An insane list of demands like that should fall under the “We don’t negotiate with terrorists” clause right?
Well, an insane list of demands aimed at an international school that derives a huge amount of its income from foreign students and a reputation as a global leader in law and commerce. Harvard’s admins aren’t “Going Woke”. They’re going into survival mode.
They’re also likely looking at the bloodbath at Columbia as the admin over there bend itself into a pretzel to comply with these demands, gets their funding gutted anyway, and turns the student body into either El Salvadorian inmates or white nationalist freaks. Clearly there’s no upside to compliance. Trump never goes away, he just comes back with a longer and more vile list of demands.
Harvard has its own issues of course, but don’t let that distract you from the fact that this thing it’s done is the right thing.
Well they have balls not like other universities
One would hope that the wealthiest university in the country would have the minerals to tell the Trump regime to piss off.
The letter that they sent Harvard was mental. Demanding wholesale replacement of the staff and students, removing the human rights curriculum, removing any cultural studies, a full mask ban bc only ICE get to wear masks now apparently, and a tattletale hotline. That letter is so up its own ass. Glad they published it.
FINALLY. One university with the balls to stand up to Trump.
Georgetown has been out ahead of this for weeks. But they get no press because they’re (a) not Harvard and (b) not humiliating themselves in compliance rituals like Columbia, so they aren’t as exciting to cover.
You’ve also got schools down in Texas - A&M and UT particularly - that have already been fully integrated into Governor Abbott’s brand of Lone Star Fascism that there’s little to report. Just a bunch of admins saying, in thick German accents, that everything is normal and there’s nothing to see.
Columbia looking twice as pathetic now. I hope this catches on.
Dartmouth too. One of trump’s rnc ghouls is working with her directly.
I don’t think all the people I was telling understand how much money Harvard has.
It’s … Way way more than it appears on paper.
They have, over the last 40 years or so, systematically bought commercial real estate in Boston, left it vacant to devalue the housing property in the neighborhood, then bought houses in the neighborhoods, bulldozed, expanded. They own way more of Allston than people realize. Let’s not even talk about their endowment, which can pay for all students tuition on interest alone.
Here’s a fun one.
42.3580140, -71.1385711
Try and figure out what that building is, who owns it, what it’s for. It’s like 5 acres. In the middle of a major capital city.
Yeah. Good luck. (P.S. it’s Harvard)
Now note proximity to Harvard Stadium.
Harvard runs shit. In broad daylight secrecy. Within a democratic stronghold.
Scott Galloway on YouTube often mentions this on his podcasts. That Harvard and a few others have turned from being a university with money to a private equity fund with some students.
Any rec?
Someone should support them! Poor guys, can’t catch a break!
Maybe Lemmy should run defence on them
So you’re telling me Harvard may be home base for a modern day revolution when it comes. Noted!
They’ll protect themselves first. If that means working with the regime then that’s what they’ll do.
Let me guess and you guys support these billionaires who pocket student money, correct? Just because it looks like it’s fighting another of your imaginary enemies?
Trump is imaginary?
What’s the point of sitting on a $53B endowment if you’re not going to use it? Losing $9B in contracts to fight fascism is worth every penny.
Donald Trump proposed taxing large private university endowments as part of his 2024 election campaign.
This tax aims to fund the creation of the “American Academy,” a new institution designed to provide free, high-quality educational content. The tax would target excessively large endowments, collecting billions of dollars to support this initiative
This proposal is part of a broader effort to reshape higher education and address political controversies within universities. The tax on endowment investment income could significantly impact universities with large endowments.
This just sounds like they’re going to contract PragerU to rebrand their videos and then someone will pocket billions of dollars.
Trump University.
Did that already happen or am I now adding grifts to the long list that do exist?
Who in their right mind is against this?
Anyone who can see that with any republican sentiment in the government, that ‘high quality educational content’ is going to be pants on head idiotic shilling for conservative viewpoints?
Read the letter sent to Harvard. It will give you the idea what the new higher ed would look like.
Anybody actually in their right mind is against this
How was his last University? How well did that do? Donald sure does love the uneducated.
Likely because their endowment is large enough to not need federal funds.
I don’t think Columbia’s hard up for cash either, but they folded like a cardboard lawn chair
They have “Russian asset go fuck yourself” money.
The Government will retaliate. I wonder if all intentional students will now be under a watchful eye
They already have been.
I do not believe someone ever said once “hey wait a minute did I woke up in Harvard? That wasn’t the plan at all?!”
Didn’t require balls, mate. Don’t glorify them doing the bare minimum.
They have the largest academic endowment in the world. All of their students could go there for free for basically forever but they still collect tuition. Somehow they’re brave because of this though.
$9B is still a lot of money, plus you know more spite is coming - turnipas ego doesn’t like to be told no
Collectivists supporting billionaires and running defense for them online in 3…2…1
The stunlock intensifies
It’s a good start.
I don’t agree with Harvard (DEI & Pro-Palestinian protests), but I support them defying this order. They’re a private institution, the government is overstepping here.
How about a not hiring example: A class in Urban Ecology and Planning will have a component on equity and inclusion. Historically, marginalized people were subjected to more pollution, more waste, and even evicted to create services and goods for other people. The notion that everyone is a citizen and deserves thoughtful design, access to public services, and equal burden of pollution is a relatively recent idea.
These orders make those discussions go away. Those considerations in planning and design are “divisive” and support “anti American values”. Although that is not the real reason, the real reason is to go back to the way it was before.
Wheelchair access is DEI. Services for the deaf is DEI. Understanding the impact of diesel corridor pollution is DEI. They do not want you to waste resources and time on trying to do better, because it is not better for them.
