Latest news with #anti-Communist
Morocco World
2 days ago
- Politics
- Morocco World
Populist Historian Wins Polish Presidential Election
Rabat – The Polish presidential run-off elections have reached their conclusion, resulting in a narrow victory for Karol Nawrocki, who won against liberal Warsaw mayor Rafal Trzaskowski, by 50.89%. This is a major victory for populism in the Visegrad Group, which political pundits argue threatens the stability of Prime Minister Donald Tusk's center-right government. Nawrocki is a Polish historian who studies anti-Communist opposition in Poland. He stood as an independent candidate but was backed by the Law and Justice Party (PIS). His opponent was Rafal Trzaskowski, the liberal Warsaw mayor, who is a member of the Civic Platform party led by Tusk. Karol Nawrocki is a populist figure who champions Christian nationalism, and questions have been raised about his support for Ukraine. He is only the latest populist figure in the Visegrad group to be elected to power. Other populist leaders in Eastern Europe include Hungarian Prime Minister Victor Orban, Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico and Turkish President Recap Tayyip Erdogan. In the first round of the election, held on the May 18, Trzaskowski was ahead with 31.3% of the vote against Nawrocki on 29.5%. However, the election polls had been narrowing in the last few weeks of the election campaign and looked extremely close between the two candidates. The exit poll showed Trzaskowski ahead, and he came out to claim victory, but during the night the election became closer and Nawrocki won with 50.89%. Nawrocki will become the president on August 6 succeeding Law and Justice President Andrzej Duda. The role of the President in Poland is largely ceremonial, but with this election Nawrocki will be able to put pressure on Donald Tusk's government, as the president possesses a veto-power which can be used to block parliamentary legislation. The election has also been seen as a precursor to the 2027 parliamentary election which could result in a loss for Donald Tusk and the Civic Platform party. This has been a very influential election that will have a long-lasting effect on Polish politics. Tags: electionspolish electionspoliticspresidential elections
Boston Globe
28-05-2025
- Boston Globe
How an $18 pillow led to the recovery of a $2 million stolen Dutch painting
Schorer had flown from Brussels the day before with the painting he now carried in his hands, a winter scene by the acclaimed Dutch Golden Age artist Hendrick Avercamp. The artwork was stolen nearly half a century earlier in a sensational 1978 heist from the baronial estate of Helen and Robert Stoddard, a Worcester industrialist. The Avercamp picture, along with numerous other paintings and other valuables taken from the home that night, had not been seen since. Local officials were stumped. So was the FBI. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up But Schorer had thought to look where others did not. Advertisement Inside the museum, members of the Stoddard family and museum staff greeted Schorer, who apologized for being late. As they gathered around, he and a conservator carefully unwrapped the package, revealing the aged but unscathed picture of Dutch figures skating in winter. 'It was nirvana,' Warren Fletcher, a nephew of the Stoddards, said of the moment. 'There's not a snowball's chance in hell this painting will show up, but through a combination of serendipitous circumstances, it did.' Advertisement Dutch artist Hendrick Avercamp's winter scene, stolen in 1978, arrived earlier this month at the Worcester Art Museum. Pat Greenhouse/Globe Staff The Avercamp originally disappeared the night of June 22, 1978, when thieves broke into the 36-acre Stoddard estate, hacking open sofa cushions to cart away valuable works by Camille Pissarro, J.M.W. Turner, and Pierre-Auguste Renoir, among others. The theft has been largely forgotten since, overshadowed by notorious art heists such as the 1990 But the Stoddard theft — the largest art heist in the city's history — was equally chilling. That night, with Helen undergoing cancer treatment at a Boston hospital, Robert turned in just before midnight. The industrialist, he'd run a metal forging enterprise, was chairman of the Worcester Telegram and Gazette Inc., and a founder the anti-Communist John Birch Society, was sound asleep when thieves broke in through the sunporch. The burglars ransacked the home, rifling through drawers and closets. They drank the couple's liquor and ate food from