An impetuous President Donald Trump has declared war on Harvard University, a distinguished American institution older than the country itself. He did so without a formal declaration of war, or even a letter of explanation, which, if sent, the White House would have considered a “mistake.”
Confusing?
Yes, but the Trump administration has a way of conducting its foreign and domestic policies in confusing ways, in particular when its target is “woke” Harvard, which strikes many MAGA fanatics as suspiciously “foreign.” After all, roughly one out of four of its 25,000 students, graduate and undergraduate, was born in a foreign country.
Focusing on Harvard, though Trump himself graduated from a sister Ivy League school, the University of Pennsylvania, the president has launched an ugly campaign against higher education, which will (almost certainly) dramatically cut into medical and scientific research, lower educational standards at primary and secondary schools, and discourage the cultural and intellectual pursuits of the American people. Question: Why would Trump engage in a controversial endeavor so clearly destructive of America’s short and long-term interests? Why bring a smile to leaders in Moscow and Beijing, both so troubled by war and economic dislocation?
Generally speaking, the answer can be found in one word: “loyalty.” By which I mean loyalty to Trump and his opinions; nothing else tolerated. He runs the White House the way he ran his real estate empire in New York. Surrounded by family, he demanded the fealty of everyone under his authority, and he got it. Now, as president of our nation, he demands a bended knee from a much wider circle of followers. Sadly, he has found them in Congress, in the Supreme Court, in donors, and in politicians around the country. Widening the circle, he has also found such willing sycophants in jittery senior partners at distinguished law firms, in newspaper and network conglomerates, and, most recently, in institutions of higher learning (including think tanks and philanthropies). Surveying the landscape, Trump imagines himself on top of the world, with all those below him bowing obediently to his every whim.
But Harvard Yard shattered this pattern of mindless acquiescence, and in doing so delivered the little word that carries the biggest impact: “No.” Shocked, Trump characteristically doubled down, threatening action against higher education.
From the start, Trump’s strategy seemed simple: if he could crush Harvard, he could crush America’s system of higher education, viewed by many in MAGA as spoiled, liberal, and out of touch with real Americans. In addition, Trump knew that, like many other universities, Harvard benefits from overly generous federal grants, measured in the billions. If he threatened to reduce or eliminate those grants, he could pressure universities to submit to his ideological whims, while winning political points on hot-button issues such as DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion) and anti-Semitism.
Scanning the academic horizon, Trump first tested Columbia University, bluntly warning he would cut more than $400-million in federal grants if it did not submit to his diktat. Columbia quickly folded, hoping to avoid even larger cuts. Trump, though, was not satisfied. He wanted even more federal control of Columbia, which sent a disruptive chill through all of higher education. How far would he go?
Higher education has problems. Costs have skyrocketed. An academic year in the Ivy League, for example, could cost $90,000 (though at Harvard and other universities, financial assistance is provided to two-thirds of its students). Polls have shown that four out of every five professors were deemed “liberals,” allowing conservatives to argue that students were not getting a well-balanced education. Many people have even begun to question the value of a college degree.
On April 11, Trump struck at Harvard, but in a puzzling fashion. Three of his senior officials emailed a long letter to President Alan Garber, recommending sweeping changes in university policies regarding student admissions, selection of faculty, hiring of staff, plus the establishment of an outside “auditor” to check on whether the proposed changes were being properly implemented. It seemed as if Trump, who’d recently taken command of the Kennedy Center, wanted to take command of Harvard as well. Then Trump dropped his bombshell. He would freeze $2.2 billion out of roughly $9 billion earmarked for Harvard in federal grants, most of it for Harvard-affiliated hospitals in the Boston area, the rest for the university itself. For the time being, the grants that were not frozen would remain dangling in uncertainty.
April 12-13 could have been a lost weekend, but the Harvard president had been expecting the bombshell. The big question at a secret meeting of his top advisers: would Harvard capitulate to Trump, as Columbia had, or would it stand tall, true to its impressive traditions, and defy the wishes of a vindictive chief executive?
The answer burst like a sunflower of defiance over other universities.
