US universities

Subterms

    More stories

    • 225 Shares140 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump and Musk want people to think college is not worth it. They are wrong | Carlo Invernizzi-Accetti

      by

      One of the many guises in which the Trump-Musk duo presents itself to the American public, as they take office in the new administration, is as ”employers-in-chief”: seasoned businessmen entitled to give life advice to their fellow citizens on the basis of a purported real-life experience that cuts against received wisdom.It is in this guise that both Trump and Musk recurrently attack higher education institutions as one of the as yet unconquered bastions of the “liberal America” they are now keen to tear down. Already during his first presidential bid in 2016, Trump famously stated that he “loves the poorly educated”. More recently, at a campaign rally in support of Trump’s re-election bid, Musk stated that “too many people spend four years in college, accumulate a ton of debt, and don’t have any useful skills they can apply afterwards”.The message appears to be landing. According to recent polls, the percentage of Americans who express “a lot of confidence” in higher education has declined from 57% to 36% over the past decade, and only about one in four now believe it is “extremely” or “very important” to have a college degree to get a well-paying job in today’s economy.Defending the emancipatory promise that has historically been at the heart of the United States’ higher education system against these attacks and widespread concerns requires going back to the basics about the nature of that promise. Simply pointing to statistics about the monetary returns of a college education won’t cut it, for at least two reasons.To begin with, aggregate data says little about individual life or investment decisions. While it is true that on average college graduates make between 60% and 80% more than workers without college degrees, a lot depends on what you study, where and at what cost. A more detailed program-level assessment conducted by Wharton professor Peter Cappelli found that “the cost-adjusted payoff from many college programs across the country – as much as one in four – is actually negative”.More importantly, however, this purely monetary way of assessing the value of a college education already concedes too much to its critics. By focusing exclusively on the economic returns after graduation, it ignores the broader educational – but also moral and political – value of the experience of actually being in college.There are not many times in most people’s lives nowadays when they can devote themselves to cultivating their own talents and opinions, without immediate regard to external constraints. Prior to entering college, most young people remain under the tutelage of their parents and are therefore at least in part constrained to do what they think is best for them. Afterwards, they usually have to enter the labor market, thereby falling under the authority of their employers, or at least the economic constraints of their revenue-generating activities.That is why, in his recent book entitled The Student: A Short History, Wesleyan University’s president, Michael Roth, reminds us that the college experience has historically been construed as a “concrete exercise of freedom”. In advocating for the creation of a publicly funded university in the state of Virginia at the beginning of the 19th century, for instance, Thomas Jefferson maintained that it was essential for a citizenry aspiring to be “self-governing” to have the opportunity of spending a period of their lives dedicated to cultivating the capacity to “judge for themselves what will secure or endanger their freedom”, unencumbered from both familial authority and the burdens of toil work.The usual retort against this conception of higher education as an intrinsically valuable exercise in freedom is that it can at best be available to a privileged few. The former director of the (for-profit) University of Phoenix, Mark DeFusco, is on record stating: “I’m happy that there are places in the world where people sit down and think. We need that. But that’s very expensive. And not everyone can do that. So for the vast majority of folks who don’t get that privilege, then I think it’s just business.”Upon reflection, however, this is the stance that turns out to be most truly elitist, since it assumes that the freedom afforded by a dedicated period of cultivation of one’s own talents and opinions cannot – or indeed shouldn’t – be available to everyone. As a professor at a higher education institution – the City College of New York, founded with the explicit goal of “educating the whole people” – I cannot abide by such a surrender of America’s democratic promise, masquerading as realism.For most of the predominantly working class and first-generation students on our campus, the decision to enroll is not a consequence of “privilege”. It involves significant costs and also risks. That is why it is generally experienced as an achievement in itself. By the very fact of going to college, these students already get to take part in what they themselves frequently – and unironically – refer to as the “American dream”.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionIn their eyes, this dream isn’t therefore reducible to a prospect of monetary payoff after graduation. It also includes a direct experience of freedom in the present. And although many City College students also have to work to support themselves while studying, they usually see their jobs as instrumental to their education, not the other way around.I take there to be a lesson in this also for our “employers-in-chief” – which is that the American dream they are so fond of referring to as well isn’t for most people about rushing to serve them (more or less lucratively) on the job market, but rather about a more expansive life of freedom, of which higher education remains a core component.

      Carlo Invernizzi-Accetti is executive director of the Moynihan Center and full professor of political science at the City College of New York. More

    • 175 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump promises a crackdown on diversity initiatives. Fearful institutions are dialing them back already

