logo
‘Harvard people' squaring up for battle royale with White House over politics, power and privilege

‘Harvard people' squaring up for battle royale with White House over politics, power and privilege

Irish Times26-04-2025

In one of his gloomier moments – and there were many – Lyndon Johnson reportedly grumbled that 'all the historians are
Harvard
people'. He feared for how the official – or most significant – chroniclers would record his presidential legacy.
'Poor old [Herbert] Hoover from West Branch, Iowa, had no chance with that crowd,' he said before concluding, 'nor does Lyndon Johnson from Stonewall, Texas. It just isn't fair.'
Perhaps not. Harvard represents many things, all at once, to Americans. It's been 'up there' in Cambridge, Massachusetts, since 1636 and its archives and story serve as an umbilical cord to the embryo of the new world. For the vast majority of people, it's an unachievable badge of privilege and success, in the far northeast where the brightest and best and richest get to go.
More than 30 years have passed since Jack Nicholson, playing a peeved army general in A Few Good Men, upbraided Tom Cruise's character for standing before him with his 'Harvard mouth'. And 2027 will mark 30 years since Good Will Hunting, in which Matt Damon's brattish, 'wicked smaht' janitor stood in a Cambridge bar humiliating a preppy Harvard type for dropping 'a hundred and fifty grand on a f**ken education you could have got for a dollar-fifty in late charges at the public library'. (Damon, like Gram Parsons and Mark Zuckerberg, attended Harvard but left before graduating).
READ MORE
The trick for Harvard has been to preserve its reputation for maintaining the highest levels of collegiate education and research and standards while batting away the criticisms of elitist privilege.
Now comes the most problematic critic, in the shape of the 47th president of the United States. Seemingly not sufficiently preoccupied with a mounting trade crisis with China and dissipating peace negotiations on the eastern front, Trump renewed his attacks on America's oldest university with a blistering
social media post
on Thursday. 'Harvard is an Anti-Semitic Far Left Institution, as are numerous others, with students being accepted from all over the World that want to rip our Country apart,' he wrote.
'The place is a Liberal mess, allowing a certain group of crazed lunatics to enter and exit the classroom and spew fake ANGER AND HATE,' he went on. 'It is truly horrific! Now, since our filings began, they act like they are all 'American Apple Pie.''
Two weeks have passed since the Trump administration sent a letter addressed to Harvard's president, Alan Garber, warning that federal investment (of $2 billion a year) 'is not an entitlement'. The letter made demands that the Harvard Gazette synopsised as including 'audits' of academic programmes and departments, as well as the viewpoints of students, faculty and staff, and changes to the university's governance structure and hiring practices.
[
Harvard University fights to withstand Donald Trump's all-out assault on higher education
Opens in new window
]
Failure to do so would jeopardise $9 billion in government contracts that were under review, including money for hospitals affiliated with Harvard's medical school. In essence, the Trump administration wanted to supervise who was hired, who was admitted and who among the faculty should be fired.
Harvard rejected the demands. This week, the university filed a lawsuit against the administration. In an interview on NBC, Garber acknowledged there was a 'real problem with anti-Semitism at Harvard' but argued there was no connection between that problem and punitive cuts to vital medical research funding.
Harvard's endowment now stands at an eye-popping $53 billion (€47 billion). Full tuition fees for last year were listed at $53,000, with on-campus room and board a further $20,000. However, its operating budget for last year was $6.4 billion.
The next move from the Trump administration could well involve an attack on the university's tax-free status (long the source of disgruntlement among local Boston politicians) and on foreign donors. If the fight with the White House becomes protracted, that rainy day fund will become necessary. However, the guardians of that endowment stress that access is strictly limited and complex: it is not as though Garber can simply dash down to the ATM at Harvard Square.
So, a classic fight is brewing between old and new. The blueprints for Harvard's 400th birthday celebrations in 2036 have, one imagines, already been drawn up. The political era of Donald Trump is scarcely over a decade old. The old place has its critics, but it couldn't simply fold to the bellicose demands of a new administration that it abandon everything it holds as coveted and right.
[
Harvard's decision to resist Trump is 'of momentous significance'
Opens in new window
]
It worked out just fine for Lyndon Johnson. Robert Caro, Princeton-educated but also a Harvard Nieman fellow, is beavering away on the fourth volume of a biographical series that has been acclaimed as a peerless masterpiece of the form.
As for current leaders of the 'Harvard people' Johnson once bemoaned, they are facing into the toughest battle in the history of the institution.
'I don't know the answer to this question,' Garber said, when asked if Harvard can win. 'But the stakes are so high that we have no choice.'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