“No government, regardless of which party is in power,” wrote the normally mild-mannered Garber, “should dictate what private universities can teach, whom they can admit and hire, and which areas of study and inquiry they can pursue.” Harvard will not “surrender its independence,” nor, he added, “relinquish its constitutional rights.” Nor, by implication, should any other university, or law firm, or network newsroom. Harvard was setting the way.
On April 15, the White House experienced one of those out-of-the-blue moments, which must have infuriated Trump. Turns out the April 11 letter to Harvard, highlighting Trump’s offensive against higher education, should never have been sent. According to The New York Times, it was “unauthorized,” a “mistake,” admitted two senior officials who were prepared to fall on their swords. The fault, they claimed, was Harvard’s.
How come?
Because of course Harvard should have known it was a “mistake” and informed the White House! Instead, “Harvard went on a victimhood campaign,” designed to win sympathy for its cause. In any case, the White House stressed, it wasn’t Trump’s fault.
Trump, never one to admit a mistake, reacted by intensifying his attack on Harvard. Ignoring key aspects of federal law, wittingly or not, he threatened first to lift Harvard’s tax-exempt status, forgetting that a president cannot “directly or indirectly” instruct the IRS to act against a properly functioning university. It may be relevant that the IRS has had four commissioners since Trump was inaugurated three months ago, a sign of truly chaotic management. But, were Trump enabled to somehow get his way, which is now possible, Harvard would be obliged to pay roughly $480 million a year in taxes.
As a follow-up move, Trump instructed Kristi Noem, his secretary of homeland security, to ban Harvard from enrolling a new generation of international students unless it first provided the government with detailed information from official records about every foreign student currently enrolled at Harvard. This demand must be honored, Noem insisted, by April 30.
Harvard is not only unlikely to comply; it also sued the Trump administration, claiming that its actions against Harvard and other universities would produce “severe and long-lasting” consequences, harmful to the American people.
Putting aside the questionable legality of these presidential decisions, what seems clear is that Trump has launched a vigorous campaign to undermine those institutions of higher education where, in his mind, “woke” is cultivated in dormitories and flourishes in faculty lounges, where “liberal” ideas germinate and then, through “fake news,” is spread, and where “elites” from foreign lands influence bright, young Americans, who then find jobs in “deep state” government.
In Trump’s detached calculation, this is a war he feels he must win, but a war many others are certain he will lose; for, from these same dorms and lounges over many decades have come the ideas, inspiration, and formulas that have defined America’s model of personal freedom and economic opportunity, once the envy of the world, still the promise of many. It is a goal worth cherishing, and a war worth winning.
Marvin Kalb, Murrow professor emeritus at Harvard, former diplomatic correspondent at CBS and NBC, author of 18 books, most recently “A DIFFERENT RUSSIA: Khrushchev and Kennedy on a Collision Course.”
Just like all other commentaries/essays/opinions written by Marvin Kalb, excellent and easy to understand.
If these universities/colleges are all so liberal and woke, why are there so very many republicon politicians who are so very right-wing and downright mAga? Could it be they were much more influenced by their mommies and daddies (and their bank accounts) before they even attended these places? On the other hand, they are using the benefit of the "liberal" education they received to totally misrepresent themselves and lie like their leader. If their learning institution had been right wing like their minds, they would have been forced to learn one side only.
Although the orange felon supposedly attended an ivy league school, I think it has been documented enough times that others were paid to take his exams for him, since he wasn't smart enough to pass them himself.
The Felon doesn't care about "woke". The Felon cares about four things, loyalty, power, staying out of jail and money (not necessarily in that order). The Felon doesn't care about his MAGA followers, doesn't care about the American people in general and certainly care about America's allies.
With the support of the six Christian Nationalists on the Supreme Court who gave the Felon immunity, the Felon and president Musk are making the United States of America an authoritarian theocracy, with the Felon as its leader and the American oligarchs running the Country. There was a recent poll on CNN, indicating a majority of the American people believe the Felon does not have too much power. This is because the Felon, his sycophants in the White House and right wing media continue to say the Felon is only sending the "bad guys" to El Salvador. Just wait until the Felon declares Martial Law and begins sending United States citizens to El Salvador (only the "bad guys" of course).