      by

      In 2020, Donald Trump signed an executive order against “race and sex stereotyping and scapegoating” which would have set the stage for sweeping attacks on diversity initiatives in the public sphere. In January 2021, on his first day in office, Joe Biden rescinded Trump’s anti-DEI order and signed one promoting “racial equity and support for underserved communities”.Now Trump is returning to office, he expected to restore his directive and double down on it. The people that run diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives at public and private institutions are expecting mass crackdown. Project 2025 has labeled them “woke culture warriors” and pledged to wield the full force of the federal government against their efforts to create a more equitable society.Trump and his advisers have already threatened the funds and accreditation of universities they have labeled the “enemy”, and pledged to dismantle diversity offices across federal agencies, scrap diversity reporting requirements and use civil rights enforcement mechanisms to combat diversity initiatives they see as “discrimination”.The multi-pronged attack is certain to be met with major legal challenges, but while they prepare for those, advocates warn about the ripple effects of an administration declaring war on inclusivity efforts.“The concern is the bigger footprint and symbol,” said Nina Ozlu Tunceli, chief counsel of government and public affairs at Americans for the Arts. “Federal policies do have a domino effect on other states, on foundations, on individual donors.”Last week, Walmart became the latest in a series of high-profile companies to announce a rollback of its diversity initiatives following a campaign of legal challenges by conservative groups. Other businesses and institutions small and large are trying to keep a low profile to avoid becoming the target of anti-DEI campaigns, those who work with them say.There are already concerns that institutions fearful of losing funding or facing lawsuits may overcorrect and dial back their programmes before they are required to do so, advocates warn.A climate of fearEven before Trump was re-elected, “educational gag orders” seeking to limit discussion of race and LGBTQ+ issues in school classrooms had been introduced in at least 46 states. Last spring, conservative legislators linked campus protests against the war in Gaza to DEI initiatives. Virginia Foxx, the chair of the House committee on education and the workforce, told the presidents of several colleges that her committee would be “steadfast in its dedication to attacking the roots of antisemitic hatred, including anti-Israel DEI bureaucracies”.Questioning by Foxx’s committee ultimately led to several resignations by college presidents.“That got everyone terrified, including private university presidents who previously had been pretty brave about these things,” said Jeremy Young, director of the Freedom to Learn programme at the free speech group PEN America. “It was just this sense that, they’re coming, they’re headhunting for leaders, and you just have to do everything they say or they’re going to fire you or they’re going to cut your budget.”View image in fullscreenEven where no laws have been passed, a broad fear of repercussions has prompted some campus leaders to cut back on DEI initiatives, noted Young.“A number of states have engaged basically in jaw-boning, where the lawmakers will go up to a university president and encourage them or threaten them to close their diversity office while dangling a threat of funding cuts or passing a law the following year,” he said. “So we’re seeing universities trying to comply with these restrictions, or with these threats, even though there’s no law compelling them to do so.”Young cited the University of Missouri, for instance, where campus leaders in July dissolved its division of inclusion, diversity and equity citing nationwide measures against DEI even though no such law was passed in the state.In Texas, where state law does ban DEI offices but exempts academic course instruction and scholarly research, the University of North Texas system began scrutinising course materials in search for references to DEI, in what Young called an example of overcompliance and a “complete overreaction”.It’s a domino effect that anti-DEI activists are exploiting, for instance by sowing confusion about the 2023 supreme court ruling, which was fairly narrow but is sometimes cited as evidence that all DEI initiatives in higher education are illegal, said Leah Watson, a senior staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union’s Racial Justice Program, where she focuses on classroom censorship.“We are very concerned about the broad chilling effect, and we see conservatives misrepresenting the status of the law in order to further the chilling effect,” Watson said. “Overcorrections are happening, and things are being cut that don’t have to be cut.”Some institutions have attempted to protect their work by downplaying their language around diversity to ensure that members from states with restrictions in place can continue to access them. Others have changed language about eligibility requirements for fellowships initially intended to promote access to people of color so as to avoid legal challenges.“There are institutions that want to continue their DEI programmes and they don’t want to be sued and they are really in a hard place with how to do that,” said Watson. “People are trying to fly under the radar at this point.”The new administrationGoing forward, the Trump administration is “likely to be the most virulent anti-DEI administration that we’ve seen”, said David Glasgow, the executive director of the Meltzer Center for Diversity, Inclusion, and Belonging, which helps institutions navigate an array of recent legislative restrictions on diversity work.“People who do this work are nervous and anxious about what might be restricted but their commitment is still there, so it’s really about trying to figure out what they’re going to be able to do,” he added.So far, four states – Florida, Texas, Iowa and Utah – have banned diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives or offices in universities, a primary target in the battle against DEI. A fifth, Alabama, has severely restricted them.In Florida, the Republican governor, Ron DeSantis, also erased nearly all already approved state funding for the arts, ostensibly over a festival promoting inclusivity, which he dubbed a “sexual event”.View image in fullscreenThat may offer a blueprint for attacks on what conservatives see as “woke” culture under the incoming administration, said Tunceli, of Americans for the Arts.Institutions anticipating a similar backlash at the national level are already planning to emphasise projects the incoming administration may be more supportive to – like those celebrating the 250th anniversary of American independence, in 2026 – and to turn to alternative funding for those they expect will lose out on federal support.Many now believe that institutions will have to show bravery to uphold their values, even if it means risking funding. “What they need to do is find a backbone, and I say that with a lot of understanding and empathy for the situation they’re in,” said Young, of PEN America.“I worry when I see a university roll over for funding,” he added, calling on administrators to leverage their influence with alumni and their communities to stand up to legislators’ attacks. “A university that doesn’t have a new building is still a university, it’s just a poor university. A university that has lawmakers banning ideas and restricting the actions of the administration is really not a university at all.” More

