You are blind. All of Trump’s words and actions in this matter speak of an effort to curtail speech, exact retribution, and exert unconstitutional control over private parties.
I’m not the one who’s blind here. DEI is the most racist ideology around. Liberals love it because they can be racist and get pats on the back for “looking out for minorities.” If they really wanted to look out for minorities, they’d help them to become competent enough to win positions on their own merits rather than continually offering them crutches. Haven’t seen too many people actually win a foot race on crutches and no one really gets ahead in life (personally or career-wise) unless they learn how to stand on their own two feet. As far as the protestors are concerned, most of these ivy-league universities have been giving these wannabe terrorists too much free rein.
Right. DEI, which seeks to protect equality for all, is more racist than racism against blacks, hispanics, jews, orientals. Some perspective you’ve got there.
Well, you’re definitely showing your colors. Why can’t any of you guys get it through your heads that when you select one individual over another based on ethnic background or skin color that’s the definition of racism. You cannot actually help someone by giving them favorable status without merit. While the United States is not a perfect country, it offers everyone the opportunity to succeed. Sure, some have more advantages than others to start with, but everyone has the opportunity to succeed if they apply themselves. However, if you give those that you determine are disadvantaged because of skin color or ethnic background an advantage without merit, you set them up for failure and keep them looking for another crutch to keep them upright. What happens when someone who doesn’t earn their position makes an honest mistake (due to their lack of ability), how do you correct that issue? How do you explain that to those who are negatively affected by that poor decision. Do you really want your surgeon working on you based on his skin color or his experience? I mean let’s just see how far you’d personally be willing to take this. As for me, my last surgeon happened to be black and he did an excellent job. But, I selected him because he was the one that all of the medical staff said was the best. I’m really color-blind when it comes to most things, but I want to see who’s the best at it.
Besides freedom of speech, there is also freedom of association. One can tell anything they want, but another is free to support or not support them financially or otherwise.
Keeping Jewish kids intimidated and off parts of the campus is cruel and completely unacceptable and should never be monetarily supported by our govt.
The school administrations and local law enforcement can deal with that if and when it happens. This is not enforcing black childrens’ right to go to public schools.
I think they are using funding or actually stopping funding because they don’t want anyone to think the government is for this behavior.
You think wrong. Trump is only using anti-semitism as a pretext for oppression. He will throw jews under the bus whenever it suits him.
Many of his closest family members are Jewish. People grow up and change by life experience. I’ve seen this in him but didn’t matter what I think. It only matters that he is standing with Israel, the American worker, standup people in the cabinet and doing what he feels is best for America. There’s a clear and thorough explanation by Victor Davis Hansen that clearly states what President Trump is doing, and it is circulating on the internet. I hope you see it.
Fuck Victor Davis Hanson. And Dershowitz appears to only care about attracting new business, from what I see. He is trolling for clients, especially ones from the Trump camp, since they are going to need legal representation with all the criming they have been doing.
Liar.
Yes I agree. Let Harvard do whatever it please. Cut funding anyway because with the tax free profit on 50 billion dollars Harvard does not need the money. Cutting the money is not punishment for the views of the faculty, it is a practical solution for wasting Taxpayer money on very wealthy institutions. In fact Most endowed Universities are plenty rich that the need no federal funds. By the way, what are these so called imported earth grants funding. Is it science or social?
Unfortunately any loss of funds from the govt will be covered by Qatar money
Exactly.
They are not funding their teaching, but their research, and mainly health and basic science research. That is not political. It helps all people.
I was told by an exec within the university system today that cancer research is going on in a vast way in so many other places that we can lose Harvard for a minute. I don’t know if that’s true.
Most all the funding being held hostage is research funding and has basically nothing to do with the DEI viewpoint concerns. The Trump Administration is not using a carrot and stick approach but a carrot and cannon. It seems that if Dershowitz was a major speaker on campus up until the fall of 2023, that it appears his problems occurred after that. Not exactly long time entrenched.
Dershowitz was canceled for being g a Jew. Shame on you and your petty deflections.
