Harvard Announces It Will Stop Releasing Political Statements
Following months of campus protests over the war between Israel and Hamas, the university has announced that it will no longer weigh in on current events.

On Tuesday, Harvard officials announced that the university would adopt a formal stance of ideological neutrality on political events and other controversial issues. The decision comes after months of tumultuous campus protests over the war between Israel and Hamas.
Earlier this month, a faculty-led working group published a report that strongly recommended adopting a neutral stance on topics that do not directly concern the university itself.
"The university has a responsibility to speak out to protect and promote its core function. Its leaders must communicate the value of the university's central activities. They must defend the university's autonomy and academic freedom when threatened," the report stated. "The university and its leaders should not, however, issue official statements about public matters that do not directly affect the university's core function."
The report hinted at what is likely the prevailing reason behind Harvard's push toward neutrality—the immense pressure faced by school officials to weigh in on Hamas' October 7 attack against Israel, and the ongoing war in Gaza. The report noted how, if officials make statements about one topic unrelated to the university's core function, the school opens itself up to demands it comment on every other controversy.
"If the university and its leaders become accustomed to issuing official statements about matters beyond the core function of the university, they will inevitably come under intense pressure to do so from multiple, competing sides on nearly every imaginable issue of the day," said the report. "This is the reality of contemporary public life in an era of social media and political polarization."
Survey results released last week by The Harvard Crimson indicate widespread faculty support for neutrality. The survey found that more than 70 percent of Arts and Sciences faculty supported a shift to formal neutrality and more than half reported feeling "somewhat negatively" or "negatively" about "the current state of academic freedom at Harvard"
The announcement was met with widespread praise from free expression advocates.
"For better or worse, what Harvard does, others follow," Angel Eduardo, senior writer and editor at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, wrote on Tuesday. "The principles outlined in the Institutional Voice Working Group's report don't just bode well for Harvard's future on free speech and academic freedom—they may also signal a significant sea change in colleges across the country."
On Wednesday, Syracuse University also announced that it would adopt the recommendations of a similar working group and take an official neutral stance.
"We embrace the guiding principle that the remedy for speech that some may find hurtful, offensive, or even hateful is not the disruption, obstruction, or suppression of the free speech of others, but rather more speech," a statement from the university reads. "Except under the most extraordinary circumstances and with the sole purpose of protecting its mission of discovery, improvement, and dissemination of knowledge, the University does not make institutional statements or pronouncements on current controversies."
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Why would you ever have a different policy?
It goes back to the '60s, which was the last time the official stance was neutrality. The activists of the time argued that "neutrality" is not really neutrality, but tacit support for the status quo. Universities pivoting to actively taking positions dates to that era, even though Universities represent the status quo pretty much by nature and can't do otherwise.
Go back further, to Wisconsin Progressives using the state university to churn out statist propaganda and help write implementing legislation.
https://mises.org/library/book/economics-service-state-empiricism-richard-t-ely
When I lived in the Badger State and was confronted with the Wisconsin Idea , I would retort that a geographical area ought to be able to have more than one idea.
Ring out, ahoya!
Exactly. And it’s not like they didn’t have a role model. The University of Chicago has had this policy for years.
Meant for the original post….
"...The activists of the time argued that “neutrality” is not really neutrality, but tacit support for the status quo...
See the antisemite truman below for the same, lame, claim.
You don't understand the burden of being so much smarter and more enlightened than everyone else.
Withholding your wisdom would be a literal war crime.
Hey, silence is literally violence.
I guess those endowments were starting to look like a giant taxable target.
Should confiscate it. Then cut off all government funding.
It was all fun, games and fuck whitey until these Hamas/Israel protests started. Now they don't want give any opinions? Strange.
Evacuee they’re stuck between a rock and a hard place. There’s no principle behind this, just trying to avoid pissing off two opposed groups of donors. Expect them to completely reverse this stance in less than five years whenever some administrator wants to condemn whatever current thing makes them angry.
There’s no principle behind this, just trying to avoid pissing off two opposed groups of donors.