    • 175 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      US students rally college voters on campus: ‘We brought the polls to them’

      by

      College students formed a steady line outside a campus art museum to vote early on Tuesday at a pop-up polling place at the University of Minnesota.The one-day site, enabled by new state laws that allow for pop-up early voting, helps populations like student voters, who may not have access to transportation to get off campus, easily access the polls.“We brought the polls to them,” said Riley Hetland, a sophomore and undergraduate student government civic engagement director, who helped plan the event.Hetland said the group has been going to classrooms and hosting tables around campus for weeks to get people registered to vote and help them make a plan to cast ballots. So far, they have gotten 12,000 students to pledge to vote, double their goal of 6,000, a sign of the enthusiasm young people have to perform their civic duty in the presidential election, she said. More than 600 people voted during the seven hours the pop-up site was open on Tuesday, organizers said.Across the country, college campuses and campaigns have ramped up efforts to register and energize college voters, especially in critical swing states. The Democratic party is counting on high turnout on college campuses, which tend to lean Democratic..Kamala Harris’s campaign on Wednesday announced it was launching an early voting push targeting students on campuses in battleground states, including a seven-figure ad buy to primarily target students on social media.College campuses are also organizing their own get-out-thevote efforts. At the University of California Berkeley, hundreds of students came together recently for an event called Votechella, which featured music and on-site voter registration, the state university system said. The name is a nod to Coachella, the popular music festival held annually in southern California.At the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, students have reacted positively to outreach efforts on campus, where a second voting hub opened on Monday, according to CBS News.Nevaeh McVey, a student, told CBS: “I come from a place where I wasn’t really educated about how to vote or who to vote for, and I think getting the younger population to vote is extremely important in times like these. I just think [this initiative] makes it really easy and accessible for us students to do.”The push to mobilize young voters comes as some students are facing challenges in casting their ballot. Leaders of some Republican-controlled states have worked to limit student voting, writing legislation to limit the use of student identification cards as an ID at polls and shuttering on-campus polling precincts.Proponents of these measures claim that they are necessary to prevent voter fraud, while others have railed that voting is too easy for university students.The League of Women Voters of Wisconsin has urged the US justice department to investigate text messages they believe targeted young people to dissuade them from voting. The organization received complaints from voters who received a text that read: “WARNING: Violating WI Statutes 12.13 & 6.18 may result in fines up to $10,000 or 3.5 years in prison. Don’t vote in a state where you’re not eligible.”College students could prove integral in tipping swing states, as they are traditionally permitted to vote either in their home state or where they attend school. Some students have registered in the state where they believe their vote might have the most impact.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“We’ve seen dozens of elections up and down the ballot over the course of the last few years that have been decided by as close as one vote,” Clarissa Unger, co-founder and executive director of Students Learn Students Vote Coalition, told ABC News.“Every single college student’s vote can be consequential.”Throughout the day on Tuesday, the line for the pop-up site in Minnesota held dozens of people who passed by between classes, came to campus specifically for the voting site or walked over from their dorms. A 30ft inflatable eagle helped set a fun atmosphere for voting – and the free pizza didn’t hurt.There are election day polling places on campus, but the pop-up site is the only on-campus early voting opportunity. And it doesn’t require voters to live in any specific precinct – any Minneapolis voter could cast a ballot there on Tuesday. Joslyn Blass, a senior and undergraduate student government director of government and legislative affairs, said the group has pushed for early voting because there could be various obstacles – like an exam or getting sick – that can get in the way of voting solely on 5 November. “We really prioritize the early voting site, just because you never know what’s gonna happen,” she said.Madelyn Ekstrand finished her class for the day and waited about an hour to cast her ballot. The 21-year-old senior said abortion access and the climate crisis were important to her, so she was voting for Harris.“I’m happy to see people my age getting out and voting and being proactive and not waiting till the last second,” she said. More

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Could young voters in Michigan hand the state to Kamala Harris?