the fridge, according to later news reports. They made their way through each room, snatching paintings from the walls and pocketing collectibles including miniature carvings, silver tea sets, watches, and valuable music boxes. When Stoddard awoke the next morning, he realized the house had been robbed when he found his glasses on the floor. The couple's bedroom dressers had been raided, their closets opened, and, ominously, a thief had left a poker from the downstairs fireplace by his bedside. All told, the thieves stole nine paintings, which today would be worth millions. (Schorer estimated the Avercamp, valued at $65,000 at the time of the theft, could today bring upward of $2 million.) Advertisement Investigators conducted a wide-ranging investigation, but no one was ever arrested, and the crime remains unsolved. 'We never had a suspect,' Ralph E. Doyle, a retired Detective Sgt. with the Worcester Police Department, told the Telegram & Gazette in 2000. That's not to say there haven't been breakthroughs. The most valuable work in the Stoddard's collection, Pissarro's 1902 oil on canvas, 'Bassins Duquesne et Berrigny à Dieppe, temps gris,' surfaced at a Cleveland auction house in 1998. The painting, which reportedly wasn't listed in a stolen art database the auction house consulted, was set to be the sale's premier lot. But the auction stalled when the Impressionist's great grandson, art historian Joachim Pissarro, informed a potential buyer the painting was stolen. 'The auction was coming up in a week,' recalled Fletcher, who worked to get the Federal Bureau of Investigation involved once he learned of the painting's whereabouts. 'At the last moment, the FBI did go in and basically seized the painting, withheld it from the auction.' Helen Stoddard, then 94, was ecstatic. 'I don't believe it,' she told the Globe back then. 'I'm so thrilled.' Helen Stoddard after she'd learned the Pissarro had surfaced in Ohio. Barry Chin/Globe Staff The discovery of the Pissarro prompted authorities to look closely at a Springfield-area art dealer named Robert Cornell, and his ex-wife, Jennifer Abella-Cornell, who had brought the painting to Ohio. But the estranged couple gave wildly conflicting accounts: She said she'd took it from his closet; he denied any knowledge of the painting. The FBI never charged either of them, and an agency spokesperson later told the Telegram & Gazette that reconciling their stories was 'like beating a dead horse.' Advertisement Cornell died in 2013; Abella-Cornell did not respond to a request for comment. Helen Stoddard, in poor health when the Pissarro was discovered, did not live to see its return to Worcester. In a codicil to her will, however, she said she wanted the Pissarro and the Avercamp — if ever found — to go to the museum. A stolen painting by Camille Pissarro, Bassins Duquesne et Berrigny à Dieppe, temps gris (The Duquesne and Berrigny Basins at Dieppe, Overcast Weather), 1902, now at the Worcester Art Museum, surfaced in 1998. Stoddard Acquisition Fund in memory of Mr. and Mrs. Robert W. Stoddard. Camille Pissarro Another of the stolen works, a small painting by Boston-born Impressionist Childe Hassam, turned up at auction around 2006. But the work never entered the museum's collection, and it was eventually sold at auction. The trail of the Avercamp and other missing works then went cold. Frustrated by the lack of progress and still hoping they might be retrieved, Fletcher, the Stoddards' nephew, finally turned to Schorer in 2021. He put information about the missing artworks in a manila envelope and sent it to the sleuth. Fletcher was by then familiar with Schorer. The dealer, whose Provincetown home was designed by Bauhaus School founder Walter Gropius, is a shareholder in London's storied Agnews Gallery. He's renowned in the trade, and he'd recently discovered a Schorer was only vaguely aware of the Stoddard theft at the time, but as he looked through the envelope's contents, he began to concentrate on the works he found most interesting: the Avercamp, the Turner, and an oil painting by 19th-century Dutch painter Johan Jongkind. 'They were quite distinctive,' said Schorer, who began to scour the internet. 'I figured, even in silhouette from an old image, I could find them.' Advertisement Cliff Schorer, the former head of the Worcester Art Museum board of directors, visits the museum's Baroque Gallery in Worcester, MA. Pat Greenhouse/Globe Staff His search came up empty. But from his years of experience tracking down stolen art, Schorer knew that disreputable dealers will sometimes misrepresent works to evade detection. 