logo
How universities die

How universities die

Boston Globe2 days ago

The University of Berlin, founded a century earlier, was the Harvard of its day. Every serious American university, from Hopkins to Chicago, to Harvard and Berkeley, was made or reformed according to the 'Berlin model.' Why else is
the freedom to learn, across multiple disciplines. Although supported entirely by the state, universities themselves would decide who would teach and what would be taught. If university rankings had existed in 1910, eight of the top 10 in the world probably would have been German — with only Oxford and Cambridge joining them in that elite circle.
Get The Gavel
A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr.
Enter Email
Sign Up
As late as 1932, the University of Berlin remained the most famous of the world's universities. By 1934, it had been destroyed from without and within.
Advertisement
Germany's descent from a nation of 'poets and thinkers' ('Dichter und Denker') to one of 'judges and hangmen' ('Richter und Henker') ended its leadership in higher education.
Advertisement
The impact of the new National Socialist regime that came to power in January 1933 became clear on May 10 of that year, when the members of the German Student Union — among them many students from the University of Berlin — piled and burned books from public libraries on the streets of Berlin's Opernplatz, the square opposite the university's main building. A crowd of 70,000, including students, professors, and members of the SA and SS — the storm troopers for the National Socialist Party — watched as thousands of volumes were torched.
Students and Nazi Party members at the book burning on the Opernplatz in Berlin, May 10, 1933.
German Federal Archives via Wikimedia Commons
The Nazi regime quickly purged universities of non-Aryan students and faculty and political dissidents. Leading scholars left Berlin in large numbers in a historic academic migration to the United States, Britain, and elsewhere. Universities lost any capacity for self-government. The University of Berlin abandoned its own traditions of teaching and research. Scholarship serving truth for truth's sake was jettisoned for scholarship in service of the 'Volk.'
The Nazi period would be followed by East German Communist orthodoxy and finally, in 1990, by absorption into the German Federal Republic — with each change accompanied by a new purge of faculty.
In 2010, at the celebration for the 200th anniversary of the university — now named Humboldt University — its president welcomed guests by saying: 'Today, nobody anywhere in the world is prepared to take this university as a model.' Indeed. No longer the leading university in the world, Humboldt University today is not the best in Germany — and not even the best in Berlin.
Advertisement
Beijing
In the first half of the 20th century, China developed a remarkable set of colleges and universities: a small system, but pound for pound one of the best and most innovative in the world. Its institutions were Chinese and foreign, public and private. The system was composed of leading state universities — Peking University in Beijing and National Central University (modeled on the University of Berlin) in Nanjing. Its private institutions often had international partners. Peking Union Medical College, with Rockefeller Foundation funding, had a global reputation.
Tsinghua University in Beijing began in 1911 as a prep school for students planning to enroll at universities in America. By the 1930s, it was China's leading research university, devoted to free and open inquiry. When the Japanese occupied Beijing in 1937, Tsinghua led the effort to relocate leading Chinese universities to China's southwest. Some of Tsinghua's most famous and innovative alumni, such as physicists C.N. Yang (Yang Zhenning) and C.T. Li (Li Zhengdao), who would become Nobel laureates in 1957, completed their studies during this time. Tsinghua's president and the leader of National Southwest University
,
Mei Yiqi, is still remembered today for his advocacy of liberal education, institutional autonomy, and academic freedom even in the darkest moments of the war. For that he is known as Tsinghua's 'eternal president.' In short, Tsinghua survived eight years of exile and war, and it stood firm by its academic values.
What it could not so easily survive was the Communist conquest of China in 1949. Tsinghua's longstanding ties with the United States were severed, not to be joined again for three decades. Chinese universities were reordered along Stalinist lines and were rapidly Sovietized. A new Tsinghua campus arose next to the original one. Its 13-story main building, a brutal Stalinist complex of three structures, now dominated the campus. In 1952 Tsinghua became a polytechnic university to train engineers according to rigid state plans. The schools of sciences and humanities, agriculture, and law were all abolished, and their faculty members were scattered to other institutions. Faculty who would not or could not work under the new regime either fled abroad or were fired at home.
