Oh, some more Harvard shite (#984924, #972831) by some WSJ staff. Several contributions here worthwhile. Enjoy the read.
Fucking on point by James Taranto:
...also very reasonable retort, by Kyle Peterson:
What do these docs and scientists have to do with some bozos screaming in Harvard Yard? The med school isn’t even in Cambridge; it’s based a couple of miles south, across the Charles River in Boston. ... Harvard is also a research powerhouse, and what’s the point of defunding tuberculosis and ALS studies?
Elliot Kaufman was funny:
One professor said the solution must come from within: Courageous scholars should retake their disciplines and restore the primacy of scholarship and pluralism. I applaud the sentiment, but from where will such bravery come—the Harvard faculty lounge? If even 10 righteous men can be found there, spare Sodom.
He also added that "a sledgehammer is called for" -- callback to the letter that Heather Heying published on Substack (#984924).
Matthew Hennessey brings the snark:
Yes, on balance, a globally recognized, nearly 390-year-old institution that has educated eight U.S. presidents and is synonymous with educational excellence is probably worth saving. Every great nation needs a credentialing institution for its intellectual, political and managerial classes. Harvard is worth saving, but don’t ask me to lift a finger. Harvard, save thyself.
...and Barton Swain brings the sanity:
To know if Harvard is worth saving, we would need a thorough accounting of the good it does weighed against the bad. Like other large universities, it’s hard enough to know what it does, let alone figure out if it all adds up to a net benefit. What’s safe to say is that the public senses more bad than good. ... Harvard may be worth saving, but its leaders will have to forgive the rest of the country for wondering why.
archive link here: https://archive.md/DX97h