Maybe he had more than he could swallow! Like many dems who moved to the right: musk, trump, Kennedy, tulsi, you guys keep drifting left! More moving as you lose 6-8 reps in 4 states in the house! And your tax base.. a few more nudges and silicon valley will be in tx and tn
I believe Dershowitz does not really have the public interest at heart and is merely trolling for more business.
Your beliefs, Eichler, are as valuable as the evidence you fail to produce. A useless mouth, you are nothing but a checklist of bloated cliches.
The evidence is clear for all to see, if the want to see, which MAGA clearly don't.
MAGA is your boogie man. Your lazy retort about evidence is pathetic.
MAGA are fascists and thus a very valid and real “boogie man.”
Don’t think he is lacking in the business department…
Trump was a failure at business. His only success was as a tv personality and a conman. He has clearly conned you.
Have you seen all of his hotels, golf courses, and apartment buildings? Yes sometimes they went south. But he didn’t give up. I like that because a lot of men lose their business and they are completely crushed and it’s understandable. But a strong entrepreneur keeps at it and I admire that myself. I also really admire Victor David Hansen and Jorden Peterson. I know Alan loved to sell books. But a guys gotta make a living. Lol
You are ignorant, like all MAGA. Trump licenses his name, which he started after becoming famous through The Apprentice. He has largely been a failure at real estate development and ownership. His father was a success at that and Trump squandered all the money he inherited, which you would know if you bothered to learn Trump's history, instead of falling for his con.
As someone who has ties to Harvard and know Dershowitz I can say that while there is a lot of talk and rhetoric there is unfortunately not much feel of change. Going through all the available information the percent of Jewish students at Harvard is 10% give or take not 35. By meritocracy it would be 35%. And Alan is a traditional democrat not a Republican.
And if you replace Jews with any other minority except Asiansthere would be a huge difference in how Harvard would handle things.
I understand Dershowitz's nominal political affiliation, but my strong impression is that his public statements on matters impinging on public policy are not out a genuine concern with the public interest and are merely shilling for more business.
Trump's letter to Harvard is right out of the fascist playbook. It is not a sincere effort to deal with anti-semitism, and is merely a ruse in pursuit of authoritarian goals, from which jews would suffer as much as anyone else. However distasteful, people have a right to express criticism of Israel and support for Palestinians. Violence and vandalism can be dealt with at the institutional and local police levels. This is not like civil rights for blacks in the 1950s and 1960s, where there was entrenched systemic discrimination that the states would not deal with.
That's a nice antisemitic ttope you offer there.
Criticizing Dershowitz makes me anti-semitic?
'Trolling for business"? Everyone else has free speech but Dershowitz must be looking to make money. Nice
Dershowitz has freedom of speech, like anyone else. And I am free to criticize his speech. Yes, I think Dershowitz is feigning concern for the public welfare in order to attract clients.
Dr. Thomas Sowell when asked about Diversity in universities would advise one to inquire, "How many conservatives are in the Sociology Department?"
I love thomas but he knows there is no money there… 🤣🤣😂
I'm wondering what a Conservative Sociologist would look like? Would they mostly be blaming the individual for their problems? Any examples of how their thinking might differ?
Mostly individuals are to blame for their problems. It is only when someone says to himself ‘I did this to myself’ he can begin to heal. If someone else did it to you, you have no agency, and you are stuck.
My Dad informed me at an early age that I see the fellow that causes my problems each day when I look in the mirror.
This would be a good start:, the moral case for Capitalism by Dr. Walter Williams in 5 minutes: https://youtube.com/watch?v=fJr2RO7g7jI
They would properly BALANCE the factors that impact people, and NOT propagate the idiocy that ALL problems are external, and require an inefficient, ineffective, and overly expensive Government “solution.”
For example… in 1840… we could all agree most problems the a black person had were external… now empowered by laws, regulations and much changed society… it’s time to recognize blacks are empowered more than ever.
Ergo…Supreme Court & California have BOTH banned affirmative action.
Good point. State sponsored discrimination through Jim Crow. The state, the Supreme Court and Executive acted to end the ignorance. In NYC, during the immigration influx of the Irish, signs in windows of businesses, "INNA," Irish need not apply. Also signs in the parks to stay off the lawns.
Likely answer… ZERO.
