Until they don’t, I bet.

[jon-nyc]

You can imagine them saying ‘there’s nothing controversial about…[insert controversial issue here].

[Horace]

Similar to the ol' motte and bailey. The bailey is where they take social justice stands, the motte is where they retreat to, where they are above taking stands, as neutral institutions there to serve everybody.

They will never, however, be able to control the ideologically captured faculty in the -studies departments (and to a large extent most of the humanities), whose life purpose is entirely about taking controversial stands. Their course work might actually be advocacy for controversial stands. Maybe the management won't be as captured by that faculty as they have been.

[jon-nyc]

One of the first comments was “what’s controversial about stopping genocide”.

[jon-nyc]

The wording in the statement is that they won’t “issue official statements about public matters that do not directly affect the university’s core function.”

You can hear it now, “surely keeping [insert group identity here] students safe is a core function of the university”.

[Copper]

Harvard is really above all that.

[89th]

Maybe it'll start a trend that'll reach to the cities in California who have raucous public debates about whether or not to pass a cease fire resolution for a location half way around the world with zero connection to the city.

[jon-nyc]

[LuFins Dad]

So their relationship status with Israel is “It’s Complicated”?

[jon-nyc]

I’m not sure what you mean. This seems like nothing but good news, as long as they stick to it.

[Axtremus]

@LuFins-Dad said in Until they don’t, I bet.:

So their relationship status with Israel is “It’s Complicated”?

This may be an interesting game:

Name a relationship with Israel that is not complicated.

[Copper]

These are really smart guys.

They can hate Israel and make it look like neutral.