I don’t agree with Harvard (DEI & Pro-Palestinian protests), but I support them defying this order.
Wait, so you… both think they should not have DEI programs and should expel pro-palestinian protestors, but you also think they should defy the government order telling them to do what you think they should do?
I’m not sure what the guy you’re responding to’s actual position is.
But from an objective standpoint, he could disagree with Harvard’s DEI policies but still support Harvard’s defiance of Trump because the DEI policies should be Harvard’s choice to make, not Trump’s.
Basically a variant of the saying “I disagree with what you say but defend your right to say it.”
Yes, because the order is an abuse of power. I don’t agree with their policies, but private institutions shouldn’t be bullied by the government. I support their autonomy.
Fair enough. We disagree on the policy, but definitely agree on it being an abuse of power.
Person wants to ride all the highs, no consequences.
What dei policies do you object to?
The fact that DEI sounds good in theory but in practice it’s just systematic discrimination. Similar to Affirmative Action but that’s already been settled in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard.
I’ve managed and hired in workplaces that have employed DEI for years. It’s not a hiring quota, like Affirmative Action. It’s a training course and cultural adoption to increase awareness around unconscious bias and microagressions. It’s a way to help identify discrimination, and bring it out into conversation. It also focuses on the benefits of diverse perspectives when approaching a problem.
Removed by mod
That’s MAGA’s definition of DEI because Affirmative Action was repealed, so they needed a new way to rally the racists and bigots.
The only hiring guideline is equal representation in interviewing. There are no quotas in DEI as there were under Affirmative Action. No one gets hired to fulfill a requirement.
Your own link (https://online.hbs.edu/blog/post/what-is-dei) that you’ve now deleted states the opposite. I’m sorry, but I believe employment should be merit based only.
DEI MAKES a position merit-based
You have the wrong end of the stick when it comes to DEI, like so many others you have just gobbled up the view points of the right propaganda machine. But let me ask one thing, where is the evidence os all this supposed discrimination that took place because of DEI?
I’m sorry, but I believe employment should be merit based only.
Maybe the problem lies with your interpretation? Inclusion means to include a thing. You can still hire based on merit while being inclusive. The whole point of DEI is to make sure a company isn’t missing out a massive talent pool because they’re focusing on a singular demographic.
I deleted it because it’s written poorly. It implies requirements. There are none. Affirmative Action had metricized hiring quotas that must be met. DEI does not.
This is a better explanation from Forbes on how quotas are not just bad for the majority, but also cause resentment within minority groups.
Although DEI quotas can help level the playing field for historically marginalized groups, and help to send a message that a company is committed to diversity and inclusion, they may also be seen as discriminatory. When a company sets aside a certain number of positions for members of a particular group, it can send the message that these groups are not qualified to compete on their own merits. Quotas can lead to resentment among employees who feel that they were not hired based on their qualifications, and they can be difficult to implement and enforce. It can be challenging to determine who is eligible for a quota position and how to measure the effectiveness of a quota program.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/juliekratz/2024/08/25/dei-backlash-4-legitimate-concerns-to-avoid/
Won so hard the mods had to ban you to maintain their illusions
it’s just systematic discrimination
I don’t understand how fixing existing discrimination is in itself discrimination. People are not being oppressed because they aren’t being given special treatment anymore. DEI policies have absolutely nothing to do with quotas or giving protected classes special treatment.
Well, when you discriminate, either positively or negatively, it’s discrimination.
Glad to help clear that up!
But it’s explicitly not discrimination. It’s inclusion. Meaning “in addition to”. No one is left out by it lol.
Despite what they claimed, they were discriminating.
And that claim is based on what? Anecdotes?
I always find it amazing that people fail to understand such a basic concept.
Most dei policies are designed to prevent people from using bias in the hiring process, and encouraging diversity. This can include removing name/gender/etc from the process.
What policies do you object to?
Just simply not true.
The fact that DEI sounds good in theory but in practice it’s just systematic discrimination. Similar to Affirmative Action
Can you elaborate on this? I’ve known DEI policies and Affirmative Action to be commonly confused with each other, but distinctly different.
I have always thought affirmative action had some issues but DEI was originally conceived by corporations to get better talent that would have otherwise not been hired due to racism, sexism, or any form of nepotism. Diversity of any kind has helped corporations make fuck loads of money for decades on top of helping veterans, old people and disabled people get jobs.
In practice? Can you prove that?
The inclusion part of DEI includes assisting children and adults with disabilities across a variety of classes, both educational and recreational. What part of that is systematic discrimination? Should high functioning adults with trisonomy 21 not be allowed to attend certification classes to help them receive employment? When they are children, do you think they shouldn’t be allowed at basketball camp?
Just wanted to stop by and express my disappointment for the down votes. I disagree with you strongly on the policies, but I deeply respect your commitment to actual free speech, and I hope you hold that same energy when it comes to due process rights.
This type of “we must tolerate the intolerant” energy is how Reddit became neo-fascist. First being against DEI and Palestinians is a heinous political position. Second of all people who are against DEI believe it’s racism, if he’s okay with private institutions using what he believes are racist policies, that’s a heinous position.
What you’re basically reading is: “I’m a racist, and I think private institutions should be able to have policies I think are racist”
Yeah that’s a no from me.
Exactly let’s ban a dude for giving his opinion that doesn’t make us fascists at all you see his opinion was wrong
Wow that isn’t in good faith AT ALL. Downvotes aren’t bans.
You don’t have a right to an audience, if people don’t like what you have to say, they don’t have to listen. They can also let you know if you’re a shit person. Maybe give you an opportunity to reflect and have personal growth.
Ban? The fuck are you talking about?