Do you actually think many conservatives would even choose that to major in? I am pretty sure most of them would find it a waste of an education. And a field that is superfluous. And, BTW, why is it the universities fault if conservatives do not choose that study and career path?
Yes, given the extreme bias in curriculum, you are probably correct.
Best analysis yet. Thanks for being a voice of sanity from the inside. Hope the art of the deal makes Harvard more ideologically diverse, but the rot is so deep. How does Claudine Gay still make a million per year? How many other DEI commissars are on the payroll openly violating federal law? What actions will be taken instead of just paying lip service to reopen the federal funding spigots?
Its a racket, once one gets in, they multiply like roaches.. then it out of control They just keep hiring each other and promoting each other till they are over their heads!
Dear Professor Dershowitz,
Well said! Harvard is a disgrace and needs to pay a price for its unveiled hate and bigotry. Given his constituency, Harvard's President is in a pickle. But, choosing between hate and true inclusivity where everyone is treated with dignity and respect is a matter of principle, not politics. We'll soon know if he has the courage to reject hatred, backlash be damned.
And, thank you for always providing a voice of wisdom, courage, and clarity.
I remember the many years Dershowitz was on the other side.. i envied his positioning as well thought out even if it was against my side.. i always wished he was on my side.. now he is!!!
Thank you
Those radical left professors who teach oppressor and oppressor matrix narrative ( and in large part the western USA as the enemy evil doer) and Israel bashing the never ending enemy is entrenched: Also the Muslim brotherhood and Qatar funding which ( no doubt ) helps facilities this anti USA and anti Israel narrative in USA yet no one is objectively tackling this enough as it needs to be combated too as well as the rise in vile anti Jewish anti semitism / anti Zionism ( vile worse form of anti semitism ) which is all part of it - I will never forget the ripping down of Oct 7 victims and the cheering on Oct 7 on USA streets and campuses ever and the targeting of Jewish American Israeli students and Jewish American owned businesses .. so utterly unacceptable and vile
In the end the Islamic students and faculty practicing Islam will eat the DEI woke students/faculty. They are useful idiots. A “faith” in support of slavery, women beatings, sight erasure of women, child rape and murder of anyone not of Islam is the anthesis of academic collegiate discourse.
Bravo Mr. Dershowitz for telling it like it is, from the inside. Perhaps it’s time to rethink taxpayer dollars going to colleges that have a wealth of private funds at their disposal (Harvard has a $50 billion dollar endowment!). These colleges would be just fine on their own and should take responsibility for their own actions without a government handout. Harvard’s a self sustaining money machine and taxpayers are fed up paying for their nonsense.
Most all the funding being disputed is for research and has nothing to do with DEI or any other ideology you care to hate.
It has everything to do with DEI.
How does research funding relate to DEI? It's engineering, computer, medical, etc and benefits everyone.
DEI is why they are losing funding. As is antisemitism.
So your child watches a TV show you don't like and your punishment is to prevent him from volunteering every week reading to elementary children. Totally unrelated and harming the children at the same time.
Yeah. Because a child watching a TV show is EXACTLY the same as physical intimidation and harrassment of a minority. Great analogy.
It's irrelevant what the funding is for. That's just bookkeeping. I don't want any of my tax dollars going to Harvard. Why should my money be used to subsidize some kids' college degrees - or, excuse me, "research"?
The government of every economically developed nation sponsors university and other independent research, with the top five spending more of their GDP than America does.I've asked chatgpt to help me to communicate all the important reasons concisely.
Economically developed nations invest in life-saving medical research for several key reasons:
Public Health and Productivity: A healthier population means a more productive workforce. Preventing or curing disease reduces the long-term costs of healthcare, increases life expectancy, and boosts economic output.
National Security and Stability: Disease outbreaks can destabilize entire economies and strain national security systems. Investing in research helps prevent pandemics and keeps healthcare systems resilient.
Global Influence and Innovation Leadership: Leading in medical research enhances a country’s global standing, attracting top talent, investments, and partnerships. Breakthroughs in medicine are also lucrative intellectual property, generating economic returns.
Moral Responsibility and Social Equity: Democracies often operate on the principle that all citizens deserve access to life-saving care. Investing in research ensures vulnerable populations are not left behind and reinforces societal values of compassion and justice.