      by

      So few students wanted to join the campus Republican party when Abigail Sefcik began studying at Saginaw Valley State University (SVSU) that she was rapidly voted in as its president.“The group was only four or five people. Nobody else wanted to do it,” she said.Four years later, Sefcik has turned her back on the Republicans and is supporting Kamala Harris for president.“In 2020, I voted for Donald Trump. I was being sucked into his void and I said some really disparaging things about other people. I did some things that I would just really call shameful when I think of them,” said the political science student in her final year at university.“But after a couple of years, I decided that there wasn’t a lot that the Republicans stood for that I really cared about.”Rejecting Trump and the Republicans was one thing, but Sefcik found little to inspire her in Joe Biden’s run for re-election. Then the president dropped out the race in July and Harris rapidly became the de facto Democratic candidate.“I couldn’t identify with Joe Biden as a good leader. When we were looking at a ticket with Biden and Trump, of course I was going to vote for Biden. But I would do so unwillingly because we know what the alternative would be,” she said.“Kamala Harris provides a way out for a lot of voters. Her youth, for one thing, has inspired a lot of young people.”A recent Harvard Kennedy School poll gives Harris a two-to-one lead over Trump among voters aged 18 to 29. Harris has the support of 64% of younger voters to 32% for Trump principally because of significantly higher approval ratings on the issues of the climate crisis, abortion rights and healthcare. Harris also scores much better with younger voters on empathy, reliability and honesty.View image in fullscreenThe Kennedy School polling director, John Della Volpe, said the findings showed “a significant shift in the overall vibe and preferences of young Americans” in favour of Harris compared with Biden.“In just a few weeks, Vice-President Harris has drummed up a wave of enthusiasm among young voters. The shift we are seeing toward Harris is seismic, driven largely by young women,” he said.The challenge for the Harris campaign is to translate that enthusiasm into votes where it matters.SVSU is one such place. The university has about 7,000 students. The vast majority can vote in Michigan, a battleground state that Trump won by fewer than 11,000 votes in 2016.With polls showing the former president and Harris closely tied in Michigan, student votes potentially carry significant weight in a state that the vice-president’s campaign sees as a key part of her clearest path to victory alongside two other Rust belt states, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.Leah Craig is campaigning for Harris on campus and registering her fellow students to vote. She did not volunteer for Biden’s campaign even though she would have voted for him. But Harris prompted Craig to get involved.“It was reinvigorating, to say the least. When Biden was the candidate, I wasn’t really passionate about it and it just felt like I was going into another election of the-lesser-of-two-evils kind of a thing. But the Harris campaign brought a new level of attention to a lot of issues that people of my generation are really passionate about,” she said.“We now have an easier candidate to embrace, an easier candidate to advocate for, an easier candidate to appeal to young people.”Many students at SVSU talk about Harris’s relative youth. Although at 59 she is old enough to be a grandmother to the students, they see a sharp contrast in energy and spirit compared with Biden and Trump. Noah Johnson, president of the SVSU Democrats, also credits a determined social media campaign for drawing in younger voters.“A lot of it is due to a big initial social media push. I saw it definitely resonate with some people, like Charli xcx when she tweeted out the Kamala brat thing. That was effective with young people. And similarly, like the coconut tree meme,” he said.“It’s like a permission structure. It wasn’t cool or popular to be a fan of Biden. Students were like: ‘Sure, I support his policies.’ But it was very rare to find a young person that was actively a fan of him. It was more: ‘I’ll vote for him, especially because I like him more than Trump.’ But I’ve definitely seen, especially from my less politically engaged friends, they’re actively excited to go out and vote for Kamala even if they’re not doing anything else.”Still, the Harvard youth poll found a significant gender gap, with the vice-president garnering 17% more support among young female voters than those who are male, although a majority of young men say they will vote for Harris. Sefcik said she saw that at SVSU, where the small membership of the campus Republican party is mostly male while a majority of the college Democrats are women.Trump held a rally at SVSU last week but said little to directly address younger voters or their concerns, perhaps because relatively few students attended and the former president failed to fill the 4,000-seat sports hall.A student who did attend and said he supported Trump didn’t want to give his name. Asked why not, he replied: “There’s no problem at SVSU. I feel like people are respectful of each other’s views. I have friends on both sides. But it’s not like that outside. Saying you vote for Trump could cost you a job.”Many of SVSU’s students come from rural and small-town Michigan, and grew up in Republican neighbourhoods and homes. Sefcik’s disillusionment with Trump went hand in hand with questioning her upbringing in a religious and politically conservative family. But she also became more dismayed with the Republican party as she experienced it from the inside.Sefcik said that as president of the campus Republicans, she would attend fundraising events where the donors expected to hear how she was suffering at the hands of “woke” students and liberal professors.“They want to hear about how hard it is to be a conservative college student and how the system is just not benefiting you anymore. And so you sort of learn these two or three talking points to reinforce that. But in my experience, it wasn’t hard, because people who identified as Democrats were kind and most welcoming people I ever met,” she said.The SVSU Republicans declined a request for an interview.Two days after Trump’s rally, a different student crowd turned out to hear Bernie Sanders speak in support of Harris on the campus.Sanders hit all the right notes for a young audience. Abortion rights, the housing crisis, the US moving ever closer to becoming an oligarchy. He gave a discourse on the dangers of electing Trump again, warning that if he is returned to the White House the world will have “lost the struggle” against the climate crisis.But Sanders also illustrated the gap with Harris as he called for universal public healthcare – “Medicare for all” – in contrast with her much weaker proposals for drug price controls and greater regulation of medical providers.Some of Harris’s more active supporters on campus say that she falls short on some policies but they see other strengths. Although Harris has avoided putting her race and gender at the fore of her campaign, Craig said it was important to some students.“From what I’ve observed around campus, it makes people of our demographic feel more heard and seen and that’s a really big thing, too,” she said.Several students see Harris as a break with being raised in an age of apprehension. Sefcik said people her age “grew up with the fear after 9/11 and have never known a world where we were sort of safe”. She said Trump exacerbated that with his attacks on minority groups and by packing the supreme court to strip women of control over their bodies.Craig described students who recently began at university as spending their teenage years living in the “Trump era of American carnage”.“This is all they’ve ever known. The Biden years are pretty much scrambling to undo what had been done and fix things. I feel like there’s a certain level of despondency whereas, as Harris herself said, she is about bringing joy to people, making it a little more positive and upbeat as compared to the same old. It’s a new approach,” she said.Still, the challenge of making sure students actually vote remains. There are reasons for the Democrats to be optimistic on that score. Four years ago, a historic high of 66% of American college students voted in the presidential election, a huge leap from 2016, when just 52% turned out.The Institute for Democracy & Higher Education called the increase “stunning” and attributed it to a range of factors, including student activism on “racial injustice, global climate change, and voter suppression”. Revulsion with Trump also drove a lot of people to the polls.Harris’s supporters also note that nearly half of SVSU students voted in large numbers in the midterms two years ago, just months after the US supreme court threw out the constitutional right to an abortion by overturning Roe v Wade – a larger turnout than in the rest of Saginaw county.Craig is pushing a widely heard message among Democrats that Trump’s victory in Michigan in 2016 by 10,704 votes is equivalent to just two ballots in each of the state’s election precincts.“We are telling them, all it takes is taking a couple of people with you. Talk to your friends, reach out on social media. You don’t have to go knocking door to door, you don’t have to be standing out here with a clipboard. You don’t have to go do anything terribly crazy. You just have to get two people to vote,” she said. More

