[mgkimsal]

https://www.harvard.edu/research-funding/wp-content/uploads/...

Did you read the demands?

"By August 2025, the University must adopt and implement merit-based hiring policies, and cease all preferences based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin throughout its hiring, promotion, compensation, and related practices among faculty, staff, and leadership. Such adoption and implementation must be durable and demonstrated through structural and personnel changes. All existing and prospective faculty shall be reviewed for plagiarism and Harvard’s plagiarism policy consistently enforced. All hiring and related data shall be shared with the federal government and subjected to a comprehensive audit by the federal government during the period in which reforms are being implemented, which shall be at least until the end of 2028."

Trump administration is now the defacto HR department for Harvard, and eventually all universities.

[JumpCrisscross]

> cease all preferences based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin

But! Also! "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."

[mgkimsal]

Yeah, I made another comment about that.

Cease all DEI programs, but we require 'viewpoint diversity'...

"Every department or field found to lack viewpoint diversity must be reformed by hiring a critical mass of new faculty within that department or field who will provide viewpoint diversity; every teaching unit found to lack viewpoint diversity must be reformed by admitting a critical mass of students who will provide viewpoint diversity. If the review finds that the existing faculty in the relevant department or field are not capable of hiring for viewpoint diversity, or that the relevant teaching unit is not capable of admitting a critical mass of students with diverse viewpoints, hiring or admissions within that department, field, or teaching unit shall be transferred to the closest cognate department, field, or teaching unit that is capable of achieving viewpoint diversity."

[rofo1]

You say that they are "demands". As if the taxpayers should automatically give billions to Harvard, no matter what Harvard does. That's insanity (to me at least).

"Harvard has in recent years failed to live up to both the intellectual and civil rights conditions that justify federal investment."

"The United States has invested in Harvard University’s operations because of the value to the country of scholarly discovery and academic excellence. But an investment is not an entitlement. "

So basically, they are claiming that the Federal government will not invest money until Harvard gets rid of the communist/socialist rhetoric. As far as I can see, they are free to burn their money to fund communist ideals. Who says that they deserve taxpayers money by default?

It's amazing how communist problems always end with: "you eventually run out of other people's money"

[JumpCrisscross]

> they are claiming that the Federal government will not invest money until Harvard gets rid of the communist/socialist rhetoric

They're changing the terms of the trade after a contract was signed. At the very least, this is the U.S. defaulting on commitments.

That said, I broadly agree with you--the U.S. shouldn't be funding Harvard. And the public shouldn't have a say--or continuing economic stake, the way we do with publicly-funded research--in what Harvard does and produces.

[mgkimsal]

This is Trump's trademark move, writ large. We've all read the reports of him refusing to pay contractors after work is done, ignoring the contracts and saying "sue me". This is who he is, and he's just bringing this playbook (back) to the federal government, cheered on by people until they're personally and directly affected by this behaviour.

[nkassis]

Research grants come with stipulations on how research is conducted, these grants were already granted so this is essentially breaking their contract. So there is no by default grant, generally the grants also don't delve into what the school can teach and hire for teaching which is very much protected by first amendment rights.

Considering a private university rights to hire and teach as they wish as communism is definitely an odd definition of communism I've rarely seen.

[jkmcf]

  As if the taxpayers should automatically give billions to Harvard, no matter what Harvard does. That's insanity (to me at least).

AFAIK, Harvard doesn't get money for nothing -- it's primarily for research. The demands are orthogonal to what Harvard provides: top tier talent for whatever the government sees fit to fund.

  It's amazing how communist problems always end with: "you eventually run out of other people's money"

It's always someone else's money. Roads suck? You probably have too many roads for other people's money to fix. The list goes on. Libertarian dreams of self-sufficiently die when their money has to pay for things. Unless you meant feudalism or plutocracy, where wealth primarily flows away from the working class.

Humans are creatures of community. There will always be taxes for any sufficiently developed people, the only hope is they serve the public good and aren't funneled into the oligarchs' pockets.