'Finally, I said, 'All right, if I had that painting, who would I fence it as,' Schorer recalled thinking. He knew that Avercamp, a mute painter who specialized in outdoor winter scenes, had a nephew, Barent Avercamp, who mimicked the style of his more gifted relative. Schorer turned again to his computer, this time searching for winter scenes by the famed painter's nephew. Bingo: Fifteen minutes later, he came across a throw pillow that was selling for $18.40 with a portion of the missing Avercamp scene —including a distinctive arch — printed on its case. 'Instantly,' Schorer knew, 'I mean, there is no other painting of that composition.' An image of a throw pillow may not seem particularly revealing, but Schorer had made a breakthrough. The only known images of the Avercamp were grainy black and white photos from the '70s. But this image was in color. It could mean only one thing: The photo was taken after the theft. 'I clicked on that, and it took me to a page trying to sell me a pillow,' Schorer recalled. There, just above the asking price, he also found the logo of the image licensing company that held the source file. Schorer knew he'd made a breakthrough when he found a color image of the Avercamp painting on a pillow. Courtesy Cliff Schorer Schorer navigated to the site and paid $39 to download the photo. As he parsed its metadata, he discovered the copyright on the image: L.S.F.A.L., an acronym for Lawrence Steigrad Fine Arts Ltd., a dealer he'd known for years. Advertisement Steigrad told Schorer he'd taken a photo of the painting for Newhouse Galleries, which had offered the artwork at a fine arts fair in the Netherlands in the mid-90s. Working another angle, Schorer discovered the name of the person who'd originally sold the work to Newhouse: Sheldon Fish. Fish told Schorer he'd purchased the painting at the Brimfield Antique Flea Market, a short drive from Worcester. He added that he'd bought the piece 'in the '90s' but hadn't known it was by Avercamp and couldn't remember the seller's name. 'I just thought it was a good painting,' Fish told the Globe via telephone from Peru. 'I took a shot.' Schorer is now convinced the mysterious Brimfield seller was Cornell, the art dealer who was implicated when the Pissarro surfaced in the late '90s. 'Cornell exhibited there,' he said. 'He sold it to Sheldon Fish.' Newhouse Galleries, which Schorer said offered the painting as the work of Barent Avercamp, has since closed. But Schorer managed to access the gallery's archives, where he learned the name of the Dutch couple, now deceased, that had purchased the work at the art fair back in the '90s. By August 2021, Schorer had tracked down an heir to the couple and began firing off a series of increasingly urgent letters. But he received no response. Eventually, Schorer wrote that he planned to go on Dutch television about the case, enlisting a well-known art recovery expert, who also made contact. 'At that point, finally, they came back' to me, he said. Terms of the Avercamp agreement, including the name of the Dutch family, were not revealed. But after years of searching, Schorer finally collected the picture in early May after having it independently authenticated at a meeting in Antwerp, Belgium. The small group of individuals who supported the recovery of the painting now plan to donate it to the museum. Schorer returned home the following day, stowing the artwork in the back of his car while he squired it back to Worcester. James Welu, who led the museum when the Pissarro came home, said the Avercamp's return 'was like déjà vu.' Cliff Schorer, left, inspects the recovered painting with conservator Matthew Cushman. Pat Greenhouse/Globe Staff Current museum director Matthias Waschek called it 'profoundly meaningful.' 'Not only because a long-lost work of art has been returned to the family that once owned it,' he said in a statement, 'but because it reflects the enduring bond between the Stoddard family and the Worcester Art Museum.' During a meeting last week, Schorer marveled at the overall condition of the painting with conservator Matthew Cushman. The yellowed varnish will need to be addressed, Cushman said, and there may be some minor retouching before he applies a new coat of varnish. Otherwise, the painting is almost exactly as it was described in a conservator's report from 1977. But Schorer was already thinking about other missing works from the Stoddard collection, saying he plans to focus on the nexus revealed by the recovered Avercamp and Pissarro. 'That's the exciting part,' he said. 'There's a whole number of threads now that I can unravel.' Malcolm Gay can be reached at