    • 113 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Republicans threaten to punish colleges that allow pro-Palestinian protests

      by

      Top Republicans are threatening to pull billions of dollars of federal funding from some of the most prestigious universities in the US, stripping them of official accreditation to punish them for allowing pro-Palestinian protests on their campuses.The Guardian has reviewed a video recording of a meeting in Washington last week between House majority leader Steve Scalise and the powerful pro-Israel lobby group the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (Aipac). In it, Scalise outlined how he planned to unleash a massive attack against universities that fail to squash criticism of Israel.The offensive, which would be coordinated with the White House should Donald Trump win the presidential race in November, could even threaten the existence of universities, Scalise warned. He talked about revoking accreditation, the system by which higher education institutions are approved and to which the bulk of federal funds are tied.“Your accreditation is on the line,” Scalise said. “You’re not playing games any more, or else you’re not a school any more.”The Aipac meeting was held on 1 October, and was attended by Scalise and his fellow Republican congressman, Pat Fallon from Texas. The event was ostensibly billed as a discussion on the spread of antisemitism in the US since the start of the Gaza conflict on 7 October last year, when Hamas killed 1,200 people inside Israel and took 250 hostage.The attack sparked the Israeli offensive, which has destroyed much of the Palestinian territory and killed almost 42,000 people, according to local health authorities. The fall-out continues to roil campuses and cities throughout the US.Latest FBI figures show that the monthly rate of hate crimes against Jewish people in the US spiked in the aftermath of 7 October from 103 offenses in September 2023 to 389 in November. Anti-Muslim incidents have also surged.Despite the Aipac-Scalise meeting’s framing on antisemitism, most of the talk was about how to crush criticism of Israel’s military operation in Gaza. There was no attempt during the hour-long conversation to distinguish hatred of Jews from pro-Palestinian or anti-Israeli government sentiments.Aipac is the most influential pro-Israel lobby group in the US. It has a $100m war chest to spend on the election this year, and is using that muscle to support political candidates that back the actions of the Israeli government and oppose those who are critical.This summer Aipac invested $23m in unseating in primary contests two core members of the progressive Democratic group the “squad”, Jamaal Bowman of New York and Cori Bush of Missouri. The pair had called for a ceasefire in Gaza and have highlighted the death toll of civilians there.Fallon praised Aipac for intervening in the races. “I want to thank you from the bottom of my heart for firing Jamaal Bowman, and even more so, Miss Cori Bush. Great work,” he said.“That’s accountability, by the way,” Scalise added. He further commended Aipac for having “tentacles throughout the Republican and Democrat circles in 435 districts. You can see how people are voting – just put the pressure on those who are voting the wrong way.”Scalise reserved his most potent threats for universities that in his view have failed to quash anti-Israel protests. He told Aipac that a second Trump administration would wield federal purse strings to punish the schools.“We’re looking at federal money, the federal grants that go through the science committee, student loans. You have a lot of jurisdiction as president, with all of these different agencies that are involving billions of dollars, some cases a billion alone going to one school,” Scalise said.The congressman from Louisiana is the second highest-ranking Republican in the House. He has travelled to Israel several times on trips paid for by the American Israel Education Fund, a group created by Aipac.Scalise singled out Harvard, the University of Pennsylvania and Columbia University, which have been rattled by the controversy over student protests around the Gaza war. Penn’s president Elizabeth Magill resigned last December and Harvard’s Claudine Gay a month later after they were accused of being evasive under Republican questioning about how they would respond to calls for the genocide of Jews.Columbia’s president Minouche Shafik stepped down in August after also facing criticism over her handling of pro-Palestinian protest encampments.In the Aipac meeting, Scalise scolded the former university chiefs for existing in a bubble in which Palestinians were painted as the real oppressed group. “You start siding with a terrorist organization, and you think that’s mainstream, because all your friends are in this little bubble, and I don’t know who you’re talking to – you’re sure not talking to normal people any more,” he said.The congressman went on to denigrate Jewish students who engage in pro-Palestinian protest, saying they “just feel guilty that they’re alive. I don’t know how you’re brought up to where you feel, ‘I’m a Jewish student, and I’m on the side with terrorists who want to kill me.’”Scalise said Republicans were determined to confront anti-Israel protests, which he called “disgusting” and “unacceptable in America”. “We’re bringing legislation to the floor to continue to confront it, to stand up against it, to show we support Israel,” he said.The Guardian invited Scalise, Fallon and Aipac to comment on the meeting and their discussion about punishing universities for pro-Palestinian campus protests, but they did not immediately respond.Part of the Republicans’ gameplan is to use House oversight powers to investigate colleges for alleged civil rights violations. Scalise told Aipac that any college deemed to have breached the law would have their accreditation revoked.“If you have a change in administration, President Trump has made it clear day one, if you’re a college that is violating the civil rights of your students, we’re taking away your accreditation. We have that ability,” he said.Under the current system, the bulk of federal money that flows to higher education institutions comes through student loans that are in turn dependent on formal approval of the school’s academic and other standards, known as accreditation. That approval is granted by 19 accrediting agencies, independent bodies that are in turn recognised by the US education secretary.Under a second Trump administration, the education department could decertify accrediting agencies that pursue liberal policies towards campus speech and favour agencies that follow a more draconian approach. Republicans could effectively punish universities by forcing the removal of their accreditation, with potentially dire consequences.“If accreditation becomes a political tool, then the concern is it will be used ideologically to punish particular views on campus, threatening free inquiry which is the bedrock of universities,” said Mark Criley of the American Association of University Professors.The plans being laid by top congressional Republicans chimes with Trump’s own vision of a second term. In his manifesto for a return to the White House, Agenda47, he says that “our secret weapon will be the college accreditation system”.He pledges that once back in the White House, “I will fire the radical left accreditors that have allowed our colleges to become dominated by Marxist maniacs and lunatics.” He would then appoint new accreditors who would defend “the American tradition and western civilization” and remove “all Marxist diversity, equity and inclusion bureaucrats”.“We are going to have real education in America,” Trump said.Trump’s vice-presidential running mate, JD Vance, has taken a similarly hard line, calling universities “the enemy” in a 2021 speech. He said he would “aggressively attack the universities in this country”.In May, Vance introduced to a bill to the US Senate which he titled The Encampments or Endowments Act. Were it passed, it would give universities an ultimatum: remove protest encampments from campus grounds within seven days, or lose all federal funding.David Cole, national legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), said the Republican vendetta against universities over pro-Palestinian protests was deeply disturbing. “That is viewpoint discrimination at its core. It’s an attack on academic freedom in its most basic form, and would raise serious constitutional concerns.” More

