4 ms·
I personally think a balanced take is: It's a private school, and it's not the job of the Federal Government (especially personally directed by the President) t
by sgnelson 1y ago
I personally think a balanced take is: It's a private school, and it's not the job of the Federal Government (especially personally directed by the President) to go after an educational institution for arbitrary and capricious reasons; just because he doesn't like a few of its policies and how a few of the students and professors behave.
I believe that is a balanced take. It's not about what Harvard is and is not doing. Harvard is a private school, they can do whatever they want. But when the Federal government goes after them for their internal policies, almost completely because the President personally doesn't like them, that is government overreach at it's worst.
It blows my mind that people are arguing over what Harvard's internal policies are instead of the fact that we're watching the Federal Government run roughshod all over the right to free speech.
But yeah, people will continue to say "Harvard sucks." I don't care if Harvard sucks. Harvard has the right to suck. It's not the Federal Governments job to ensure they don't suck. But it's somehow Harvard's fault for deserving this.
"Small Government" My Ass. We are watching America become fasicist in real time. But let's continue to argue about a relatively small schools internal policies.
- nkurz 1y agoSure, that sounds like a great target to aim for, and I think Pinker would agree. Private schools like Harvard should be able to run their school however they want, as should Bob Jones, or Reed, or Hillsdale, or whomever. They should all obey the same laws, fairly and equally enforced, and either all of them or none of them should be taking public funds. Do you think that's where we're currently at? If not, how do we get there?
- gladiatr72 1y agoBe that as it may, Harvard holds an outsized influence on the direction of U.S. business as well as domestic and foreign policy.