The Irish Times view on turmoil in Los Angeles: a key test of Trump's power
The Irish Times view on turmoil in Los Angeles: a key test of Trump's power

Irish Times

time2 hours ago

  • Irish Times

The Irish Times view on turmoil in Los Angeles: a key test of Trump's power

The Trump administration says that the US is being 'invaded' and a rebellion or insurrection is thus jeopardising its very existence. Even by the standards of Trump's hyperbolic rhetoric these inflated claims are extraordinary. They are necessary, however, for the president to invoke emergency powers to federalise California's National Guard and deploy 2,000 of its members against protesting Los Angeles citizens, contrary to the wishes of its commander, state governor Gavin Newsom. The latter describes the deployment as 'purposefully inflammatory' – it is the first time in 60 years that a president has mobilised the National Guard against the wishes of a state governor. The president justified his move on Sunday with incendiary language: 'A once great American city, Los Angeles, has been invaded and occupied by illegal aliens and criminals.' White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller posted that 'this is a fight to save civilisation.' And vice president JD Vance said the spectacle of 'foreign nationals with no legal right to be in the country waving foreign flags and assaulting law enforcement' could be defined as an invasion. READ MORE Sufficient justification, it appears, for invoking Title 10 of the US Code on Armed Services which allows federal deployment of National Guard forces if 'there is a rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States.' That notional immediate threat to the security of the US has also previously been used by Trump to justify his right to deport migrants without congressional or court approval; multiple cases challenging his increasing, deliberate , autocratic stretching of the constitutional boundaries of presidential power are working their way through the legal system. Newsom says he will also test his latest actions in the courts. In LA the deployment of the National Guard came after local police insisted that they had already restored order, and served only to provoke new protests in the city and elsewhere. Democratic governors across the US have also rallied against what they see as a serious violation of states' rights and autonomy. Trump clearly believes that the deployment will be strongly supported by an electorate which backs his flagship migrant deportation policy, and that it will send a warning signal about his ability to use the full weight of the federal state to enforce his agenda. California, a predominantly Democratic state, had already been in his sights, its funding threatened for allowing trans athletes to compete in women's sports, and its major rapid rail modernisation losing $4 billion in federal funding. The huge, wealthy state's capacity to fight back has yet to be tested. It will be a key test of the limits of Trump's authority to impose his malign immigration agenda.

China and US resume trade talks in London
China and US resume trade talks in London