Advertisement
While Tsinghua began to train China's Communist technocracy, the relentless politicization of universities under Mao Zedong first weakened and then nearly destroyed the university. During the Cultural Revolution of the 1960s, the university became the site of bloody clashes and eventually shut down completely. The Cultural Revolution even destroyed Tsinghua's iconic gate, replaced for a time by a huge statue of Mao. Tsinghua resumed operations, but on a skeletal basis, only in 1978. It would take until the centenary of the university, in 2011, for Tsinghua to reclaim its position as a leading comprehensive research university.
A Chinese politician, Wang Guangmei, was publicly humiliated at a denunciation rally at Tsinghua University in 1967.
Wikimedia Commons
Boston
Harvard University began life in 1636 as a public institution. Its founder was not John Harvard but the General Court of Massachusetts. It was supported in the 17th century by taxes and other 'contributions' from as far south as New Haven, at times levied in corn, and by the revenues of the Charlestown ferry that connected Cambridge to Boston, paid in wampumpeag (the currency of the Massachusetts Bay Colony).
Founded 140 years before the United States, Harvard was nonetheless central to the creation of our nation. After the battles of Lexington and Concord in April 1775, the
Advertisement
Harvard and the United States have been closely connected ever since. During World War II, the university once again devoted itself to the war effort. Soldiers were housed on Harvard's campus. Harvard faculty developed advanced torpedoes for submarine warfare and the napalm used in the firebombing of enemy cities, and they assisted in creating the first atom bomb. They also provided intelligence. Numerous Harvard scholars joined the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), the precursor to the Central Intelligence Agency. Their collective work at OSS, organized in regional departments, formed the foundation of postwar 'area studies' at Harvard and across the United States, supported by the Department of Defense. In the aftermath of the war, Harvard created a curriculum focused on 'General Education for a Free Society' to give students 'a common understanding of the society which they will possess in common,' a concept that would be adopted nationwide.
The Vietnam War led, in contrast, to a Harvard sharply divided over the justness of that cause. But even so, in its wake, Harvard created the Kennedy School of Government to prepare students for careers in public service — a leading center for the study
and
practice of government.
For nearly four centuries, the decisions and actions of Harvard have set the tone for American higher education. Today Harvard has become the leading research university in the world, with a reputation equal to, if not greater than, that of the University of Berlin in the 19th century. As it rose to national prominence in the 20th century, universities across the United States vied to be the 'Harvard of the South' (Duke, Vanderbilt, Rice), the 'Harvard of the Midwest' (Michigan, Northwestern, Chicago, Washington University), and the 'Harvard of the West' (Stanford).
Advertisement
Yet today Harvard is an institution that may be more admired abroad than at home, in an era of public (and politicized) critique of American higher education. At least 43 US states have cut back on their investments in higher education since 2008, according to research I gathered for my book 'Empires of Ideas.' Leading public and private universities, including Harvard, have become lightning rods in the political and culture wars of the day.
Although the Trump administration's multifront assault on Harvard may be less violent (for now, at least) than the authoritarian takeovers of the University of Berlin and Tsinghua University, it is no less dangerous. It is an attempt to destroy the academic freedoms and institutional autonomy that have been hallmarks of every great modern university.
Fortunately, the United States is not (yet) Berlin in 1933 or Beijing in 1950. It retains an independent judiciary and rule of law, and it has, in Harvard, a university with the history, will, and resources to resist. In its resistance, Harvard has reaffirmed its leadership in American higher education as nothing else could. Should it fail, we shall witness the destruction of the one industry, higher education, in which this country is still
the
global leader. We shall destroy our capacity to recruit talent from all shores. We will decline. For history shows that universities can die, and nations will decay.
If American universities remain the envy of the world in 2025, the question must be: for how long?