National Observer
23-05-2025
- Entertainment
- National Observer
MOVIES: A big showdown for the US long weekend: Tom Cruise in action vs Disney's live action Lilo & Stitch
It seems that we've got another case of two big films going head to head. It's Memorial Day weekend in the US and both Mission Impossible The Final Reckoning starring Tom Cruise and Lilo & Stitch, Disney's latest live-action remake of an animated film, are both predicted to be smash hits. The only question is, which one will be at the top. The other will be right behind. And here's a fun fact: Angela Bassett is an actor in one; her husband Courtney B. Vance is in the other. We've got other choices too, including a Jane Austen-inspired rom com and a gay rights/anti-Communist dissertation with a small Canadian connection. And watch out for a film I didn't have a chance to preview: Ocean with David Attenborough. It promises to be stocked with his usual wisdom about the natural world and revel in spectacular cinematography. And take note that Incandescence, the film about forest wildfires that I reviewed a month and a half ago, is about to start on the National Film Board ( website. It'll be free and with wildfire season starting up again, essential. In theaters, we have these: Mission Impossible The Final Reckoning: 3 stars Lilo & Stitch: 3 Jane Austen Wrecked My Life: 4 Bad Shabbos: 2 ½ MISSION IMPOSSIBLE THE FINAL RECKONING: This film finishes the story that started in Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning two years ago and is predicted to be a much bigger hit. But it's not the story that you come to it for; it's the action, the driving narrative and Tom Cruise again doing his own stunts. I don't know if he really did the main sequence, dangling from a plane in midair after jumping from another. Then climbing up to overpower the pilot. It's thrilling and pretty-well sums up what summer movies are all about. Don't explain, just energize. The story has Cruise as Ethan Hunt continue searching for the people behind a malevolent use of Artificial Intelligence. It's a program called The Entity. It can invade any computer system on earth and considering how much of our world is now run with computers poses an extreme threat. Nuclear missiles will launch in three days unless Ethan can stop the Entity. He has half of a key (he got hold of it last film) and now needs something called the Podkova, a gadget apparently sitting in a Russian submarine that sank, also last film. He assembles his crew (Ving Rhames and Simon Pegg, holdovers, and Hayley Atwell and Pom Klementiff, newcomers) and with the U.S. president (Angela Bassett) urging him on, gets to work. The details don't make sense and take almost three hours to play out but for gung ho action and intense moralizing this is more than worthwhile. (In many theaters) 3 out of 5 LILO & STITCH: Disney is at it again. They've made this live action version of the animated film which came out 23 years ago and has been very popular with children. This new one will probably be also, with kids about 8 or 10 years old. They'll love the recurring scenes of havoc and probably the family connections it espouses. Adults may find it glossy and pleasant but bland and repetitive, a milder counterpart of better films like ET, lower in emotional impact and certainly not bringing on tears. Instead it plays like a run-of-the-mill family drama like Disney used to make regularly. Lilo (played winningly by newcomer Maia Kealoha) is a young girl living in Hawaii. She's been raised by her older sister (Sydney Elizabeth Agudong) after their parents died sometime in the past. Lilo is a bit of a troublemaker at school (in self-defense) which brings both a teacher and two children's services people calling. Sis assures her she's not bad. 