Meanwhile, at Harvard...
-
@LuFins-Dad said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:
What exactly does intifada mean? I always thought it essentially meant revolution
Context is important, I'm told.
In this context - revolution against Jewish occupation - IOW, war.
@George-K said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:
@LuFins-Dad said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:
What exactly does intifada mean? I always thought it essentially meant revolution
Context is important, I'm told.
In this context - revolution against Jewish occupation - IOW, war.
I don’t really see an issue with that being spoken or chanted at a campus protest. The word is not the issue. The very evident physical intimation of personal violence is the issue.
-
We have a former board member who is the head of the university senate of the other big Ivy League school that made the news a lot due to protests. I was on a call with her today and asked how they avoided being at the grilling.
Their president, a former world bank exec, was at the big global climate meeting (COP28) so they got out of it.
FWIW she blamed the lawyers for why these folks on the stand had to be so wishy-washy.
-
@89th said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:
I'm a bit extreme, but sure...burn the cross. Tell someone you support genocide. Free speech laws are meant to protect the stuff that makes you uncomfortable, not the easy stuff. I tell my kids whenever a sibling tells another one "You're a booty butt!" (a very common insult when the 5 year old tries to get the 3 year old to cry). I tell them they are just words. Air and sound. They don't hurt and to ignore it. "Sticks and stones will break my bones but words cannot hurt me...
I'm totally down with free speech absolutism, but as a practical matter, I like to consider what is possible, and the least bad options among them.
-
Sorry, but this is all a result of decades worth of accepting and even promoting criminal harassment, intimidation, and extortion and calling it free speech, while punishing and belittling those that peacefully assemble and express themselves.
Harassment and intimidation is not a policy issue for Presidents and Chancellors to debate, it’s a policing issue.
@LuFins-Dad said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:
Sorry, but this is all a result of decades worth of accepting and even promoting criminal harassment, intimidation, and extortion and calling it free speech, while punishing and belittling those that peacefully assemble and express themselves.
Harassment and intimidation is not a policy issue for Presidents and Chancellors to debate, it’s a policing issue.
Hear! Hear!
-
Most Ivy League Schools Now Have Female Presidents
Mildly interesting
I wonder if a white male would have done any better.
-
Most Ivy League Schools Now Have Female Presidents
Mildly interesting
I wonder if a white male would have done any better.
@Copper said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:
Most Ivy League Schools Now Have Female Presidents
Mildly interesting
Somewhere I read that Harvard's president has only 11 publications to her name. She's not an academician, she's a bureaucrat.
-
@Copper said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:
Most Ivy League Schools Now Have Female Presidents
Mildly interesting
Somewhere I read that Harvard's president has only 11 publications to her name. She's not an academician, she's a bureaucrat.
-
@George-K said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:
She's not an academician, she's a bureaucrat.
OK, but how does she feel about climate change?
@Copper said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:
@George-K said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:
She's not an academician, she's a bureaucrat.
OK, but how does she feel about climate change?
She trusts the science.
-
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-67655910
A major University of Pennsylvania donor has withdrawn a $100m (£79.3m) grant after a controversial appearance in congress by the school's president.
President Elizabeth Magill met representatives alongside Harvard President Claudine Gay and Sally Kornbluth of MIT on Tuesday.
But they caused anger after avoiding questions on how students calling for the genocide of Jews would be punished.
The donor, Ross Stevens, said he was "appalled" by her stance. -
The Congresswoman from New York in yesterday's WSJ:
Paywalled, so here's the whole thing:
Opinion: Harvard Bans ‘Cisheterosexism’ but Shrugs at Antisemitism
College presidents are directly responsible for the hatred that has flourished on campus since Oct. 7.
But when I asked Harvard President Claudine Gay at a congressional hearing whether calls for the genocide of Jews violated the university’s rules on bullying and harassment, she answered: “It depends on the context.” Pressed further, she said it would qualify “when it crosses into conduct.” I received similar answers from the presidents of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the University of Pennsylvania.
