City Journal - December 6, 2023: Forget Ridley Scott’s Napoleon, now in theaters: if you want to watch an epic drama of vanity and failed leadership that ends in catastrophe, just tune in to the hearing held this week by the House Committee on Education and the Workforce.
Summoned to account for the surging anti-Semitism on their campuses, the presidents of Harvard, MIT, and the University of Pennsylvania delivered a masterclass in obfuscation. When New York representative Elise Stefanik asked them whether calling for the genocide of the Jewish people violated the codes of conduct of their respective institutions, for example, all three presidents responded by saying that—well, it’s complicated.
“It is a context-dependent decision,” Penn’s Liz Magill answered, driving Stefanik—and anyone else watching with half a heart and a brain—to wonder just what was so difficult or context-dependent about cheering for the murder of every Jewish man, woman, and child.
The hearing made headlines, and rightly so. But it would be a mistake to focus on the trio’s failure to sound remotely empathic when discussing the safety and wellbeing of their Jewish students. The problem with Harvard, Penn, MIT, and others isn’t merely that these previously august institutions condone, or at the very least tolerate, anti-Semitism. It goes much deeper, and you could sum it up in three letters: DEI—or diversity, equity, and inclusion, the ongoing effort to regulate a host of policies pertaining to race, sexual orientation, and other identity markers.
Consider Harvard. Our nation’s most lauded university is currently home to 7,240 undergraduate students and 7,024 administrators, or nearly one administrator for each young adult. Some of these officials, it’s possible, are doing important work. But if you’re wondering what the rest are up to, you needn’t look much further than the Crimson, the university’s long-running student newspaper. Recently, the Crimson reported on the Faculty of Arts and Sciences Task Force on Visual Culture and Signage, created on the recommendation of the Presidential Task Force on Inclusion and Belonging. The Visual Culture and Signage task force’s 24 members, including nine administrators, toiled for months and interviewed more than 500 people before delivering a 26-page report that included recommendations like one urging Harvard to “clarify institutional authority over FAS visual culture and signage.” This farce ended the only way it could have—with the minting of a new administrative post, the FAS campus curator, and a new committee, the FAS Standing Committee on Visual Culture and Signage, to help facilitate the curator’s all-important work.
Eight Qualifications To Get A Job As Ivy League President
I don't think the article makes good sense, CS.
ReplyDelete“It is a context-dependent decision,” Penn’s Liz Magill answered, driving Stefanik—and anyone else watching with half a heart and a brain—to wonder just what was so difficult or context-dependent about cheering for the murder of every Jewish man, woman, and child."
The above quote contains a blatant exaggeration and distortion. Those who are protesting against Israel's actions against Gaza are not calling for the murder of every Jewish man, woman, and child. They are calling for a cease fire and cessation of the mayhem in Gaza.
That could be interpreted as a call to save Israeli lives. In my opinion, it could be interpreted as a call to save the failed state of Israel. World opinion says to Israel "enough is enough", and if Israel goes further, it is going to find out it is not the only religiously-fanatic state capable of going overboard in retribution.
"The hearing made headlines, and rightly so. But it would be a mistake to focus on the trio’s failure to sound remotely empathic when discussing the safety and wellbeing of their Jewish students. The problem with Harvard, Penn, MIT, and others isn’t merely that these previously august institutions condone, or at the very least tolerate, anti-Semitism. It goes much deeper, and you could sum it up in three letters: DEI—or diversity, equity, and inclusion, the ongoing effort to regulate a host of policies pertaining to race, sexual orientation, and other identity markers."
This is incoherent. And I'm pissed. These institutions are not condoning anti-semitism by allowing students to protest Israel's attacks on Gaza. This is the same as saying you are anti-American because you question the official response to Covid, as just one example.
I get that you hate DEI. I typically see your point on that.
What caught my attention was the fact reported in this article that Harvard has as many staff as students. that means that Harvard, arguably America's top university, is less a center of scholarship that a monstrous bureaucracy, which, among other things, apparently aims to police what people say, and penalize those guilty even of "microaggressions."
DeleteSurely, one thing a person should get from attending university is the verbal skill to deal with, not only a microaggression, but a serious moral and political questions.
As to the call for genocide, it should have been condemned in forthright terms. That America's top universities are headed by people unable to state an obvious moral truth is consistent with the impression one has of an American civilization in the last stages of moral and intellectual decline.
But that is not to say that Palestinians have no basis for complaint. Far from it. Israel is a settler state and the Palestinians are the victims. For this not merely Jews, in flight from the horrors of Nazi genocide, but the Western powers are responsible. Much better would have been to direct Jews fleeing Germany and Eastern Europe to the countries of thevictorious allies of WW2.
I would never be able to guess these points were what you took away from the article you linked, CS. Thank you for the clarification.
Delete"Harvard has as many staff as students. that means that Harvard, arguably America's top university, is less a center of scholarship that a monstrous bureaucracy, which, among other things, apparently aims to police what people say, and penalize those guilty even of "microaggressions."
Harvard is a very complex institution, serving multiple purposes at multiple levels. It is an instrument of the ruling class, first, and whatever else it does is subsumed under that role. Its roles in education and as a center of scholarship fall under the category of what serves the interests of the ruling class.
Even to say this involves complexity, though, because everything might be said to serve the interests of the ruling class except real questioning of the status quo, including a government of the people, by the people, and for the people.
Back when it was founded, MIT was thought of as a way of providing excellent technological education, or, more accurately, training, to members of the non-ruling class, to serve the ruling class. It was a separate institution because Harvard didn't want to taint itself with the servile nature of technology and technologists. Nowadays, this is perceived differently, and a lot of great scientific research comes out of Harvard, and that's undeniable.
I think you're implying the enormous number of Harvard staff are involved in administration of the "students" at Harvard. I disagree. Many of these people are involved in policy formation, as if Harvard were a think tank, or an erudite wing of the US government.
"which, among other things, apparently aims to police what people say, and penalize those guilty even of 'microaggressions.' "
You can be sure those who are penalized for microaggressions are not members of the ruling class at Harvard. They're of the talented riffraff who are at Harvard now and must be carefully mind-controlled to ensure they don't F* up and truly question and think. (As I was trying to get at, above.)
"Microaggressions"-- yeah, that's a good one, CS. Got to remember that one.
Yes, your explanation of the actual, as opposed to the proclaimed role orf Harvard University is consistent with my review of the book Rationality, by famed Harvard psychologist, Steven Pinker, which review Google cannot find though it is on one of their own servers. For that reason, let me draw attention once again to my review of Pinker's "Rationality.":
DeleteSteven Pinker's "(ir)Rationality" in Defence of the Official Narrative