'You just do bad things sometimes,' she says. All that changes dramatically because out on a planet somewhere in space a rogue genetic experiment has produced a 'monstrosity.' The queen orders it disposed of. It looks like a small animal with a soulful face and ends up on Earth where an animal rescue group saves it and Lilo finds and adopts it. She thinks it's a dog. Cue the havoc it causes at her home, at various locations and even on a surfboard. All that is fun but very silly, as are the forces closing in. One is the CIA (really? Operating internally in the USA?). Courtney B. Vance is the agent investigating. Also in pursuit are a couple of agents sent from the planet that Stitch came from. They disguise themselves as humans (Zach Galifianakis and Billy Magnussen) but prove to be bumblers. Children may enjoy that. What may affect them more is the family separation threat looming over Lilo thanks to the child social workers. The film follows the original closely, with only a few changes. And live action isn't 100%. Characters on and from the alien planet are still animated; earthlings are live. Any reason, I guess, to re-visit old favorites. (In theaters) 2 ½ out if 5 JANE AUSTEN WRECKED MY LIFE: Here's a better-than-usual romantic comedy powered by a literary and classic English ambience. The word 'wrecked' don't fit though. The main character is a reader of Austen's novels and quite longing for some of the life in there, but she's not, as far as I can see, damaged by her. Influenced, sure. Agathe, played by Camille Rutherford, is single, hasn't had sex in years, writes but hasn't finished a novel yet, seems to be suffering a writer's block, and works in a bookstore alongside Felix (Pablo Pauly). She is attracted to him but makes no effort to show it. Felix says to her 'You don't live. You hide.' He helps, though. He reads the start of her in-progress novel, declares it good and recommends her to an English writers retreat. She's accepted, sheepishly goes and meets Oliver (Charlie Anson) who is a great, great, great, great nephew of Jane Austen's. He's a professor of English literature and considers Austen 'overated' which prompts Agathe to declare him 'unbearable and arrogant.' If you've seen any rom com before you know that feeling won't last. Gradually she warms to him and a love triangle, with him versus Felix, takes shape. Much like in an Austen novel. There are other smaller parallels envisioned by writer/director Laura Piani who herself, like Agathe, worked in a Paris bookstore. She steers the film's main theme to fight self-doubt and do what you dream of. A surprise cameo late in the film by the documentary filmmaker Frederick Wiseman sums that up. Satisfying. (Theaters in Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver) 4 out of 5 BAD SHABBOS: The Jewish Sabbath is supposed to be a day of rest and family gatherings but is noisily disrupted in this comedy. Too bad it's not as funny as the writers, Daniel Robbins, who is also the director, and Zack Weiner, seem to think it is. It feels like one of those SNL skits that starts with a good idea but comes up short in the writing. It's not all that clever and the story reminds me of several films done before. At heart this is a standard meeting-of-cultures film. David, who is Jewish and played by Jon Bass, is engaged to marry Meg, a Christian, and brings her home to his family for dinner on the Sabbath evening. Her parents are to arrive later. So there are many opportunities to have slightly awkward misunderstandings over Jewish traditions. Meg (Meghan Leathers) says she has always wanted to find out more about Judaism and thinks the Torah is a prequel to the Bible. (One of the better jokes in here). Kyra Sedgwick and David Paymer play the Jewish parents; she written stereotypically and he easygoing. Another son is the problem. Adam (Theo Taplitz) dreams of joining the JDF (the Isreali army) but sets off a huge problem with a prank that causes the death of another of the evening's guests. How to hide the body before the potential in-laws arrive? Do you call the police? 911? Good complications but lackluster debate and an unsatisfying solution follow. And the laughs are pretty mild in this would-be dark comedy, although the rapper Method Man contributes some good ones as a doorman who helps. The film has been popular at many festivals including Tribeca, in New York. (In theaters: Toronto, North York and Vancouver, soon Victoria). 2 ½ out of 5
Yahoo
23-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
In Defense of Academic Freedom
