They should be ashamed by their cowardice. Trump threatened and Columbia caved.
The US president has made no secret of his intent to control what is studied, thought, and debated. His administration sent a letter to Columbia University demanding sweeping changes, including placing the Middle Eastern, South Asian, and African studies department under “academic receivership” for five years, abolishing the university judicial board, and centralizing all disciplinary processes under the office of the president. Such unprecedented intervention is blatantly illegal and a wholesale attack on academic freedom and free speech. On Friday, Columbia capitulated.
It is an embarrassment to Columbia, of course, but the embarrassment is not Columbia’s alone. The use of federal funding threats to control universities should be a five-alarm fire for the thousands of other universities, and yet the response from the majority of academic leadership has been silence.
It is, ultimately, about the money. Trump has destroyed the autonomy of federal research agencies, which is what allows him to hold research funds hostage and exercise that kind of leverage over the curriculum and control faculty and students. That’s why spineless Columbia surrendered.
The reasons are understandable. If any one university speaks out, they are scared Trump would pull funding. The president of that university will have to see the place they love and the people they are responsible for gutted by a $50 or $100 or $400 million cut, either to federal grants or scholarships. What if speaking out will change nothing? Why risk the all-critical research of their science faculty, important scholarships for their students, for a statement that might lead to naught?
It seems to me that one approach universities could take to this threat is to not stand alone. Shouldn’t we all be standing together to resist. After all, it is illegal, everyone says, why isn’t everyone responding with lawsuits and threats of legal action? Columbia’s actions are going to have repercussions for all of us, because it’s crippling research.
The reason this is different is because the government is attacking free speech and free inquiry itself. The current collective cowardice is self-defeating. Their refusal to stand together now only makes them more vulnerable in the future, and less credible when they say they are privately resisting. How can we trust they aren’t complying in advance, reshaping their curriculum and research dollars to avoid retribution? We can’t.
If university leaders, some of the most privileged people in our society, allow themselves to be bullied and blackmailed, and refuse to coordinate with each other on courage, how do we expect any other institutions – law firms, non-profits, businesses – to stand up?
Personally, I find the silence of the University of Minnesota worrying. Maybe they’re busy building a case to defend against Trumpian attacks? Or maybe there are a bunch of lawyers on the board of regents holding everyone back.
I should acknowledge that one provost of Columbia has spoken out strongly against the assault on academic freedom — in the pages of the New York Times, no less. Usually the NYT is doing their best to provide cover, in the form of ambiguity and weasel wording, for Republicans, so this was a surprise.
The Trump administration has sought to impose its will on higher education by withdrawing more than a billion dollars of funding from some universities and threatening others with similar punishment. It has sought to deport student protesters who are legal residents. All this represents a fundamental assault on the values and functioning of our university system. Columbia and Johns Hopkins, founded in 1876 and America’s first true research university, may be only the first to feel the effects of this needless use of a sledgehammer.
Columbia’s capitulation last week to the Trump administration, in which it agreed to a number of demands in order to restore federal funding, obliterates its leadership in defending free inquiry. If Columbia allows authoritarian-minded leaders to dictate what we can teach, then the federal government will dictate what we can read, what books we may have in our libraries, what art we can display, what problems scientists can explore. Then, we are no longer a free university.
They don’t want a free university! Having a bunch of intelligent, articulate people who can criticize the dumbass-in-chief and his wicked, self-destructive policies is not desirable. He loves the uneducated, remember!
Today, the stakes are higher. We are in a fight for survival and appeasement never works. Despite platitudes to the contrary, Columbia’s leaders have weakened our community and our leadership among the greatest educational institutions in the world. This is not the way to fight Mr. Trump’s efforts at silencing our great American universities. If we don’t resist collectively by all legal means, and by social influence and legislative pressure, we are apt to see the destruction of our most revered institutions and the enormous benefits they accrue to America.
Collective resistance sounds like a good plan. Who is organizing it? Not the Democratic party, that’s for sure.