Cost Savings Over Time: Prevention and early intervention save enormous healthcare costs in the long run. For example, developing a vaccine or targeted therapy is far less expensive than decades of chronic disease management.
Preparedness for the Unknown: Diseases evolve, and new threats emerge. Constant medical research ensures preparedness for future health crises, protecting both national and global populations.
Both public & private university administrations charge abusive overhead on government grants, up to ~50% of the grant. Valid overhead rates are about half that. Thus the extra funds subsidize other university costs/objectives and the bureaucracy.
That is a valid point, but the higher overhead helps balance the too low overhead offered by grants/funding from private industry.
Stop being so ignorant.
The government of every economically developed nation sponsors university and other independent research, with the top five spending more of their GDP than America does.I've asked chatgpt to help me to communicate all the important reasons concisely.
Economically developed nations invest in life-saving medical research for several key reasons:
Public Health and Productivity: A healthier population means a more productive workforce. Preventing or curing disease reduces the long-term costs of healthcare, increases life expectancy, and boosts economic output.
National Security and Stability: Disease outbreaks can destabilize entire economies and strain national security systems. Investing in research helps prevent pandemics and keeps healthcare systems resilient.
Global Influence and Innovation Leadership: Leading in medical research enhances a country’s global standing, attracting top talent, investments, and partnerships. Breakthroughs in medicine are also lucrative intellectual property, generating economic returns.
Moral Responsibility and Social Equity: Democracies often operate on the principle that all citizens deserve access to life-saving care. Investing in research ensures vulnerable populations are not left behind and reinforces societal values of compassion and justice.
Cost Savings Over Time: Prevention and early intervention save enormous healthcare costs in the long run. For example, developing a vaccine or targeted therapy is far less expensive than decades of chronic disease management.
Preparedness for the Unknown: Diseases evolve, and new threats emerge. Constant medical research ensures preparedness for future health crises, protecting both national and global populations.
Truly a voice of reason and of principle.
These woke academics are frauds. They claim to be against racism and for inclusion and diversity, but they promote and enable violent prejudice against Jews, Asians, and whites. The Marxist indoctrination of students is academic fraud. As academic standards fall and admission standards fall, the elite universities concentrate more on anti-America, anti-Western and anti-Semitic indoctrination. Social engineering experiments take precedence over solid education.
Harvard has destroyed its brand. Claudine Gay, a plagiarist and a person who chose to contextualize violence against Jews on campus in order to make radicals happy, is still employed at Harvard after being forced to step down as President. She is making $900,000 a year. Her scholarship is dreadful. Similarly, Columbia and other “elite” institutions have trashed their reputations. These are unforced errors. The administrators are cowards or Communists. Appeasing their racist Marxist idiotically woke faculty takes precedence over student civil rights. Intimidating, harassing, and assaulting Jewish students and faculty is not protected speech. I hope the Trump
administration withdraws all federal funding to any institution of higher education that has enabled large scale discrimination and violence against Jewish students. I hope civil rights violators who committed criminal acts are prosecuted and jailed.
Harvard is a cesspool.
Even a good Jewish lawyer will have trouble arguing against Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which prohibits federal financial assistance to organizations who allow discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin, which include ancestry or ethnicity. The best way to combat Harvard’s refusal to protect their Jewish students from ongoing harassment and threats is to pull their IRS 501c3 status. Not only does Harvard financially benefit from this huge federal tax break, but tens of thousands of Americans who contribute to Harvard benefit by deducting their 501c3 contribution from their income tax.
The very smart people at Harvard don’t seem to remember that the Supreme Court has already told them that discriminating on the basis of race is unconstitutional and yet they have promised to continue to do so. I hope the Feds drop the hammer on them.
Do you have any suggestions for how to help minorities get ahead? It seems that many are determined to not give them even a hint of a helping hand.
skbunny:
. Here are a few suggestions.
There is a systematic lack of respect for education within the black community. Tolerance of disruptive students by black school administrators and lack of effective discipline hinders learning in many black majority schools, stifling students’ potential achievement. The simple answer is to expel repeat offenders so that those who desire to learn can learn. Once you set a high standard the number of offenses should quickly decline.