This is an edition of Time-Travel Thursdays, a journey through The Atlantic's archives to contextualize the present. Sign up here. Why defend academic freedom even when the ideas in question are wrongheaded or harmful? 'It is precisely because any kind of purge opens the gate to all kinds of purge, that freedom of thought necessarily means the freedom to think bad thoughts as well as good.' Those words, written in 1953 by Joseph Alsop, an alumnus of Harvard who later served on its Board of Overseers, are relevant today, as the Trump administration cancels the visas of foreign students for viewpoints that it deems 'bad.' And they were relevant in recent years as institutions of higher education investigated and disciplined members of their communities for expressing views that ran afoul of various progressive social-justice orthodoxies. But Alsop wrote them in response to the McCarthy era's efforts to identify and punish Communists who were working in academia. Hundreds of professors were summoned by the House Un-American Activities Committee and the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee, forced to appear as witnesses, and pressured to name names––that is, to identify fellow academics with ties to the Communist Party. Many were then censured or fired and blacklisted by their employers. 'I have been profoundly and actively anti-Communist all my life,' Alsop declared in a letter to the president and fellows of Harvard, published in The Atlantic. 'Unfortunately, however, the question that confronts us is not how we feel about Communists and ex-Communists. The question is, rather, how we feel about the three great principles which have run, like threads of gold, through the long, proud Harvard story.' The first principle he listed was the freedom to make personal choices within the limits of the law. The second principle was 'unrestricted freedom of thought.' And the third principle was one's right to due process when accused of breaking the law. 'A member of our faculty is not to be penalized for any legal choice he may make, however eccentric or controversial,' Alsop wrote. 'He may become a nudist or a Zoroastrian, imitate Origen or adopt the Pythagorean rules of diet. If called before a Congressional investigating committee, he may seek the protection of the Fifth Amendment, and refuse to testify on grounds of possible self-incrimination. However much we disapprove, we may not interfere.' By standing for 'unrestricted free trade in ideas,' Alsop sought to conserve the university's ability to extend the frontiers of human thought and knowledge at a moment that has long been regarded as one of the darkest in the history of American academia. But as Greg Lukianoff, the president of the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), documented in a 2023 Atlantic article, the threat to academic freedom today arguably surpasses the threat that existed in the 1950s. 'According to the largest study at the time, about 100 professors were fired over a 10-year period during the second Red Scare for their political beliefs or communist ties,' he wrote. 'We found that, in the past nine years, the number of professors fired for their beliefs was closer to 200.' More recently, FIRE has objected to the Trump administration's infringements on academic freedom, including the unprecedented demands that it sent to Harvard last month. Supporters of academic freedom have every reason to fear that more colleges will be similarly targeted in coming months. One defense should involve consulting similar situations from bygone eras. Doing so can help identify principles and arguments that have stood the test of time—and it can be a source of hope. After all, the authoritarian excesses of McCarthyism, which intimidated so many, did not long endure. 'From the perspective of the sixties, the whole period has an air of unreality' for many students, a 1965 Harvard Crimson article—written in an era of 'sit-ins, summer projects, and full page ads criticizing U.S. foreign policy placed in the Times by hundreds of academics'—declared. But just several years prior, it pointed out, 'tenured professors thought long and hard before risking a statement on public issues; teaching fellows, fearful of antagonizing Governing Boards, were politically inert; and students retreated into silence and inactivity.' I hope that, circa 2030, incoming college students will have trouble understanding the mounting attacks on academic freedom that began about a decade ago. Perhaps this period, echoing the Red Scare's aftermath, may yet be followed by a new flourishing of academic freedom. A renaissance of that sort will require defending people's rights—no matter how abhorrent one may find a given opinion. As Alsop put it, 'In these cases the individuals are nothing and the principles are everything.' Article originally published at The Atlantic
Atlantic
22-05-2025
- Politics
- Atlantic
In Defense of Academic Freedom