RTÉ News​

time2 hours ago

  • RTÉ News​

China and US resume trade talks in London

Top US and Chinese officials were meeting in London today to try to defuse a high-stakes trade dispute that has widened beyond tit-for-tat tariffs to restrictions over rare earths, threatening to cripple supply chains and slow global growth. Officials from the two superpowers were meeting at the ornate Lancaster House to try to get back on track with a preliminary agreement struck last month in Geneva that had briefly lowered the temperature between Washington and Beijing. Since then the US has accused China of slow-walking on its commitments, particularly around rare earths shipments. US economic adviser Kevin Hassett said that the US team wanted a handshake from China on rare earths after Presidents Donald Trump and Xi Jinping spoke last week. "The purpose of the meeting today is to make sure that they're serious, but to literally get handshakes," Hassett, director of the National Economic Council, told CNBC in an interview. He said the expectation was that immediately after the handshake, export controls would be eased and rare earths released in volume. The talks, which could run into Tuesday, come at a crucial time for both economies, with investors looking for relief from Trump's cascade of tariff orders since his return to the White House in January. China's export growth slowed to a three-month low in May while its factory-gate deflation deepened to its worst level in two years. In the US, the trade war has put a huge dent in businessand household confidence, and first-quarter gross domestic product contracted due to a record surge in imports as Americansfront loaded purchases to beat anticipated price increases. But for now, the impact on inflation has been muted, and the jobs market has remained fairly resilient, though economists expect cracks to become more apparent over the summer. Attending the talks in London will be US TreasurySecretary Scott Bessent, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer, and a Chinese contingent helmed by Vice Premier He Lifeng. The inclusion of Lutnick, whose agency oversees export controls for the US, is one indication of how central rareearths have become. China holds a near-monopoly on rare earth magnets, a crucial component in electric vehicle motors. Lutnick did not attend the Geneva talks at which the countries struck a 90-day deal to roll back some of the triple-digit tariffs they had placed on each other. The second round of meetings comes four days after Trump and Xi spoke by phone, their first direct interaction since Trump's January 20 inauguration. During the more than one-hour-long call, Xi told Trump to backdown from trade measures that roiled the global economy and warned him against threatening steps on Taiwan, according to a Chinese government summary. But Trump said on social media the talks focused primarily on trade led to "a very positive conclusion," setting the stage for Monday's meeting in London. The next day, Trump said Xi had agreed to resume shipments to the US of rare earths minerals and magnets and Reuters reported on Friday that China has granted temporary export licenses to rare-earth suppliers of the top three US automakers. China's decision in April to suspend exports of a wide range of critical minerals and magnets upended the supply chains central to automakers, aerospace manufacturers, semiconductor companies and military contractors around the world. White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt told the Fox News program "Sunday Morning Futures" that the US wanted the two sides to build on the progress made in Geneva in the hope they could move towards more comprehensive trade talks. The preliminary deal in Geneva sparked a global relief rally in stock markets, and US indexes that had been in or near bear market levels have recouped the lion's share of their losses. The S&P 500 Index, which at its lowest point in early April was down nearly 18% after Trump unveiled his sweeping "Liberation Day" tariffs on goods from across the globe, is now only about 2% below its record high from mid-February. The final third of that rally followed the US-China truce struck in Geneva. Still, that temporary deal did not address broader concerns that strain the bilateral relationship, from the illicit fentanyl trade to the status of democratically governed Taiwan and US complaints about China's state-dominated, export-driven economic model. While the UK government will provide a venue for Monday's discussions, it will not be party to them and will have separate talks later in the week with the Chinese delegation.

Why the Musk and Trump relationship has broken down — a psychologist explains
Why the Musk and Trump relationship has broken down — a psychologist explains

