12 ms·
Federal Government's letter to Harvard demanding changes [pdf]
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- bondarchuk 1y agoThe points "Viewpoint Diversity in Admissions and Hiring" and "Discontinuation of DEI" seem inconsistent. Enforcing "viewpoint diversity" is a DEI practice in all but name. Actually, it is even in the name. Also with the merit-based stuff, of course. What if people of merit skew towards certain viewpoints? Then hiring/admissions won't be merit based after all?
- bad_user 1y agoDEI has led to anything but viewpoint diversity, fostering ideological conformity via practices such as DEI statements, DEI metrics, mandatory trainings, or cancel culture leading to censorship. That the current administration is also purging viewpoints it doesn't like, adopting the same authoritarian mindset, but having it enforced by the government (which is worse, IMO), that goes to show horseshoe theory is true.
- titzer 1y ago> DEI statements Just going to point out that this is absolutely not the same thing as rescinding research grants using some lazy grepping of abstracts like the absolute clown show going on now. > horseshoe theory is true. Had to look this one up. Apparently the "far left" and "far right" are somehow the exact things we are dealing with here and now. Nope, sorry. Not equivalent. Not at all.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- mhb 1y agoWas this pedantry really worthwhile? The current interpretation of "diversity" is of outward characteristics, not points of view. So, technically, you're right. Kudos.
- rocqua 1y agoIt is far from universally accepted that 'the current interpretation of diversity is of outward characteristics, not points of view'. In fact, I would be surprised if anyone who favors DEI aggrees with that statement. Moreover, the actual interpretation of most proponents of diversity is very much that we desire a diversity of views, which it wants to get through getting a diversity of backgrounds. That is, of course, not the only reason behind DEI. There is also the fact that it is fair to allow people of all backgrounds the same opportunity.
- ToValueFunfetti 1y agoWikipedia[1] says >Diversity refers to the presence of variety within the organizational workforce in characteristics such as race, gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, disability, age, culture, class, veteran status, or religion. Brittanica[2] says >Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs—meant to address historical and systemic disparities based on race, gender, age, ability, and sexual orientation in the workplace CNN lists the following as examples of the title of this article[3] ("DEI programs benefit many groups, not just Black and brown communities"): >White women >LGBTQ+ people >Families who need IVF >Disabled people >Veterans This is the first three links I clicked on, so it seems to be broadly agreed upon. It's (obviously) not an exhaustive search of the literature, and I'd love to see your side of it. I have heard ideological diversity used as a defense of DEI, but it doesn't seem to be central. I've never heard of a DEI push to get more conservatives in tech or academia, for example. [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diversity,_equity,_and_inclusion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diversity,_equity,_and_inclusi... [2]https://www.britannica.com/topic/diversity-equity-and-inclusion-programs https://www.britannica.com/topic/diversity-equity-and-inclus... [3]https://www.cnn.com/2025/02/08/us/dei-programs-diversity-list/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2025/02/08/us/dei-programs-diversity-lis...
- 1y ago
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- bearjaws 1y ago> What if people of merit skew towards certain viewpoints? What if admissions is actually a cyborg alien race??? I am just asking questions! Having the government dictate University level programs is bad, we should all agree to let Universities and colleges run themselves.
- kolbe 1y agoWhile you are completely right about the impossible/conflicting legal standards here, this is not an unusual state of things. For example: it has been illegal to discriminate for a very long time, but it has also been de facto illegal to have demographic compositions substantially different from the general population. So, they've always been faced with the problem of needing to either discriminate to get the numbers to match, or not discriminating and risking the numbers falling out of line. The real law has always been, and always will be, prosecutorial discretion. Whatever party is in control will choose whether they go after you or not, and they can because you're always violating one side of something.
- ajross 1y ago> de facto illegal to have demographic compositions substantially different from the general population The Trump administration mid level staffing decisions are something like 70%+ white men! This seems laughable. Controversial maybe, certainly not "illegal" or they wouldn't have done it.
- kolbe 1y agoYou need to read what I wrote more carefully. The entire point is that whoever is in power decides which law actually gets applied and to whom. Do you think for some reason that the Trump administration risks being prosecuted by the Trump administration?
- davorak 1y agoThis seems like an argument against the rule of law. When arguing for demographic compositions, at least for my personal admittedly limited experience, I see arguments for how policy X upholds the law, or maybe only the spirit of the law in Y ways. I do not see that here for the current admins demands for diversity.
- ericjmorey 1y agoThe executive branch is afforded some discretion, but the judicial system decides how law gets applied as directed by Congress when they write laws.
- throw_m239339 1y ago[flagged]
- jltsiren 1y agoViewpoint diversity is not the same as diversity of opinion. When someone is seriously trying to justify DEI practices, viewpoint diversity is usually the first thing they talk about. They argue that having people from diverse backgrounds is important, as diverse experiences lead to diverse viewpoints, which may allow the organization notice and do things it could otherwise not do. They may even argue that if viewpoint diversity and diversity of opinion are in conflict, viewpoint diversity should prevail, as it contributes directly to the mission of the organization. Or at least that's how it started, before DEI became a big controversial topic.
- throw_m239339 1y ago[flagged]
- nhinck2 1y ago> telling things (as) they really are Lol, what reality do you live in?
- intended 1y agoYou are using a throwaway. Your own views are not valuable enough for you to risk your livelihood for.
