<p>can somebody tell me what the Rhodes adn marshal scholarships are about? i didnt really understand if they were for post doctorate or for undergraduate opportunity abroad.</p>
<p>
[quote]
then had the chutzpah to use Summers' resignation as the excuse for his welching.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>What if it's geniune?</p>
<p>On the one hand, people should keep their promises, and not make up excuses to break them later. On the other hand, it is delightful to see Harvard punished--albeit in a tiny way--for the disgraceful way Summers was treated by the hard leftists!</p>
<p>Ellison sounds like your typical megalomaniac petty rich a-hole.</p>
<p>As a Harvard alum, I continue to chuckle at how many people have shadenfreuder when it comes to Harvard. It always reminds me of the commercial, "Don't hate me because I'm beautiful."</p>
<p>Meanwhile, I'm not concerned about the loss of $. Harvard has no reason to be embarrassed. The former donor has a lot of reason to be embarrassed. And Harvard has plenty of ways to get more donations from rich donor alums (and, yes, this does include alums like Bill Gates, who dropped out of Harvard).</p>
<p>I also was delighted to see Larry Summers go.</p>
<p>blah get over yourself buddy nobody hates u cause u go there or went there. in the real world ur the same as anybody else.</p>
<p>yeah harvard has a humongous endowment already</p>
<p>I have shadenfreuder whenever I see political zealots on either side getting owned.</p>
<p>Apparently, Ellison had cold feet from the very beginning. Cosar is right, the Summers resignation is only a pretext for not following up on a widely publicized but only orally made promise.</p>
<p>Here's an interesting question: if the global health institute that would have been established by Ellison's gift is important (and I think it certainly is), why doesn't Harvard just dip into its enormous endowment to fund it? Where's the dedication to service and scholarship? Why does Harvard need all of this money if they simply intend to hoard it?</p>
<p>because they just want money</p>
<p>I project.</p>
<p>Frankly, it's been stunning to me how trustees and donors, notably to the "elite" colleges and universities, have seemingly put their heads in the sand when it comes to examining the values and value of the places and people, notably profs, they're shipping their "largesses" (?) to.</p>
<p>When one looks at the values of the wealthy (Hollywood aside), they seem to run 180 degrees to the professoriate they're underwriting. Selling their souls to the devil, thinking a Harvard monument will allow them to live on. Right. </p>
<p>No, make that left. </p>
<p>And in the meantime, these so-called trustees (and their courted philanthropists) behave much like Sgt. Schultz of Stalag 13. "I see nothing, nothing! And here's my check. What does I get from HU?(put in your fave compost letters in lieu of HU.) "</p>
<p>But I believe as the liberal, leftist, often anti-patriotic, America-deriding campus culture becomes increasingly exposed by inquiring minds ... and news-hungry communicators ... there will be more renegings. </p>
<p>Eventually the almighty $ will bring these unaccountable bastions into balance. They too will learn the lesson of "no free lunch." You wanna show the world how PC and "enlightened" you are? Pay the piper. So far, it's been a free ride. Funny how "they" want to disallow hazing among the student activities, yet their own intellectual hazing is allowed, even encouraged, to run rampant. It's all abusive.</p>
<p>A few like this will bring some reality checks to PC la-la lands called campus.</p>
<p>Remember. You heard it here.</p>
<p>
while i consider myself to be basically left of marx, i'm not sure why dissenting with a nation's policy inherently makes one "anti-patriotic"</p>
<p>i would argue that individuals who see problems in their country and then protest about them demostrate much more concern about their nation than those who complacently tolerate the status quo.</p>
<p>moreover, i'm not sure why conservatives can't open debate without flinging pejoratives left and right (as you have done, Whistle Pig)</p>
<p>response predictable. I trust you are fully self-understanding. left of Marx.</p>
<p>Sadly, the phenomenon is more so, dissenting about America among those so often unwilling to do anything more than talk about that which they've come to disdain. </p>
<p>And it's a self-perpetuating fraternity. You can't get in if you disagree with the academic elite. Enlisting more and more of those who know less and less. Or at least think like the tenured elites who are evaluating whether they want this person as a lifetime colleague. Engenders an ever-expanding narrowness.</p>
<p>With notable exceptions, the vast majority of America's professoriate seem to be exceptionally close-minded. And like you and me, they cannot simply read, listen, and ponder. They must write and wramble and wrant. </p>
<p>The principal difference though between you and me ... and them ... is they have a paying audience of unfettered, unknowing minds to impress. </p>
<p>I'll not persuade you, and you not me. Sadly, the narrow academics will and do increasingly preach their politics to persons who naively believe, "Well, damned, this is Harvard, ain't it. It's gotta be good ... and right."</p>
<p>They say Communism has only survived in American universities..hah. Did you mean Gary Trudeau or Jeneane Garofalo when you meant 'pejorative slinging', iostream?</p>
<p>sure, we have some trolls on our side of the political fence, iloveagoodbrew, but at least we try to entertain debate! the current political climate in america these days is essentially hostile - publicly challenge the administration and you will be tarred, feathered, and ostracized for disloyalty...</p>