There is a casual acceptance of criminal behavior within the black community that results in a failure to cooperate with police in solving crimes. Until this is reversed there will be zero economic development within their neighborhoods.
Finally, someone must find a way to make black fathers love and care for their children and especially their boy children. One terrible result is that young black men (25-34) who are just 2% of the nation’s population commit about half of our homicides. A rate an astounding 50 times higher than the average American. The lack of a father’s involvement in raising their sons is at the heart of this problem yet few within the community are willing to acknowledge it and seek answers to it. Where the hell are the middle and upper class blacks (and especially black politicians) who even publicly acknowledge this problem?
What are they waiting for?
Yes, Those are all problems in that Community, but also in poor White communities. You mention the middle class Blacks should be helping, and I think helping more Blacks getting into college or Trade schools will help a great deal to stabilize them. But it appears there is a concerted effort by the anti DEI folks to keep them down.
As you mentioned the way you help blacks without unconstitutional discrimination against Asians and whites is to focus your efforts on poor people without regard to their race. You also don’t undermine the accomplishments of those black Americans who are successful without government intervention. DEI is simply a terrible way to go about helping people.
Based on what the anti DEI folks are enacting, it can be guaranteed that very few Blacks will go to college and the whole community will stay an underbelly of society. But I guess those anti DEI folks really don't care the damage they do as long as the Whites are on top.
What have the Dem years done but worsen that underbelly, encourage divisions and resentment, and discriminate against the millions of whites without money or power?
All people are equal or none are. Dems steal from affirmative action and DEI programs to enrich themselves.
It's not about money. That always gets stolen from the top. It's about literacy programs that work and education dept and schools that are accountable. First and foremost. Cultural reform. Expectations. Welfare that works to build people up not leave them stuck and helpless. Most teachers in the poorest schools have the worst administrations. An educational overhaul that uses AI tools. Elon needs to make that his next project.
Thank you for your insightful analysis—consistently relevant, principled, and on point. This approach exemplifies how to intellectually address any topic, particularly one centered on cultural balance and educational excellence. It applies equally to small institutions and giants like Harvard, the cornerstone of American academia. The ship is turning, but the tremors feel unsettlingly reminiscent of the Titanic. Let’s hope Harvard avoids a similar fate.
Dear Prof. Dershowitz: please comment on Harvard's handling of antisemitism in light of their failure to aid the prosecution of Ibrahim Bharmal and Elom Tettley-Tamaklo
Great article! TY
Good article. I agree with your views. Thank you.
If Harvard and the rest of these elitist progressive pro-jihadist institutions want true “freedom” then they should be forging the scissors that cut their ties and be “free” of taxpayer funding. A $ 50-billion, with a B , endowment in the hands of Harvard’s brilliant, successful and wealthy alum and its vaunted administration should be able to replace a few hundred million, with an M, dollars of federal funding.
Put another way, those who see Trump as attacking free speech, are mistaken. Although the government cannot interfere with the academy’s “freedom” the first amendment does not require the government to actively fund it. Receiving federal money is a contractual issue. School A seeks the money. The feds say we have it and will transfer it under certain conditions. One condition is Title VI. If school A violates those conditions, it’s in breach of contract . School A can choose the “freedom” of remaining in breach. But that relieves the government from paying its side of the contract.
Many objectors on the left don’t understand this. Probably because their schools and universities fail,as does Harvard, to teach civics. I had to deal with that deficiency debating a corespondent who, in my response to explaining why what campus rioters did was not protected speech any more than looting is protected speech, responded with “but the first amendment is absolute.” These are the same folks who don’t know the definition of “genocide” but that’s a discussion for another time
Diversity at Harvard and most campuses means “we all think alike here, so no one with critical thinking skills should apply”. As a result the quality of education is low, certainly not worth $60,000 to $90,000 per year. Government grants and student loans along with preferential tax treatment are subsidizing the excessive prices as well as socialist and pro terrorist indoctrination. So all government funding, loans, and tax breaks should be eliminated.
Yes, and Harvard recently began remedial math for new students. That’s how far their standards have plummeted.