    • 88 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      Why fascists hate universities | Jason Stanley

      by

      In Bangladesh, something remarkable has happened. Initially in response to a quota system that reserved the majority of government jobs for specific groups, university students initiated large-scale non-violent protests. Bangladesh’s increasingly autocratic prime minister, Sheikh Hasina, responded essentially with “let them eat cake.” Instead of calming the protests down, Hasina’s response made the protests grow nationwide.In mid-July, the government responded with extreme violence, with police gunning down hundreds of students and shutting down the internet across the country. Scenes of extreme police brutality flooded social media. By the end of July, the protests had grown into a nationwide pro-democracy movement. Eventually, the military joined the students, and Hasina fled the country. A nationwide student-led democracy movement successfully challenged a violent autocratic leader, and, at least for now, appears to have won.Bangladesh’s non-violent student movement has not gone unnoticed in neighboring countries. In Pakistan, the popular former prime minister and leader of the opposition party, Imran Khan, was jailed a year ago, an act dictated by Pakistan’s military. Media companies were instructed not to mention his name, quote his words, or show his picture. Members of his opposition party were imprisoned. But something astonishing has begun there. Motivated by the success of the student-led pro-democracy movement in Bangladesh, the Pakistan Students Federation declared an ultimatum for the government: free Khan by 30 August or face nationwide student protests.What has happened in Bangladesh and now could happen in Pakistan is the nightmare of every autocratic regime. Authoritarians and would-be authoritarians are only too aware that universities are primary sites of critique and dissent. Attacks on universities are the canary in the coalmine of fascism.Narendra Modi, India’s autocratic Hindu nationalist prime minister, has ruled the country since 2014. Attacking India’s elite universities as “anti-India” is a hallmark of his government. Similarly, Hungary’s autocratic prime minister, Viktor Orbán, started a political campaign with an attack on Central European University in Budapest, with demagogic rhetoric directed against its supposed spreading of “gender ideology”. With the use of legislation, Orbán’s government went so far as to drive the university out of the country.The situation is structurally the same in the United States – would-be authoritarians and one-party states centrally target universities with the aim of restricting dissent. Florida’s Republican governor, Ron DeSantis, a graduate of Yale University and Harvard Law School, is an aspiring autocrat who has used the myth of widespread voter fraud to severely restrict minority voting. (Voter fraud practically never happens in the United States; rigorous investigation estimated it as between 0.0003 and 0.0025%.) DeSantis also created an office of election crimes and security, to pursue supposed cases of voter fraud.Besides minority voting populations, DeSantis has focused on public and higher education as central targets. According to an AAUP report by the special committee on political interference and academic freedom in Florida’s public education system in May 2023, “academic freedom, tenure and shared governance in Florida’s public colleges and universities currently face a politically and ideologically driven assault unparalleled in US history.” The committee’s final report reveals an atmosphere of intimidation and indeed terror, as the administrative threat to public university professors has been shown to be very real.Even more so than Florida, Tennessee is a one-party state, with a Republican governor and a Republican supermajority in the legislature. The Tennessee house and senate passed a resolution to honor the Danube Institute; on the floor of the Tennessee house, the state representative Justin Jones questioned why the state was honoring the Hungarian autocrat Viktor Orbán’s thinktank. Tennessee has a state ban on the teaching of “divisive concepts”, one that includes public universities. To report a professor for teaching such a concept (such as intersectionality), Tennessee provides an online form.Attacks on voting, and democratic systems generally, almost invariably center on universities, and vice versa. The Yale Law School graduate and current Republican vice-presidential candidate JD Vance has claimed that the 2020 election should not have been certified because of suspicion of voter fraud. In a speech to the National Conservatism Conference, Vance also proclaimed, echoing Richard Nixon: “The professors are the enemy.”In the fall of 2023, in response to Israel’s brutal retaliation in Gaza for Hamas’s terrorist attack, anti-genocide protests erupted in American universities, with the active participation of a significant number of Jewish students. These anti-genocide protests were labeled as pro-Hamas and used as a basis to attack elite universities, their students, their professors and their administrations, verbally, politically and physically. It is not implausible to take the goal to have been, at least largely, a preliminary show of police power to university students.In the United States, the Republican party has long been aware of the democratic potential of student movements. As it lurches closer and closer to authoritarianism, it will, like all rightwing authoritarian movements worldwide, seek to crush dissent, starting with university students and faculty. With great courage and determination, the students in Bangladesh have shown that this strategy can be made to backfire.

