A university president makes a case against cowardice

Universities as Businesses and Funding Leverage

• Many commenters argue universities have become risk‑averse corporations and real‑estate funds: preservation of brand, endowment, and grants now dominates over mission.
• Federal research money (especially NIH, NSF, DOE) is seen as a primary lever: institutions structurally dependent on hundreds of millions in grants are far more likely to “roll over.”
• Smaller liberal‑arts schools with little or no medical centers are less exposed and thus more willing to defy federal threats, though they still face some risk.
• One recurring suggestion: some colleges reject federal funds entirely to avoid political control, but others note this is only plausible for a small subset of institutions.

Free Speech, Activism, and DEI

• Strong disagreement over whether universities have long censored heterodox views or merely protected vulnerable groups from harassment.
• Critics cite DEI hiring statements, disinvited speakers, speech codes, and survey data on student self‑censorship as evidence of systematic suppression, mostly of right‑leaning views.
• Defenders argue earlier “speech restrictions” were attempts to counter longstanding systemic discrimination and create space for minorities; they see current crackdowns as far worse.
• Many distinguish between speech and conduct: blocking access, threats, arson, and harassment are repeatedly labeled as coercion or violence, not protected expression.

Public Resentment and “Culture War” Framing

• Several threads explore why large parts of the public cheer attacks on universities:
  • Elite schools’ political homogeneity and open alignment with progressive causes.
  • Tuition inflation, heavy debt, and the sense that universities gatekeep entry into the professional class while sitting on large endowments.
  • Anti‑intellectualism and decades of media attacks on “ivory tower” academics.
• Others see this as class warfare driven by populist right media; universities look left‑wing mainly because the broader Overton window has shifted right.

Cowardice, Hypocrisy, and Tenure

• Some argue universities are now reaping what they sowed: after years of selectively policing speech and yielding to student pressure, their free‑speech defenses ring hollow.
• Tenure is criticized as having failed its purpose: faculty are portrayed as cautious and careerist rather than using their security to defend principle.
• Others defend specific administrators who resisted post‑2020 illiberal demands and say those institutions are better positioned to credibly oppose current federal overreach.

Government Power, Rights, and Funding Conditions

• One camp views the current administration’s threats—cutting funds, targeting visas, public intimidation—as authoritarian, even “Nazi‑like,” and incompatible with constitutional protections.
• Another replies that conditioning federal money on compliance is longstanding practice (e.g., drinking age, Title IX) and not automatically a First Amendment violation.
• There’s an extended side debate about whether rights are inherent vs purely legal, and whether “rights” have any force when governments and courts decline to enforce them.

Research Funding and Alternatives

• Proposals to “just stop taking federal money” face pushback: modern basic research (labs, big instruments, graduate training) overwhelmingly runs through federally funded university systems.
• Commenters argue private or corporate research can’t realistically replace this without huge coordination and sharing problems, or a shift to national labs on a massive scale.
• Some still see dependence on federal grants as structurally dangerous and advocate diversifying funding sources, while others say the real fix is to make political retaliation illegal.

Safety, Antisemitism, and Line Between Speech and Harm

• Several focus on campus antisemitism and specific incidents (e.g., blocked access, “exclusion zones”) to argue administrators failed to protect Jewish students and are now being overruled by the state.
• Others counter that “student mobs” are being exaggerated to justify a much broader crackdown on dissent, including deportations and surveillance of lawful protest.
• There’s no consensus on the scale of antisemitic harassment or on how well universities responded; both minimization and alarmism are called out.

Impact on Students and Future of US Universities

• Commenters worry about chilling effects on international students (deportation risk, “black‑bagging” accusations) and on the US’s long‑term scientific and educational advantage.
• Some younger people are reportedly beginning to boycott high‑profile universities for perceived cowardice or complicity.
• Underneath the immediate Trump–university clash, many see a deeper, decades‑long drift: from liberal education and independent inquiry toward brand management, ideological policing, and political patronage.