Harvard, Trump, No Mask Ban And The Farmer’s Pig

Harvard University has refused to bow to any of the Trump administration’s demands to make changes that would curb and punish antisemitic activity on its college campus. One of those proposed changes is a “comprehensive mask ban with serious and immediate penalties for violation, not less than suspension.” While one news report recently suggested that Harvard was amenable behind closed doors to a mask ban, Harvard has made no public statements indicating its support for such a ban.

Why would Harvard – and so many other prestigious universities — be unwilling to enforce a mask ban? It is no coincidence that so many of the pro-Hamas hooligans on college campuses who harass, intimidate, and assault Jewish students do so while cloaked in keffiyehs that shield their identities. Enforcing such a ban would be an easy, low-hanging fruit to grasp as a sign of good faith efforts toward fighting antisemitism. Hooligans could no longer cloak themselves in anonymity to escape detection and accountability.

If students wore hoods and Klan garb at Harvard – or any other college — to terrorize Black students, could anyone realistically imagine an administration – especially a left-wing one — allowing for such behavior in the name of free speech absolutism?

Of course not.

As The Harvard Jewish Alumni Alliance acidly observed: “Harvard’s fighting the Trump administration harder than it’s ever fought antisemitism.”

The dirty secret here is that so much of Harvard’s administration, student body, and faculty openly engages in, and supports, antisemitism.

Maybe the administration wants the plausible deniability that comes with keeping its pro-Hamas students masked, unidentifiable and undisciplined.

Harvard students openly brag on social media that their “movement” is “working” when they intimidate Harvard community members (read: Jews). Harvard refuses to discipline these students who admit to creating an unlawful hostile environment in violation of Title VI.  Imagine if Klan members at Harvard boasted on social media that they were succeeding in intimidating African-Americans on campus. Would Harvard be even so remotely cavalier?

Harvard’s faculty members teach odious ideas that are consistent with this mindset, that encourage such bad behavior among the student body. This fall, Harvard is offering a class taught by Professors Rosie Bsheer, Lorenzo Bondioli, and Cemal Kafadar on “Palestine: 1000 Years.” (Perhaps off by 939 years.) Lest the title of the class be too oblique to extrapolate its slant, all three of these faculty members are among the 101 Harvard professors who signed a letter asserting that it’s unfair that the genocidal chant “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” be construed as antisemitic.

Bashar Masri, a billionaire Palestinian, was on the Harvard Kennedy School’s Dean Council for years, and taught on campus. Last week, hundreds of October 7th victims’ families sued Bashar for “aiding and abetting” Hamas by allegedly constructing miles of tunnels and rocket launchers in Gaza. Bashar has just resigned from Harvard’s board. The lawsuit does not state that Masri knew about the October 7 attack, but that he was aware that Hamas used his properties for military purposes.

In the wake of the 9-11 attacks, Harvard came under fire for receiving bin Laden family money. Osama bin Laden’s brother,  Sheik Bakr Mohammed bin Laden, made two gifts to the University in 1993 and 1994 to fund fellowships for advanced study in Islamic culture.

In the last 4 years, Harvard received more than $100 million from the governments of the United Arab Emirates, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Bangladesh. Harvard receives more foreign investment than any other Ivy League college, almost $200 million more than the next highest recipient, Cornell University.

It would be naïve to think these countries are giving – and continue to give — hundreds of millions to Harvard out of the goodness of their hearts, without expectation of receiving anything in return. Though there is no explicit quid pro quo, these countries whose governments are not democratically elected may reasonably expect increased access and influence on what those schools teach, a greater acceptance rate for their citizens, as well as research grants and endowed chairs for professors who teach ideas they support.

The percentage of international students at Harvard has risen from 13.1% in Class of 2023 to 15.6% in the Class of 2027. More vocal, more anti-Israel, antisemitic professors combined with more students from countries whose residents have rising favorable views of Hamas make for a toxic brew. That brew asphyxiates Jewish students, especially the visibly Jewish ones who do not adorn watermelon kippahs and keffiyehs.

Some might point out that Harvard’s current president, Alan Garber, and lead member of the Harvard Corporation, Penny Pritzker, are Jews. Jews are “in charge,” after all, so why the fuss?

Being Jewish, of course, is hardly a guarantee of loyalty to fellow Jews, let alone support for the State of Israel. Unfortunately, there has been no shortage of As-A-Jews. These are Jews who stay quiet in Israel’s darkest hours but loudly trumpet their Jewish lineage (“As a Jew, I condemn…”) when criticizing the State of Israel. These As-A-Jews also embrace those who devote their lives to hurting and murdering Jews, and destroying the state of Israel. See here, here, here, here, and here for very recent examples.

Garber and Pritzker may not be As-A-Jews but they certainly have not been pillars of support for Jewish students at Harvard in their time of need.

While serving as provost, Garber failed to speak up about, and expressed regrets after the fact about, Harvard’s initial statement on Hamas’ October 7 attack on Israel.  He also stayed silent when 30 Harvard student groups called Israel “entirely responsible” for the violence Hamas inflicted against it. Pritzker was an early, seminal backer of Barack Obama when he transitioned from US Senator to President. Pritzker also led Harvard’s search for its former president, Claudine Gay.

When it comes to standing up for Jews at Harvard, no profiles in courage, they.

What would it take for Harvard to make itself a safe space again for Jews? Actions that would shut off the nine-figure spigot of cash from Muslim Middle Eastern countries. Actions that would alienate its vocal, tenured, antisemitic faculty members. Actions that top administration officials lack the desire or fortitude to implement.

The difference between loyalty and commitment, as the old joke goes, compares chickens and pigs: The chicken is loyal to the farmer by laying eggs. The pig, by contrast, is committed because he must die to provide his body in the form of bacon.

Harvard’s president and its administration refuse to embrace any of the substantive, transparent steps that would hold antisemites accountable. To that end, they are committed to saying goodbye to $2.26 billion in multiyear grants and contracts from the government, and another $7 billion in the not too distant future. Harvard can perhaps afford to be so intransigent; its best-in-class endowment grew by 9.6% last year to $53.2 billion.

The Constitution does not afford the right to cover your face in public. There is no Constitutional right for a university to receive grant money from the Government. But college students do have a legal right under Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act to be free from discrimination, especially those who attend colleges that receive federal funding.

If Harvard is unwilling to bend to comply with Title VI, if it is unwilling to purge the endemic Jew-hating discrimination in its midst, then academic independence is not the true, top priority. It is truly committed to the status quo, which is keeping its campus unsafe for Jews and safe for Jew-haters. Committed…like the farmer’s porcine buddy.