This is an edition of Time-Travel Thursdays, a journey through The Atlantic 's archives to contextualize the present. Sign up here. Why defend academic freedom even when the ideas in question are wrongheaded or harmful? 'It is precisely because any kind of purge opens the gate to all kinds of purge, that freedom of thought necessarily means the freedom to think bad thoughts as well as good.' Those words, written in 1953 by Joseph Alsop, an alumnus of Harvard who later served on its Board of Overseers, are relevant today, as the Trump administration cancels the visas of foreign students for viewpoints that it deems 'bad.' And they were relevant in recent years as institutions of higher education investigated and disciplined members of their communities for expressing views that ran afoul of various progressive social-justice orthodoxies. But Alsop wrote them in response to the McCarthy era's efforts to identify and punish Communists who were working in academia. Hundreds of professors were summoned by the House Un-American Activities Committee and the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee, forced to appear as witnesses, and pressured to name names––that is, to identify fellow academics with ties to the Communist Party. Many were then censured or fired and blacklisted by their employers. 'I have been profoundly and actively anti-Communist all my life,' Alsop declared in a letter to the president and fellows of Harvard, published in The Atlantic. 'Unfortunately, however, the question that confronts us is not how we feel about Communists and ex-Communists. The question is, rather, how we feel about the three great principles which have run, like threads of gold, through the long, proud Harvard story.' The first principle he listed was the freedom to make personal choices within the limits of the law. The second principle was 'unrestricted freedom of thought.' And the third principle was one's right to due process when accused of breaking the law. 'A member of our faculty is not to be penalized for any legal choice he may make, however eccentric or controversial,' Alsop wrote. 'He may become a nudist or a Zoroastrian, imitate Origen or adopt the Pythagorean rules of diet. If called before a Congressional investigating committee, he may seek the protection of the Fifth Amendment, and refuse to testify on grounds of possible self-incrimination. However much we disapprove, we may not interfere.' By standing for 'unrestricted free trade in ideas,' Alsop sought to conserve the university's ability to extend the frontiers of human thought and knowledge at a moment that has long been regarded as one of the darkest in the history of American academia. But as Greg Lukianoff, the president of the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), documented in a 2023 Atlantic article, the threat to academic freedom today arguably surpasses the threat that existed in the 1950s. 'According to the largest study at the time, about 100 professors were fired over a 10-year period during the second Red Scare for their political beliefs or communist ties,' he wrote. 'We found that, in the past nine years, the number of professors fired for their beliefs was closer to 200.' More recently, FIRE has objected to the Trump administration's infringements on academic freedom, including the unprecedented demands that it sent to Harvard last month. Supporters of academic freedom have every reason to fear that more colleges will be similarly targeted in coming months. One defense should involve consulting similar situations from bygone eras. Doing so can help identify principles and arguments that have stood the test of time—and it can be a source of hope. After all, the authoritarian excesses of McCarthyism, which intimidated so many, did not long endure. 'From the perspective of the sixties, the whole period has an air of unreality' for many students, a 1965 Harvard Crimson article —written in an era of 'sit-ins, summer projects, and full page ads criticizing U.S. foreign policy placed in the Times by hundreds of academics'—declared. But just several years prior, it pointed out, 'tenured professors thought long and hard before risking a statement on public issues; teaching fellows, fearful of antagonizing Governing Boards, were politically inert; and students retreated into silence and inactivity.' I hope that, circa 2030, incoming college students will have trouble understanding the mounting attacks on academic freedom that began about a decade ago. Perhaps this period, echoing the Red Scare's aftermath, may yet be followed by a new flourishing of academic freedom. A renaissance of that sort will require defending people's rights—no matter how abhorrent one may find a given opinion. As Alsop put it, 'In these cases the individuals are nothing and the principles are everything.'