- dani__german 1y agoOur founding fathers dressed as indians to throw tea into the Boston Harbor. You and your ilk demand the bank account information of anyone opposing your views.
- intended 1y agoSlashdot, the venerable ancient for tech discussions, allowed temp accounts under the term anonymous_cowards. Their camouflage was tactics, not cowardice. Don't bring the courage of courageous men as a shield for someone lacking convictions. For what its worth, I sympathize. I live in a country where I recognize that I am not as free as America used to be. That means I recognize the courage of those who take actual risks, and I also understand the weight of my words and the risks they may carry. I don't shoot from the hip.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- watwut 1y agoViewpoint diversity is that you want fsr right propagated more. Bonus points for open racism and sexism. However, left of any kind is not part of diversity. No one arguing for Palestine, no one arguing for equality. I was tempted to say "no communists" but those kind of don't matter.
- belter 1y agoCowards are now saying it was a mistake: "Trump Officials Blame Mistake for Setting Off Confrontation With Harvard" - https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/18/business/trump-harvard-letter-mistake.html https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/18/business/trump-harvard-le...
- rich_sasha 1y ago[flagged]
- titzer 1y agoThe entertaining thing for you is the university response and it doesn't concern you that the government is blatantly forcing ideology on people via every lever of power they can?
- rich_sasha 1y agoI'm glad my sarcasm was misplaced. I'm not supporting the government... Instead I was bemused by how Columbia just folded on all points, after lecturing the world from its position of absolute superiority. Interesting one to watch now.
- j_maffe 1y agoI'm sorry Harvard has disappointed your synicism
- titzer 1y agoIf there's one thing I've learned over the years is that the easiest way to tell who one's real enemy is to see whom they extend no leeway to, never forgive, equivocate, or apologize for, whom they actively criticize at every turn, and who's misfortune they enjoy. Even, and especially when, that person or group is legitimately victimized. It's extremely telling. With all the blaring red signs of fascism taking over the federal government, a brazen and direct assault on free speech staring us right in the face, we get people still taking potshots the "wokes". I guess it's not fascism if its against people you disagree with.
- phatskat 1y ago> I guess it's not fascism if its against people you disagree with. What’s fun about fascism ™ is that the circle of people being agreed with gets smaller as power is concentrated more towards a central figure. What’s his face, the Jewish white supremacist? Surely somewhere deep in the back of his mind is the warning bell that will start going off if we reach a certain stage of fascism. The “out group” starts with the most marginalized and vulnerable and moves inward. [There’s Always a Bigger Fish](https://youtu.be/agzNANfNlTs?si=Uso01ZloETa3T2IZ https://youtu.be/agzNANfNlTs?si=Uso01ZloETa3T2IZ)
- dang 1y agoRelated ongoing thread: Harvard's response to federal government letter demanding changes - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43684536 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43684536
- CodeWriter23 1y ago[flagged]
- jl6 1y ago> Viewpoint Diversity in Admissions and Hiring. By August 2025, the University shall commission an external party, which shall satisfy the federal government as to its competence and good faith, to audit the student body, faculty, staff, and leadership for viewpoint diversity, such that each department, field, or teaching unit must be individually viewpoint diverse. I kind of hope they go through with this just for the comedy. If students and staff have to fill out some kind of viewpoint survey, the only rational strategy is for them to randomize their answers to minimize the chance of being in the group that gets told “sorry, we have too many of your type this year”.
- TimTheTinker 1y agoI think the intent is to reduce the politically leftward trend in universities, as well as the fact that not all viewpoints are presented anymore. Universities used to be billed as a "marketplace of ideas". Also, the hermeneutics used for interpreting literature on the fringes in the 1980s are now mainstream -- students aren't learning the methods of interpretation used everywhere in the west up until the turn of the century.
- colanderman 1y agoOr one can view it as the increasing intellectual vacuousness of ideas on the "right". (In quotes because the dividing line between left and right itself has shifted rightward over the years.)
- alabastervlog 1y agoThis isn’t new. Buckley is the best they could manage in the entire last century or so, and that’s… not a great high water mark.
- TimTheTinker 1y agoWhat about Tolkien, Lewis, Chesterton, Dorothy Sayer, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, or Josef Pieper? These were in fact some of the intellectual greats of the 20th century. Like many today, they wouldn't necessarily closely identify with "the right" as much as they'd disagree with and argue against the current ideology of the left.
- ProllyInfamous 1y ago[flagged]
- johnea 1y agoI'm amazed this isn't flagged. The earnest determination of segemnts of the HN comments "community" to prevent discussion of topics they don't agree with is almost as concerning as the actions of this adminstration.
- bondarchuk 1y agoIt was flagged, but saved by the mods soon after, I saw it.
- typeofhuman 1y agoThis is such a great move by this administration. The Executive branch has been doing this for a long time across the nation. They use funding to pull strings and execute their views. This latest move is ad absurdum and the whole country will see how ridiculous it is that the President can demand a university (or any other body) do this or that... well guess what folks, you're right, and it has been going on for a long time. Look at the Dept of Education next. It needs to stop. The federal Executive Branch is way too large it is breaking the idea of independent states - incubators of ideas and democracy.
- dudefeliciano 1y agoah yes "ad absurdum" is how i want my policies to be made - similar to the tariffs, renaming the gulf of mexico, threatening to take over Canada and Greenland, DOGE... great moves all of them! I'm sure they are just using reverse psychology to make the american public understand how corrupt their government is