Call for Change in Status Quo at US Universities

I am retiring from academic life after many years of research and teaching. I had good days, excellent days and not so good days, pretty much like most of my colleagues. I also had plenty of time to observe my colleagues in action at meetings, social occasions and as my neighbors. What has always surprised me is the posturing and the degree of smugness present especially among some older professors and administrators around the country. I do attribute this to being aware of their superiority as highly educated members of society. They feel entitled to exert power over their less imposing colleagues, students and staff for their own good, not to mention rest of the population. Many younger faculty are waiting for get tenure so they can come out from the forest to do the same thing to their colleagues on the bottom of the academic ladder. And they may have the same or even more paternalistic attitude toward general audience.

And why am I writing this? Because following the battles of presidents of our most prestigious universities first with Congress and now with president Trump how to deal with antisemitic and anti-Israel speech, acts and just pure vandalism and hooliganism by pro-Palestinian and pro-Hamas activists I (and I think many other people) came to the conclusion that these universities and their presidents missed the point. The lack of self-awareness together with the high level of self-confidence of certain university presidents’ is glaring and disconcerting. Do they not sense how conceited they appear?

This current battle is not about free speech, by which I mean peaceful free speech, and debates; something not really seen on many campuses anymore. It is not that much about autonomy of universities and freedom to hire whoever they want as faculty and make decision what type of students to admit as the fight is really about preserving and defending civil rights of minorities on campus, in this case Jewish students. Other issues have come up as well – safety of staff, both janitorial and public safety officers who got attacked by protesters and the vandalism which if committed by “regular” vandals and criminals would not be tolerated. Yes, universities are autonomous but only to certain degree. They do have to comply with many regulations regarding budgets, grant administration, conduct of faculty, staff and students including civil behavior and non-discrimination.

As far as instruction and education goes the goal at Harvard is in their own words: …”world-class faculty and talented students come together to pursue knowledge, conduct ground-breaking research, and produce transformative scholarly work to help to create a better world.” You decide for yourself how celebration of October 7 massacre by some professors and calls for destruction of Israel by pro-Hamas supporters contribute to a better world.

The current Harvard homepage brings information about many research projects cancelled or on hold because of withdrawal of federal funds. They do mention that halt in funding hurts safety of patients, but nothing about violent protests hurting safety of certain minority.

It is hard to believe that highly educated and intelligent people in highest positions at top universities would not understand what this stand-off is all about. Is it pride that makes Harvard president Alan Garber announce that he is standing up to Trump to preserve some most important principles, such as free speech and autonomy of Harvard, but he is not able to acknowledge danger of antisemitism and hooliganism to free thought and basic safety? Do violent protests create an atmosphere promoting creation of knowledge and transformative work? What is it Dr. Garber and other university presidents do not understand? Or are they, pardon me the expression, so much full of themselves that they and the institutions of which they are the “Supreme leaders” cannot admit that they failed their constituents, students, faculty, alumni and donors? Would president Garber rather forgo federal money and engage in costly lawsuits? Is the freedom to admit students who are likely to engage in similar protests and the hiring of intolerant and strongly anti-Israel (and antisemitic) faculty worth the fight? Is this how he plans to support medical research at Harvard? Does a report on antisemitism have to be accompanied by a report on Islamophobia?

Last week at Columbia the new acting president Carol Shipman did not wait and asked NYPD for help in evicting violent anti-Israel disruptors from the Butler library where other students were peacefully studying for their final exam. Many troublemakers, most of them women were arrested, and later suspended. Ms. Shipman did send out an urgent letter to Columbia alumni appraising them of the situation at the time of the riot. She did condemn very clearly “antisemitism and all other forms of harassment and discrimination”. Events at University of Washington took similar path – from damage to facilities estimated at $1,000,000 to arrest of 30 students. Brooklyn College and some other institutions followed in the same footsteps. One can only hope that these bastions of higher education started to understand the word “higher”. It still remains concerning, say the least, that it took one year and a half after October 7 massacre and only after interventions of the Congress (not discussed here) and the Administration for university presidents to move reluctantly in addressing and limiting antisemitic activities on their campuses.