This lack of moral clarity is shocking. If only it were surprising. In the months since Oct. 7, the mainstreaming of anti-Jewish hate has been on full display at the poisoned Ivy League and other so-called elite schools, as has the gutless lack of response from university leaders. When 34 Harvard student groups signed a statement that they “hold the Israeli regime entirely responsible for all unfolding violence,” Ms. Gay and other Harvard leaders were silent for days.
Since then, we have heard reports of Jewish students being spat on, verbally accosted and, in a widely circulated video, physically assaulted. We’ve seen students march chanting “There is only one solution: Intifada revolution,” a call for violence against Israel. They follow that with a chant of “Globalize the Intifada,” implying that the hatred of Israel is a hatred of Jews everywhere, including on campus.
The Penn, Harvard and MIT presidents’ refusal to identify these calls for violence as policy violations is revealing, and their attempt to justify it with feigned concern for free speech is insulting. Just this year, Harvard placed dead last among 248 universities on the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression’s College Free Speech Rankings, receiving the only score of zero out of 100.
Where was Harvard’s concern for free speech when it disinvited feminist philosopher Devin Buckley from a colloquium on campus last year because of her views on transgender issues? Where was its concern for free speech in 2020 when it revoked conservative activist Kyle Kashuv’s acceptance because of social media posts he made as a 16-year-old, or in 2017 when it revoked admission for 10 incoming freshmen who shared offensive memes on Facebook? Apparently the same outrage doesn’t apply to students sharing antisemitic memes on Slack today, as Bill Ackman noted in his letter to Harvard last month.
While this hypocrisy is being exposed now, it has been festering for years. The failure to call out and punish those demanding the genocide of Jewish people is the consequence of decades of appeasement of radicalism and watering down of principle at our most hallowed institutions of higher education, which were founded as bastions of moral clarity and the pursuit of truth.
In March, Harvard student Sabrina Goldfischer presented her thesis, “The Death of Discourse: Antisemitism at Harvard College.” Her research details rampant antisemitism, including classmates questioning and playing down the Holocaust, a professor suggesting that a Jewish student had “bargaining in his blood” and antisemitic slurs shouted in Harvard Square. She found that 62.5% of Jewish students reported having experienced antisemitism or knowing someone who had.
The leaders of these universities want us to believe they face, through no fault of their own, a predicament for which they have no responsibility or accountability. In fact, they are directly responsible for the vile antisemitic hatred overrunning their campuses. For years they have selectively enforced their own policies to weed out certain viewpoints while fostering others, and now they are reaping the harvest.
The pathetic testimony of the Harvard, Penn and MIT presidents has been viewed more than a billion times worldwide, making it the most viewed congressional testimony in history—deservedly so, because it shocked the conscience of the world. The only acceptable consequence is that the boards immediately replace them with leaders who will restore moral clarity.
-
The last sentence is the appropriate action to take.
"The only acceptable consequence is that the boards immediately replace them with leaders who will restore moral clarity."And if not, the question becomes why not. And under new leadership, the board needs to clarify policies that need review and clarification. Too bad it comes to this.
Actually, a lot of clarification would occur during the search process.
I was really shocked by their responses. I mean, WTF?
-
Gay apologizes to Harvard students -
"What I should have had the presence of mind to do in that moment was return to my guiding truth, which is that calls for violence against our Jewish community — threats to our Jewish students — have no place at Harvard, and will never go unchallenged," added Gay. "Substantively, I failed to convey what is my truth."
What the hell is all of this “my truth”?! Where did this bullshit come from? Truth is objective, not subjective. Can we please stop this crap?
-
@Horace said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:
She is a wise Black woman and I don't feel it is my place to judge her.
Woo is racist unless it gives you points in the underdog olympics.
-
@Horace said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:
She is a wise Black woman and I don't feel it is my place to judge her.
Woo is racist unless it gives you points in the underdog olympics.
@Aqua-Letifer said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:
Woo is racist unless it gives you points in the underdog olympics.
Who is Woo?
-
@Aqua-Letifer said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:
Woo is racist unless it gives you points in the underdog olympics.
Who is Woo?
@Renauda said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:
@Aqua-Letifer said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:
Woo is racist unless it gives you points in the underdog olympics.
Who is Woo?
He's on first.
