Pursuing Trump Through the Library, Brandishing a Flamethrower
Harvard Targeted by Trump Administration: A Battle Over Education and Control
By Roland Peters, New York
The Trump administration has launched a series of attacks on Harvard University, with the aim of gaining control over the prestigious private institution until the end of Donald Trump's presidency. The White House's actions spark a heated battle that touches on freedom of education, national security, and political agendas.
The Education War Intensifies
The most prominent battle in the ongoing war on education has now centered on Harvard—the oldest and most revered university in the United States. The White House is seeking to assert control over the university through various means, targeting multiple sources of Harvard's income. Harvard is pushing back fiercely.
Harvard's annual budget stands at $6.5 billion, with approximately 11% of its revenue coming from federal research funds that the government looks to cut entirely. International student tuition fees would also be at risk. The University's income would decrease by approximately 20% as a result of the White House's actions. Harvard accuses the administration of waging a "vendetta campaign" against the institution and asserts its right to shape its curriculum, operations, and campus autonomously. As for the motivation behind the vendetta, the reasoning remains unclear.
Government Demands and Retaliation
Last week, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem threatened to ban international students from Harvard and demanded their data, giving the university a short deadline. Harvard successful sued, arguing that these demands would cause "sudden and irreparable harm" to the university. Despite the court ruling, Trump's administration shows no signs of letting up, only acknowledging the 30-day appeal period before moving on to another front: the global suspension of student visa interviews. The US plans to thoroughly scrutinize the social media profiles of applicants, with a particular focus on those holding pro-Palestinian or Chinese backgrounds, and may deny or revoke their visas for political reasons.
New Guidelines and Political Pressure
In April, the White House accused Harvard of permitting anti-Semitic activities and made wide-ranging demands, including the handover of data on international students and their protest activities dating back five years. Harvard complied, but the government deemed the provided data insufficient, escalating the crisis. International students represent 27% of Harvard's total student body.
Far-Reaching Oversight and Control
However, the demands from Washington go further. A commission established by the White House wants Harvard under surveillance "at least until the end of 2028" as stated in their April letter. During this period, the University is required to share all planned changes with the government, which will review their compliance with the new rules. The University must demonstrate that it has abolished all equal opportunity programs and will adjust student enrollment and the appointment of faculty members accordingly. It may not admit foreign students deemed "enemies of American values and institutions" and must immediately denounce them in case of misconduct. By the end of the year, the University is to examine "diversity of thought" throughout its operations and, if necessary, hire faculty and enroll students in "critical mass" across all programs. Harvard must provide an anonymous reporting hotline for students to report violations of university policies to the government.
Revenue Threats and Ideological Differences
In parallel, the US government is threatening to revoke Harvard's tax-exempt status for educational institutions, accusing Harvard of concealing contributions from foreign donors and governments. Education Secretary Linda McMahon has frozen federal funds, stating that Harvard has not properly disclosed this information. Harvard denies the accusations. The allegations against Harvard range from antisemitism and terrorism to lack of free speech and civil rights violations to "systematic lawbreaking." These claims are not elaborated upon in the letters, but can be inferred from other statements.
The Culture War Reaches the Ivory Tower
One of the accusations from Trump's government is that whites are being discriminated against. In disguise, the administration is turning the history of racism in the US on its head and portraying its predominantly white voter base as victims. Universities are accused of discriminating against whites under the guise of equal opportunity laws, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which was primarily introduced to combat racism by whites against blacks. For decades, students and teaching staff were selected and hired based on quotas for the "race" category.
However, two years ago, the conservative-dominated Supreme Court outlawed the practice of admissions. Despite this, whites still comprise the majority of newly enrolled students at Harvard, with whites making up an overwhelming 75% of teaching staff. Trump's government is also targeting ideological differences, arguing that the academic establishment is not conservative enough for the government's taste. In fact, Harvard represents only a limited political spectrum in the US, with only a small percentage of students identifying as conservative.
Harvard is not the only institution targeted by Trump's administration. It is accusing more than 60 universities across the country of antisemitism, threatening investigations and the withdrawal of research funding. In 2023, these universities received a combined total of approximately $23 billion in public funds—more than a third of the total funds distributed to universities nationwide. The White House aims to set an example against the undesired left-leaning trend at universities.
US Vice President JD Vance, a Yale graduate, once labeled the faculty of his alma mater as "totalitarian," claiming that conservatives had no place there. He also argued that the predominantly leftist academics formed an oligarchy, silencing Americans who disagreed. He asserted that it was absurd to send children to universities where they would be indoctrinated and accumulate debt for a middle-class life. "It's about power," Vance explained. The White House is now challenging this power with all means available.
Controversial Steps and Looming Authoritarianism
Conservatives are underrepresented in academia, raising questions about how Trump's commission envisions its changes in practice. Would there be ideological screening of potential students, faculty, and professors, perhaps a MAGA quota? What criteria would be used to ensure this? How would curricula be controlled in content, and what changes would be imposed from above? What would constitute a reportable offense in the reporting hotline? Would Homeland Security or ICE intervene to enforce their views?
The imagination of the potential steps sounds more akin to an authoritarian state than the diversity of opinion that the White House demands. While the demand itself is justified, as Harvard was indeed ranked last in a national survey on free speech on campus, Trump's tactics seem to mirror an attempt to burnish the libraries with a flamethrower and eliminate ideological tendencies among students and faculty.
The extent to which efforts to amplify conservative voices can go is evident in the case of the US Naval Academy. The Navy recently removed around 400 books from its libraries, as they did not conform with Trump's orders to dismantle government-wide diversity, equity, and inclusion measures. Anti-racist works, or simply those focused on "non-white, cisgender heterosexual men," were removed, as reported by the "New York Times." "Mein Kampf" remains available.
The education of military personnel and officer training is one matter; civilian education at universities is another. It may be challenging for researchers and students to identify with Republican positions, especially those affiliated with the MAGA (Make America Great Again) movement. For example, the denial of climate change and its consequences, which is also reflected in the current White House policies, may not win over many minds among academia.
The Culture War at the Top Elevates
More on the Topic "Very Anti-Semitic University": Trump confident in his feud with Harvard
The standoff between Washington and Harvard carries the greatest symbolic weight of any conflict over funding for elite universities. Trump's administration seeks to use Harvard, located in Massachusetts, to illustrate its vision for the nation: Education and research should be subordinate to the president's politics, regardless of how authoritarian those politics may be. Many conservatives view universities as a breeding ground for progressives who oppose their goals and must be reined in. After all, the leaders of tomorrow are educated at elite universities.
Trump is taking the cultural war to the top. What began as a conflict over gender, "woke" books, and curriculum content in schools has now become a battle for elite universities. In 2017, Vance declared at a right-wing conference that universities and their professors were "the enemy": "Universities must be aggressively attacked." He argued that universities did not foster critical thinking but controlled the knowledge of society, which in turn determined what was considered truth or falsehood. And what could be more threatening to a government that spins its own truth?
- The Commission, established by the White House, has also been tasked with submitting a proposal for a directive on the protection of workers from the risks related to exposure to ionizing radiation, as the battle over education and control escalates, touching upon not only freedom of education but also political agendas and general news.
- The ongoing war on education, triggered by the Trump administration's efforts to assert control over Harvard, has coincided with calls for a directive on the protection of workers from ionizing radiation, raising questions about the scope and intent of Washington's oversight, extending beyond education-and-self-development matters.