^
Yasha Mounk recently argued that they kind of set themselves up for getting it from both sides in this in that
1) most campuses actively encourage activism and have tolerated far worse from other groups than the pro-Palestinian protestors who are being cleared out
and
2) most campuses have speech codes that won't even let you criticize Affirmative Action on the principle that it makes the colored people of color feel unsafe, but banners saying things like "Revenge for Al-Shifa" are being tolerated.
Harvard hasn't been run by a Harvard educated President since 1971. It has instead had two each from Stanford & MIT and one from Bryn Mawr and Princeton
Diversity! Inclusion! Edumacation!
Ya but fear not. This stance will last as long as the conflict where picking a side involves actual consequences.
When some black guy gets shot for some thing, and they can safely land back on "the problem with the country is white cis men" they will loudly and proudly resume making political statements.
In fact, they will be forced to, as the student body and their donors will all be back on the "silence is violence" kick, and lack of a political statement therefore means you endorse killing black men
Also known as sarc logic.
Who knew actively supporting a terrorist organization that uses rape and torture as a tactic would cause such a kerfuffle?
- Harvard
Us: So do you want to kill all the Jews or not?
Harvard: We've decided not to take a stand on this.
Harvard has taken a stand on this. Check their investment portfolio.
Antisemite shit here to make an ass of himself. Again.
You think there's anything worthy of investment in Gaza?
We all know your stand, Herr Goebbels.
He has no balls, at all.
Bet that goes over a lot of heads.
You're a filthy Nazi genocide loving pig. And stupid and boring.
Your
adjectivespersonal pronouns are confusing. Please narrow them down, Herr Schwein.You're a fascist cowardly cunt hiding behind a handle with fucking idiotic characters.
Awwww, po little Nazi can't handle anything unusual.
mtrueman|8.30.17 @ 1:42PM|#
"Spouting nonsense is an end in itself."
Fuck off and die, slimy pile of Nazi shit.
Just as a aside, and as a measure of trueman's abysmal ignorance, I ran on to this as I'm reading Furguson's "The Square and the Tower":
"As we shall see, few hierarchies achieve such a total control over information flows, though Stalin' Soviet Union came close" (pg39)
Well:
mtrueman|5.6.18 @ 1:35PM|#
"Stalin was more of a network guy than he was a hierarchy one. He was successful in bypassing the hierarchical structures put in place by Lenin like the politburo and the central committee, and ran the country through informal alliances with those he trusted."
Riiiight.
True-True, you’re the one who embraces all things facsim through your beloved democrat party.
Fuck off mNaziman, Nazi piece of shit. Go to Gaza and volunteer to be the recipient of Haley’s arty round.
Obviously, 5/20 is a simple typo...
"Harvard Announces It Will Stop Releasing Political Statements."
This is a tragedy of epic proportions.
Now I won't have anything to laugh at any more.
Wait.
"Now I won’t have anything to laugh at any more."
How do you post here without reading at least some of the comments?
Harvard basically says they'll stop bragging about what they are doing while continue doing what got them into this mess.
Right. No officially-issued political statements, but they’ll continue to use endowment and student loan money to operate as a politically-active hedge fund that incidentally teaches kids that expectations like “show up on time” and “change your own tampons” are between slavery and rape.
So this is what it finally took.
You noticed that too, huh?
So this is what it finally took.
If by "this" you mean losing donor money, yes.
Does anyone actually believe they're going to chill with the lefty woke bullshit they're always promoting? They will either pretend that stuff isn't political or come up with some excuse for why the exception must be made.
We all know what the problem is here. The woke lefties are in a bit of a civil war over whether to be pro-terrorist because of some convoluted oppression argument or whether they need to keep Jews in the party or at least keep up the facade that they aren't anti-semitic. They're only feigning silence over the current subject of a schism on the left. There is no chance that they will be politically neutral when it comes to the right or the current left-wing causes.
"...Earlier this month, a faculty-led working group published a report that strongly recommended adopting a neutral stance on topics that do not directly concern the university itself..."
Intelligence from Harvard?!
So will Harvard's silence = violence or no?
See the antisemitic asshole trueman above.
Harvard Announces It Will Stop Releasing Political Statements
Degree programs in Women's Consensual Rape Critical Theory and Pre-Columbian White Supremacy in North America will continue unabated.
Oh this should be fantastic.
If I see even a single rainbow flag on campus in a couple days...