<p>to both of you: with regards to the state of american academia, i would challenge the notion that most individuals in academia are leftist elitists. there are plenty of respected scholars (e.g. john mearsheimer, kenneth walz) who routinely question the beliefs of the left and spark meaningful political discussion. in fact, i would argue that a lot of internal debate happens in the academic community within the spheres of people you paint as being ideologically homogeneous (e.g. the various controversies within postmodernist philosophical circles). admittedly, american academics aren't very good at PR, but when you inspect their behaviors, they're not as absurd as you'll find.</p>
<p>now, for the issue of "communism only surviving in american universities." while this may seem horribly foreign to you, no one ever said that laissez-faire capitalism is so inherently perfect that discussion about its merits should be disallowed. just because there are people who disagree with you doesn't mean that you should label them as irrational.</p>
<p>edit: i forgot to address one thing in whistle pig's post. s/he denounces american academia as being wholly unwilling to affect actual change. essentially, in whistle pig's perspective, people who complain about problems never take the initiative to actually solve them. the answer to this claim is quite simple: discussion, believe it or not, is an intrinsic part of affecting change. changing hearts and minds can be just as powerful as storming down pennsylvania avenue in a huge mob.</p>
<p>Northstarmom, how could you be delighted to see Summers railroaded out? He was like a (small) breath of fresh air in a stifling atmosphere of group-think.</p>
<p>
[quote]
but at least we try to entertain debate
[/quote]
Surely you jest. American universities (the liberal ones, so thats about 90% of the universities out there) stifle free speech.</p>
<p>This organization is devoted to fighting political correctness, speech codes, and all the euphemisms that the left can come up with it for thought control.</p>
<p>I guess you really entertain debate when David Horowitz gets a pie thrown in his face, huh?</p>
<p>The truth is that American colleges are campuses where your speech gets restricted in the name of PC or w/e...and instead of encouraging free thought, they encourage group think.</p>
<p>is gender bias and racial discrimination acceptable? do you think hateful dialogue is appropriate in an academic environment? bigotry can be so ingrained in one's mind that one does not percieve it as wrong, but does that mean that we should allow it?</p>
<p>political correctness is nothing more than simple courtesy to ensure that no one is excluded from debate because of antagonistic linguistic modes. by casting slurs against some group of people, you inherently unbalance the playing field and make it more difficult for a hated minority to assert themselves in discussion.</p>
<p>like all rights, free speech is subject to limitation under specific circumstances. if you don't think libel or slander is acceptable, you should see how "political correctness" falls in the same vein.</p>
<p>regardless, let's talk about how the right stifles discussion:</p>
<p>the president has castigated news outlets for revealing nsa programs that basically amount to the violation of basic constitutional rights. no one protests because it amounts to political suicide. not so bad compared to a pie in the face, huh?</p>
<p>the united states continues to perpetuate injustice in guantanamo bay, and despite europe's protest, americans refuse to stand against what amounts to the organized suppression of arabs, because that would be political suicide. not so bad compared to a pie in the face, huh? </p>
<p>recent history is replete with examples how the current administration has made it impossible to stand up to the right without being ruined.</p>
<p>
[quote]
is gender bias and racial discrimination acceptable
[/quote]
Yes, it absolutely is..if its a private setting. Those terms can be stretched to fit anything. If you are constructing a new house, are you going to hire a 6'2'' man who weighs 200 lbs or a 5'0'' woman who weighs a hundred? Isn't that 'gender bias'? Those two terms are just strawmen for you to justify PC.</p>
<p>
[quote]
do you think hateful dialogue is appropriate in an academic environment?
[/quote]
Define hateful. A swastika means two different things to a Jew and a Buddhist. A white hood means two different things in Italy and the South...People are offended by different things. You cannot sacrifice free speech by trying to please everyone.</p>
<p>
[quote]
political correctness is nothing more than simple courtesy to ensure that no one is excluded from debate because of antagonistic linguistic modes. by casting slurs against some group of people, you inherently unbalance the playing field and make it more difficult for a hated minority to assert themselves in discussion.
[/quote]
Wrong. Political correctness is social engineering by liberals who want to dictate what you can say and can't say. In current times, who exactly is a hated minority?</p>
<p>
[quote]
the united states continues to perpetuate injustice in guantanamo bay
[/quote]
Terrorists should be dealt with inhumanely.</p>
<p>
[quote]
and despite europe's protest, americans refuse to stand against what amounts to the organized suppression of arabs, because that would be political suicide. not so bad compared to a pie in the face, huh?
[/quote]
When Europe can match our country, then they will have some credibility. Or when we don't have to go over every twenty years and fix their mess. Organized suppression of Arabs? The idiot president went on TV and rationalized and said Islam is a religion of peace. That is appeasement, not supression. We have even forced Israel to be weak on the Palestinians and the other barbarians. This is anything but suppression.</p>