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

EPA, Park Service take big hits in latest Trump budget plan
EPA, Park Service take big hits in latest Trump budget plan

The Hill

time36 minutes ago

  • The Hill

EPA, Park Service take big hits in latest Trump budget plan

The Trump administration's more detailed budget request seeks to decimate science, staffing and other programs at multiple environment-related federal agencies. Entities ranging from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to the National Park Service (NPS) would see deep and specific cuts under the less 'skinny' version of the administration's budget that was released late Friday. The EPA sees a 35 percent cut to the payroll for its science staff and for staff who work on environmental programs and environmental management. NPS sees a 30 percent cut to its staff in charge of park system operations. Meanwhile, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) sees a 28 percent cut to its operations, research and facilities staff payroll. But it's not just staff that takes a hit. A number of offices related to energy and environmental research, as well as disaster response, are reduced or eliminated under the proposal. It completely zeroes out NOAA's office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research, for example, and also cuts federal assistance at the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) by 32 percent. Science and technology activities at the EPA would see a 33 percent cut, while environmental programs and environmental management at the agency would see an 18 percent one. And the Energy Department would also see a 13 cut to its science office. The budget document also proposes to 'wind down' the department's Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations, which was established in the Biden-era bipartisan infrastructure law to to bolster emerging energy technologies including hydrogen power, carbon capture, advanced nuclear reactors, and batteries. 'This sick joke of a budget is a nonstarter,' said Rep. Zoe Lofgren (Calif.), the top Democrat on the House Science, Space and Technology Committee, in a written statement. 'In no way can America continue to lead if Trump continues his vendetta against the scientific enterprise. While Trump slashes budgets for American research and innovation, our adversaries, like China, are popping champagne. I will do everything I can to stand in the way of this ridiculous plan. In previous years, a White House budget request has been taken as more of a signal of an administration's priorities than a roadmap that's likely to be realized since it's Congress, not the administration, that has the power of the purse. The Trump administration, however, has signaled that it is willing to go further to challenge that authority, already instituting massive layoffs at many agencies and gearing up for more. And White House budget director Russell Vought said over the weekend that the administration would consider ' impoundment ' to get its agenda across the finish line. It's not entirely clear how the budget would play out politically, as cuts to programs such as NPS have been historically unpopular. The administration's calls for cuts to FEMA have also been met with mixed reviews even within the GOP, though, the budget proposal stops short of the administration's broader calls to eliminate FEMA entirely. The document that was released late Friday gives additional color to a less detailed 'skinny budget' previously released by the administration. The skinny budget also proposed big cuts at similar agencies. The previously announced document called for a 55 percent cut to the EPA's overall budget and a 31 percent cut to the Interior Department, which houses the Park Service. It also called for transferring certain national park 'properties' to the states.