      Jason Stanley is the Jacob Urowsky Professor of Philosophy at Yale University, and author of Erasing History: How Fascists rewrite the Past to Control the Future More

    • 225 Shares139 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘She may be family, but we need to hold her accountable’: Howard students cautiously excited by Kamala Harris

      by

      On Tuesday, day two of the Democratic national convention in Chicago, Howard University, in Washington DC, was abuzz with students excited about alumna Kamala Harris’s presidential candidacy. The Guardian spoke to several students who expressed pride that one of their own may assume the highest office, which they hoped would shine a light on historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs). Others emphasized the need to hold Harris accountable on Gaza policy, as well as on issues that affect Black communities, such as overpolicing and high maternal death rates.“I was pretty happy to not only be a Howard student, but to be Black as well,” Shondo Green, a 20-year-old biology major, said about Harris’s nomination. The general sentiment on campus since classes started on Monday has been uplifting – everyone is smiling, he said. “There’s something different about this year compared to my previous two years. There’s something in the air.”Hundreds of Howard University students milled around the Yard, the central hub of campus life, in between classes during the first week of school. Surrounding the grassy area were trees painted with Greek letters that represent the Black sororities and fraternities known as the Divine Nine. Harris, a member of Alpha Kappa Alpha sorority, pledged as a Howard student in the 1980s.Dezmond Rosier, a member of Alpha Phi Alpha fraternity and a senior studying political science and economics, said he was thrilled to vote in a presidential election for the first time. His main concerns were about cancelling student debt and ensuring that “the justice system is justice for all”. Rosier wants to see Harris create just policies around the possession of cannabis as it becomes legalized in states throughout the nation while “there’s still people in our prison systems who are unfortunately being held up for things that are now considered legal”.View image in fullscreen“She may be our family member in the sense of the university,” Rosier said, “but we also need to hold her accountable.”Outside the university’s auditorium, Ruqayyah Taylor, a senior from Norristown, Pennsylvania, attended a back-to-school pop-up event hosted by DTLR Radio. The 21-year-old journalism major wants to see Harris continue working toward the student debt forgiveness plan put forward by the Biden-Harris administration, which was thwarted by court challenges. She lauded the Harris campaign’s use of social media to galvanize gen-Z voters.“I think that she has the ability to [change course on Gaza policy],” Taylor said. “She has a different sense of awareness that Biden doesn’t have, whether it be because of age or demographics.”At the library, senior Jaden Lopes da Silva said he wanted to see more outreach efforts that catered to young Black voters. “[Her engagement] is more of a broad gen-Z sort of thing, but it appears to be more towards pop culture,” he said, referencing the Harris campaign’s embrace of the “brat” label from the pop musician Charli xcx. “I haven’t really seen anything specifically towards the Black gen-Z community.” Sitting next to him, junior Nala Francis said she considered Harris’s nomination her generation’s version of Barack Obama, who became president when she was a toddler. “I never had the experience of ‘oh we could get a Black president,’ and now that we get a Black president that is also a woman and from Howard,” she said. “This is literally history in the making and I’m now old enough to be a part of it.”Friends Jada Phillips and Jada Freeman, 19-year-old sophomores from Chicago, chatted on a walkway in between classes. “I think it’s going to bring a lot of light to Howard itself and how good of a school it is,” Freeman said about an alumna being the Democratic nominee. She plans to vote for Harris, but Phillips said that she wants to see how Harris’s economic policies will differ from previous administrations.View image in fullscreenAt a nearby cafe, Msia Kibona Clark, an associate professor in Howard’s department of African studies, recalled receiving a pop-up alert on her phone that Harris would be the presumptive nominee. She said that she was waiting to see if Harris changes course on US’s Gaza policy; however, she felt hopeful that Harris seems to be more empathetic toward the plight of Palestinians than Biden does. “From her talks before, her appearances, she definitely has been less embracing of Israel, so that has given me hope,” Kibona Clark said.Marcus Board, an associate professor of political science, said that if Harris becomes president, he would like to see her work with racial justice organizers. “I hope that they do choose to work with movement organizers who, as my research shows, are the people who are reinforcing democracy … reinforcing inclusion, access to care, access to human rights,” he said. “Without them, this whole thing is gonna fall faster than a freshman’s GPA.”View image in fullscreenLast week, freshman Elijah Sanford Abdul-Aziz waited in a long line to hear Harris speak on campus. “I’ve only been here for like two weeks, so that’s fire to me,” said Sanford Abdul-Aziz, an 18-year-old political science major. “It was like when one of the old ladies from church tells you about how they used to know you, when she talked about her orientation in the auditorium.” He said he was inspired by her statement that students could become president of the United States with hard work and determination. “She’s a vision of what you can be,” he said.Even though he said that he will cast a ballot for Harris in November, he wasn’t “super-duper excited”, given the US’s continued funding of Israel’s war on Gaza, in which more than 40,000 Palestinians have been killed since 7 October. “It’s either Kamala or Donald Trump,” Sanford Abdul-Aziz said. “I look at it as we can’t advocate as much as we can under Trump as we can for Kamala.” Sanford Abdul-Aziz said that he has one message for Harris about US allyship with Israel: “In 2020 I remember she said during a vice-presidential debate that allies are like your friends. And I know that to be a good friend, you have to hold your friends accountable.” More

