Education
Trump’s war on Harvard was decades in the making. This letter proves it | Bernard E Harcourt
On the shelf in my library, I have an autographed copy of a book written by a former Republican congressman from New York, John LeBoutillier, titled Harvard Hates America: The Odyssey of a Born-Again American. It was published in 1978, two years before LeBoutillier was elected to Congress – and decades before the Trump administration’s assault on the institution. But its message is familiar in 2025.
The book is a scathing criticism of Harvard University, in large part over its supposed left-leaning professors who allegedly indoctrinate their undergraduates. Its thrust is straightforward: Harvard is America’s problem.
Today, the blueprint for Donald Trump’s attack on Harvard, Columbia and other liberal arts colleges and universities can be found in another text: Project 2025’s Mandate for Leadership, a guide to rightwing government reform published in April 2023 by the Heritage Foundation – over a year before any encampments went up on Columbia’s campus. But the Republican ambition to subjugate Harvard and Columbia traces further back, at least to the 1970s, when it became apparent that college-educated voters favored the Democratic party.
My copy of Harvard Hates America is autographed and dedicated to two constituents. And I recently stumbled on something tucked into the fold: a letter that LeBoutillier enclosed to the recipients of his gift. On House of Representatives stationery, LeBoutillier wrote:
Long after I had graduated from Harvard and was a freshman member of Congress, I realized just how terrible some of the people educating our young are; they are not only liberals, but they use their “power” over their students to preach an anti-American leftist point of view. And this is not confined to Harvard. Indeed, this is a disease spreading throughout the academic world.
I believe that this politicalization of education threatens this country. And, coupled with a bias so obviously evident in the media, makes it difficult for we conservatives to get our message across.
Well, I’m going to continue to fight for our point of view and our principles.
Enjoy the book.
LeBoutillier was not alone in these sentiments. In a taped conversation with Henry Kissinger and Alexander Haig Jr in the Oval Office on 14 December 1972, President Richard Nixon attacked university professors, claiming they were the enemy. His rhetoric was characteristically colorful: “The professors are the enemy. Professors are the enemy. Write that on the blackboard 100 times and never forget it.”
Conservatives like the journalist Irving Kristol, the philosopher Allan Bloom, and Ronald Reagan’s education secretary, William Bennett, would perpetuate the criticisms of supposedly left-leaning universities in the 1980s. And there is a straight line from those attacks in the 1970s and 80s to the Trump administration.
In a speech titled “The universities are the enemy” and delivered at the National Conservatism Conference in Orlando, Florida, on 2 November 2021, JD Vance declared: “I think if any of us want to do the things that we want to do for our country and for the people who live in it, we have to honestly and aggressively attack the universities in this country.” Vance would then add, quoting Nixon: “There is a wisdom in what Richard Nixon said approximately 40 to 50 years ago. He said, and I quote, ‘The professors are the enemy.’”
The Heritage Foundation picked up the baton in a 43-page chapter on education in the Project 2025 text. Remarkably, the Trump administration’s continuing assault on Harvard, Columbia and other universities is unfolding line-by-line, chapter and verse, from that script.
So, right after a federal judge in Boston blocked the Department of Homeland Security from revoking Harvard University’s ability to enroll foreign students, Marco Rubio, the secretary of state, announced that the administration intended to revoke the visas of Chinese students, especially those with ties to the Chinese Communist party. On page 355 of its Mandate for Leadership, Project 2025 calls for “Confronting the Chinese Communist Party’s Influence on Higher Education”.
At a press conference in the Oval Office on 30 May 2025, Trump attacked Harvard and said he would redirect the school’s grants to vocational education. “I’d like to see the money go to trade schools,” Trump said. The remark, again, came straight out of the Project 2025 playbook, which states on pages 15-16 and 319 that the federal government should prioritize “trade schools” and “career schools” over the “woke-dominated system” of universities.
The Trump administration demanded that Columbia’s Middle Eastern, South Asian and African studies program be placed “under academic receivership”. Again, straight out of the playbook. Project 2025 calls on page 356 for “wind[ing] down so-called ‘area studies’ programs at universities”.