Ukraine's big drone gamble
Ukraine's big drone gamble

Politico

time41 minutes ago

  • Politico

Ukraine's big drone gamble

TALKING TURKEY — Russian and Ukrainian diplomats were sitting down today in Istanbul for American-brokered peace talks when the first explosions went off. Using drones launched from disguised cargo trucks, Kyiv's special forces struck military targets deep inside Russia, blowing up billions of dollars-worth of strategic warplanes at airbases as far away as Siberia. As much as a third of the nuclear-capable bomber fleet has been damaged. Now, with President Donald Trump pushing for negotiations to end the war, the daring move could swing momentum back in favor of Ukraine. 'The operation was very timely, there's no doubt about that,' Oleg Ustenko, who served as a top advisor to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy until last year, told POLITICO Nightly. 'You could clearly see from the faces of the Russian delegation in Turkey that they are not so brave or so rude as they once were and it showed the White House and the new president what we can do.' 'Trump said we don't have the cards — this shows we do have the cards, and we can play them.' So far, the Russians have shown no sign of living up to the White House's assessment that the Kremlin is negotiating in good faith, pounding cities across Ukraine with missiles and killing dozens of civilians. Trump has himself voiced frustration at the lack of progress, writing that Russian leader Vladimir Putin 'has gone absolutely CRAZY' and the refusal to do a deal 'will lead to the downfall of Russia!' For the time being, that standstill looks unlikely to change. In a statement issued this evening, Moscow claimed it was ready to sign a ceasefire, but with the improbable condition that Ukraine hand over vast swathes of its territory, including major cities the Russian armed forces have never been able to occupy. The sudden hybrid counter-offensive has left Putin with few ways to respond, according to Oleg Ignatov from Crisis Group. 'The Kremlin's options for escalation beyond its current tactic of wearing down Ukraine are limited and risky,' he said. 'For now, all eyes are on negotiations, present and future — the true targets of both Russia's and Ukraine's military operations.' The head of the Ukrainian president's office, Andriy Yermak, said the brazen refusal to make concessions showed the Russian side is 'doing everything they can to avoid a ceasefire and continue the war.' Now, Trump might have to roll up his sleeves and get involved to try and save the process. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan today offered to hold three-way peace talks with Putin and Zelenskyy, while the White House has said Trump would be 'open' to an invitation. Meanwhile, pro-Ukrainian Republicans are trying to nudge the White House into taking a tougher line. The same day, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) met with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen in Berlin to build support for new sanctions on Russia, with the pair discussing how to put 'further pressure' on Putin, including by further tightening the noose around the Kremlin's oil and gas revenues. With the White House increasingly angry at Russia and Ukraine's allies circling the wagons, Moscow's plans to buy time seem to be leaving it more and more isolated — while the cost of its war rises and some of its most expensive military hardware burns in a Siberian field. 'If we secure a Putin-Zelenskyy meeting, we want to have our allies around the table,' said Ustenko. 'The Russians will go alone — we'll be trying to build a team.' Welcome to POLITICO Nightly. Reach out with news, tips and ideas at nightly@ Or contact tonight's author at ggavin@ What'd I Miss? — Trump blames immigration policy for Boulder attack: President Donald Trump blamed an attack in Boulder, Colorado, that injured at least eight people who were demonstrating in support of the release of Israeli hostages on lax U.S. immigration laws. In a post on Truth Social, Trump seized on the attack's implications for immigration policy after a Department of Homeland Security official wrote in a social media post this morning the suspect in the attack had overstayed his visa and was in the country illegally. The FBI is investigating the incident as an act of terror, with local authorities identifying the suspect as 45-year-old Mohamed Sabry Soliman of Colorado Springs. Soliman, who was encountered on the scene, is in custody has been charged with a federal hate crime, according to an FBI affidavit. — Sean Gallagher named interim Capitol Police chief: The U.S. Capitol Police will be led by Assistant Chief Sean Gallagher on an acting basis while a search continues for a new permanent leader, the department confirmed today. Gallagher's appointment by the Capitol Police Board comes after Chief Thomas Manger retired last month after about four years on the job. Gallagher is seen by some in the department as a strong contender for the permanent position after having held a variety of roles within the department over the past two decades. Gallagher, who oversees uniformed operations as one of three assistant chiefs, has been with the department since 2001. — Pentagon to redraw command map to more closely align Greenland with the US: The Pentagon is poised to shift its oversight of Greenland by putting it under U.S. Northern Command, a symbolic gesture that would more closely align the island territory with the U.S. as President Donald Trump continues to show interest in taking control over the Arctic landmass. The shift in oversight, which could come as soon as this week, could also help the U.S. broaden its Golden Dome missile shield by providing more radars for coverage. Under the plan, Greenland would shift from European Command's jurisdiction to Northern Command, which is responsible for overseeing the security of North America, according to a DOD official and two people familiar with the planning. — Supreme Court to consider reviving case over counting ballots after Election Day: The Supreme Court has agreed to hear a Republican lawmaker's challenge to an Illinois state law requiring election authorities to count mail-in ballots received up to two weeks after Election Day, as long as they are postmarked or certified by the voter as being cast by that date. The lawsuit brought by six-term Rep. Mike Bost is one of a series of cases President Donald Trump's allies have filed seeking to exclude votes received after Election Day from official results. AROUND THE WORLD PUT IT TO A VOTE — Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk intends to call a parliamentary vote of confidence in his government following the victory of opposition-backed Karol Nawrocki in Sunday's presidential election, he said this evening. 'I want everyone to see, including our opponents at home and abroad, that we are ready for this situation, that we understand the gravity of the moment, but that we do not intend to take a single step back,' Tusk said. Nawrocki, a right-wing populist who counts U.S. President Donald Trump among his allies, will aim to use the presidency to block Tusk's domestic agenda. His election victory casts doubt on whether Tusk's government can make meaningful progress on social security reform, restoring the rule of law, or on hot-button issues like allowing same-sex partnerships or loosening Poland's strict abortion rules. COURT ORDERED — A Berlin court ruled today that the German government's push to turn away asylum-seekers at the country's borders is unlawful, upending a key feature of conservative Chancellor Friedrich Merz's promised crackdown on migration. 'People who submit an asylum application during border controls on German territory may not be turned back,' the court said in a statement on its decision. The ruling came in response to a complaint by three Somali asylum-seekers who crossed into Germany from Poland in May, but were then returned by German police. The ruling poses a major challenge to Merz, who in the lead up to his conservatives' election victory earlier this year promised to implement an 'effective entry ban' on undocumented migrants and asylum-seekers from his first day in office. Merz made that promise under pressure from the rising far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party, which ran on an anti-immigration platform and is now the country's strongest opposition party. Nightly Number RADAR SWEEP DATA GOLD MINE — A pioneer in the digital space, Brazil champions a first-of-its-kind data monetization program allowing its citizens to sell their digital data in a skyrocketing, multibillion dollar global data market. The program, named 'dWallet' is the product of a public-private partnership that coincides with the deliberation of a 2023 federal bill designating data as personal property. Advocates acclaim the initiative's potential to empower individuals in the digital market, but critics argue it could target Brazil's most vulnerable rural populations into selling their private information. Gabriel Daros reports for Rest of World from São Paulo, Brazil. Parting Image Did someone forward this email to you? Sign up here.