    • 175 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Congress’s latest ‘antisemitism’ hearing was an ugly attack on Palestinian rights | Moira Donegan

      by

      If you didn’t know what was really going on at US college campuses, the congressional hearing on Thursday – in which the presidents of Northwestern and Rutger’s and the chancellor of UCLA were called to testify before a Republican-controlled House committee – would do little to inform you.The House committee on education and the workforce has held six – yes, six – public events to draw attention to the supposed crisis on campus in the months since the 7 October attack on Israel. They’ve hauled university presidents to Washington to harangue them, allegedly for not being sufficiently punitive toward pro-Palestinian students and faculty. These hearings have been used to belittle and antagonize university faculty and students and have fed racist and anti-intellectual moral panics that have led to the resignations of several of the university presidents who have been called to testify, notably including Liz Magill of the University of Pennsylvania and Claudine Gay of Harvard.The hearings have aimed to pressure colleges and universities to crack down on a wide variety of politically disfavored speech, particularly pro-Palestinian and anti-war speech, and particularly that of students and faculty of color. In many cases, this pressure seems to have yielded the desired results: at Columbia, Minouche Shafik, the university president, twice ordered the NYPD onto campus to conduct violent mass arrests of anti-genocide student protesters; the first of these raids came the day after Shafik testified before the House committee and disparaged her own students in degrading terms.But on Thursday, at least, the university administrators seemed less nervous, a bit more subdued – even if they were not willing to defend the rights of their anti-war students or correct the Republicans’ lies about them.Michael Schill, president of Northwestern, Jonathan Holloway, president of Rutgers and Gene Block, chancellor of UCLA, were calm, if occasionally annoyed, as the Republicans on the committee told them they should be “ashamed” for using insufficient violence against protesters, called for the defunding of specific programs and the firing of individual faculty members, demanded that undergraduate students be expelled and compared pro-Palestinian demonstrators with Nazis and the segregationist George Wallace. At one point, a Republican congressman also digressed into a prolonged grievance over the firing of a Northwestern football coach.The Republican outrage at the college administrators is nominally due to what they say is a “scourge of antisemitism” on these campuses. That pretext is supported by the false conflation of anti-Zionism or simple concern for Palestinian life with antisemitic animus – a dangerous and insulting conflation that was made repeatedly and without contradiction throughout the hearing. In reality, the false equivalence of anti-Zionism with antisemitism is belied by the reality on the ground, in the campus anti-war encampments that have sprung up across the country and in the burgeoning young Jewish anti-Zionist movement. In the real world, Jewish students are not only safe and welcome in the encampments and in the broader anti-war movement; they are frequently emerging as intellectual and organizing leaders.But this reality was not convenient for the Republicans, who hope to cynically use a fear of antisemitism to provide a shield of moral righteousness to their anti-education, anti-diversity, anti-intellectual and fundamentally racist project. The flimsy pretext of fighting antisemitism was required to provide a thin pretext for an effort that is at its core about rooting out and punishing disfavored ideologies and attempting to eliminate them from the public sphere. To say that this is an insult to the history of antisemitism would be an understatement.The attempt to paint the anti-war movement as violent and malicious veered, at times, into the absurd. In one prolonged exchange, the hearing was shown a viral video, produced by a young Zionist influencer at UCLA. In the video, the man is standing in a path on campus, facing a small group of silent pro-Palestinian protesters wearing keffiyehs. The young man declares that he wants to pass them to go into an academic building. The students are mostly silent; one seems to ask him to use a different entrance. “I want to use THAT door,” the man says, pointing, and looking back at the camera. The protesters are quiet; they do not move. No one is violent, or even particularly agitated. The Republican committee members referred to this video repeatedly and in dramatic terms throughout the hearing, claiming it represented an epidemic of Jewish students being violently refused access to campus facilities.Meanwhile, other events on UCLA’s campus went largely unremarked. For while a pro-Palestinian encampment was present on UCLA’s campus for some days, so were pro-Israel demonstrators, whose much better-funded demonstration featured large groups of Zionist protestors bussed in from off campus, along with a jumbotron that played pro-Israel propaganda at all hours. When they were there, the Zionist group jeered and taunted the anti-genocide protesters, allegedly yelling racial slurs and rape threats and even allegedly releasing rats into the encampment.On the night of 30 April, a large group from the pro-Israel camp, many of them wearing Halloween masks, violently attacked the pro-Palestinian encampment. They brought “knives, bats, wooden planks, pepper spray and bear mace”, according to one witness, and proceeded to beat the anti-genocide protesters, pushing many into the ground using barricades. The police, whom UCLA had summoned to campus to help maintain order, stood by and allowed the attack to continue for hours. They seem to have assessed, correctly, what they were there to protect, and who they weren’t.At the hearing on Thursday, the Republicans went to extensive lengths to criticize universities that have engaged in negotiations with their student protest encampments, calling these talks “capitulation” to “pro-terror” and “pro-Hamas” forces. Since the encampments sprung up at many campuses this spring, not all universities have chosen to disperse their students by having them beaten and arrested; some have engaged in dialogue – with varying degrees of good faith – and attempted to persuade the students to pack up the tents in exchange for material concessions.At Northwestern, the successful negotiations resulted in a pledge from the administration to include funding for five undergraduate students and two faculty members from Palestine to come to campus, as part of the university’s broader international programming. This promise to include Palestinian scholars in campus life seemed to particularly offend the Republicans, who demanded to know why Jewish affinity groups had not been consulted before the commitment was made.This is not typical of such university funding decisions: Why would a Russian-speakers’ club, say, be consulted before a scholarship was offered to a Ukrainian student? But the message from the outraged Republicans was clear: the inclusion of Palestinians in university life, they feel, should be subject to a Jewish person’s veto.
      Moira Donegan is a Guardian US columnist More