Irish Examiner

time4 hours ago

  • Irish Examiner

Why the Musk and Trump relationship has broken down — a psychologist explains

It is not a good break-up. These were always two big beasts used to getting their own way. Two alpha males, if you like the evolutionary metaphor, trying to get along. And now the Donald Trump and Elon Musk relationship is in meltdown. Who could forget that iconic image from just a few short weeks back? Elon Musk standing behind the seated US president, Donald Trump, in the Oval Office, towering over him. Trump, his hands clasped, having to turn awkwardly to look up at him. That silent language of the body. FILE - Elon Musk, joined by his son X Æ A-Xii, in the Oval Office. Musk accompanied by his four-year-old, a charming and informal image, or that great evolutionary signal of mating potential and dominance, depending on your point of view. These were also clearly two massive narcissistic egos out in their gleaming open-top speedster. Musk was appointed special advisor to Trump, heading the Department of Government Efficiency, cutting excess and waste. The backseat driver for a while. There were a lot of bureaucratic casualties already, road kill at the side of the highway as the sports car roared on with frightening speed. But things were always going to be difficult if they hit a bump in the road. And they did. Perhaps, more quickly than many had imagined. There were differing views on what caused the crash. Many pointed to the dramatic fall in Tesla's sales — a 71% fall in profits in one quarter — and the inevitable impact on Musk's reputation. Since the break-up, Tesla's share price has also dropped sharply, as investors have panicked. The attacks on Tesla showrooms couldn't have helped either. Others pointed to Trump's proposed removal of the tax credit for owners of electric vehicles, or the political backlash in Washington over Space X's potential involvement in Trump's proposed 'golden dome' anti-missile defense system. 'Everything changed' However, according to former White House strategist Steve Bannon, what really caused the crash was when the president refused to show Musk the Pentagon's attack plans for any possible war with China. There's only so far being the president's best buddy can get you. Bannon is reported as saying: 'You could feel it. Everything changed.' That, according to Bannon, was the beginning of the end. So now we watch Trump and Musk stumbling away from the crash scene. One minute Trump is putting on a show for the cameras. He's beaming away and introducing the 'big, beautiful bill', a budget reconciliation bill that rolls together hundreds of controversial proposals. Next, he is accusing Musk of 'going crazy' and talking about withdrawing government contracts from the Musk empire. Musk is unhappy too. 'I'm sorry, but I just can't stand it anymore. This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination,' he wrote on X. 'Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong.' 'Disgust' He says he's disgusted by the bill. Disgust is one of the most primitive of all the emotions. A survival mechanism — you must avoid what disgusts you. He's social signalling here, alerting others, warning them that there's something disgusting in the camp. Musk is highly attuned to public perception, perhaps even more so than Trump (which is saying something). With his acquisition of X (formerly Twitter), Musk was able to direct (and add to) online discourse, shaping public conversations. Psychologically, Musk's rejection of Trump is an attempt to simultaneously elevate himself and diminish the man behind the bill He can call out the president's action like nobody else. He is positioning himself anew as that free thinker, that risk taker, innovative, courageous, unfettered by any ties. That is his personality, his brand — and he's reasserting it. But it's also a vengeful act. And it's perhaps reminiscent of another political insider (and geek), former Downing Street adviser Dominic Cummings, who was sacked by the then British prime minister, Boris Johnson, in 2020. Cummings was accused of masterminding leaks about the social gatherings in Downing Street. He went on to criticise Johnson as lacking the necessary discipline and focus for a prime minister as well as questioning his competence and decision-making abilities. The revenge of a self-proclaimed genius. And revenge is sweet. In a 2004 study, researchers scanned participants' brains using positron emission tomography (PET) — a medical imaging technique that is used to study brain function (among other things) — while the participants played an economic game based on trust. When trust was violated, participants wanted revenge, and this was reflected in increased activity in the reward-related regions of the brain, the dorsal striatum. Revenge, in other words, is primarily about making yourself feel better rather than righting any wrongs. Your act may make you appear moral but it may be more selfish But revenge for what here? That's where these big narcissistic egos come into play. Psychologically, narcissists are highly sensitive to perceived slights — real or imagined. Musk may have felt Trump was attempting to diminish his achievements for political gain, violating this pact of mutual respect. This kind of sensitivity can quickly transmogrify admiration into contempt. Contempt, coincidentally, is the single best predictor of a breakdown in very close relationships. Disgust and contempt are powerful emotions, evolving to protect us — disgust from physical contamination (spoiled food, disease), and contempt from social or moral contamination (betrayal, incompetence). Both involve rejection — disgust rejects something physically; contempt rejects something socially or morally. Musk may be giving it to Trump with both barrels here. Break-ups are always hard, they get much harder when emotions like these get intertwined with the process. But how will the most powerful man in the world respond to this sort of rejection from the richest man in the world? And where will it end? Geoff Beattie is Professor of Psychology at Edgehill University. (c) The Conversation Read More Terry Prone: Abuse of nursing home patients has been going on for decades

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