Department of Homeland Security removes list of sanctuary cities that included Huntington Beach
Department of Homeland Security removes list of sanctuary cities that included Huntington Beach

Los Angeles Times

timean hour ago

  • Los Angeles Times

Department of Homeland Security removes list of sanctuary cities that included Huntington Beach

Huntington Beach was listed on a since-removed Department of Homeland Security list of sanctuary cities that were 'defying federal immigration law' late last week, something Mayor Pat Burns called either a misprint or a serious mistake. The list was published on May 29, but removed from the DHS website on Sunday. It included California as a whole and listed a majority of the state's 58 counties, though Orange County was not included. There was also a list of cities deemed sanctuary cities, and Huntington Beach was the only city in O.C. to be named. DHS officials said in a news release that the list included cities, counties and states that are deliberately obstructing the enforcement of federal immigration laws and endangering American citizens. President Trump signed an executive order on April 28 that directed Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem and Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi to identify and publicly highlight jurisdictions that won't cooperate with federal immigration authorities. But Huntington Beach leaders say that description is flat-out wrong, given the city's policy. In January, Huntington Beach declared itself a nonsanctuary city that was friendly to President Trump's immigration policies. Around the same time, the city filed a federal lawsuit against the state of California, arguing that the sanctuary state law that limits local police from working with federal immigration officials violated the Supremacy and Naturalization clauses of the U.S. Constitution. In a news release issued by the city on Friday night, Burns said that city Resolution No. 2025-01, which applied to immigrants in the country illegally, remained intact and unchanged. He said he had already reached out to his federal contacts to have Huntington Beach taken off the list. 'We adopted a formal policy on this,' Burns said. 'It went before the council, and we unanimously agreed that Huntington Beach is not a sanctuary city. We took deliberate action to make our nonsanctuary stance clear.' Burns added that he had heard that other jurisdictions on the list, including Shasta County in California, had also either declared themselves nonsanctuary jurisdictions or followed nonsanctuary policies. The DHS sanctuary list itself was scrutinized over the weekend by both city political leaders and law enforcement. National Sheriffs' Assn. President Sheriff Kieran Donahue called the list 'arbitrary' and created without any input, criteria of compliance or method of objecting to the designation. Noem said on the Fox News show 'Sunday Morning Futures' that she had heard anger from officials about the list, but defended it. 'Some of the cities have pushed back,' Noem said. 'They think because they don't have one law or another on the books that they don't qualify, but they do qualify. They are giving sanctuary to criminals.' Notably, Santa Ana, the only county city that has actually declared itself a sanctuary city, was not on the May 29 DHS list.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store