Trump signed executive orders on inauguration day banning diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) and “gender ideology” at institutions such as universities that receive federal funding. Again, textbook material. Project 2025 argued on page 322, regarding educational institutions, that “enforcement of civil rights should be based on a proper understanding of those laws, rejecting gender ideology and critical race theory”.
In fact, the first line of the chapter on education in Project 2025 says it all: “The federal Department of Education should be eliminated.”
Christopher Rufo, the conservative activist behind the attack on critical race theory and gender studies, has openly described the Republican attack on universities as a “counter-revolution” planned well before the campus protests. The Republican offensive traces back at least to the rise of the Black Lives Matter and abolition movements in the wake of the police killings of Eric Garner, Michael Brown, George Floyd and others. “It’s a revolution against revolution,” Rufo admitted, adding: “I think that actually we are a counter-radical force in American life that, paradoxically, has to use what many see as radical techniques.”
And what the Trump administration has accomplished with its ongoing assault on Harvard and Columbia is the “prototype” of that wider counterrevolution. Rufo is explicit about this. “If you take Columbia University as really the first trial of this strategy, we’ve seen an enormous payoff,” he said. “I’d like to see that prototype industrialized and applied to all of the universities as a sector.”
Given this history tracing back to the 1970s, it is puzzling why people continue to believe that the Republicans are trying to reform the universities to address antisemitism. It should be clear that their actions are instead part of a decades-long effort to humble universities for political reasons, namely to counter the trend that college-educated people tend to vote Democratic. Nixon was frank about this. That’s what made professors the enemy.
On top of that, of course, there is profit and political economy. At the press conference last week, Trump admitted why he wants to shift education funding to trade schools.
Encouraged by billionaire Elon Musk at his side, Trump said: “I’d like to see trade schools set up, because you could take $5bn plus hundreds of billions more, which is what is spent [on research universities], and you could have the greatest trade school system anywhere in the world. And that’s what we need to build his rockets and robots and things that he’s doing” – pointing to Musk.
Trump could not have been more explicit. “We probably found our pot of gold,” Trump adds, “and that is what has been wasted at places like Harvard.”
The Trump administration has seen some successes in its counterrevolution against higher education. So far, the lower federal courts have run interference. But there have been major casualties already, especially in the funding of sciences and medical research, academic integrity and autonomy, and area studies. Faculty governance at some universities has also been diminished, at some universities decimated.
Anyone who is genuinely interested in understanding what the Trump administration is up to and to anticipate its next moves should return to books like Harvard Hates America and then read Project 2025’s chapter on education. It clearly explains the past four months and predicts the future – one in which the federal government will sacrifice liberal arts colleges and universities to the benefit of trade schools, faith-based institutions and military academies.
The path ahead also includes, in all likelihood, eliminating the American Bar Association as an accrediting system (page 359), as well as the other actors in the “federal accreditation cartel” (pages 320 and 355); terminating the Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program (page 354), phasing out income-driven repayment plans (page 337), and privatizing student loans (page 340); allocating at least 40% of federal funding of education “to international business programs that teach about free markets and economics” (page 356); and a host of other radical proposals.
It is time now to be honest about the decades-long history of the Republican assault on higher education. Too many of the university leaders who are negotiating with the Trump administration about campus protest are naive at best and fail to grasp the stakes of the ongoing counterrevolution – or complicit at worst. In the process, they are undermining their universities and violating their fiduciary duties to their constituents – students, alumni, faculty and staff. By capitulating based on a pretext, a feint in military terms, those leaders have sacrificed the integrity of the research enterprise and the autonomy of the academy.
Liberal arts colleges and universities are a gem in the US, envied by people around the world. Their strength lies in fostering critical thought, creativity and inventiveness throughout the humanities, social sciences, and natural and applied sciences. A liberal arts education, at its best, cultivates critical thinking that challenges society’s strengths and weaknesses, and asks how to make the world more just with more freedom for everyone. Those are the true aims of higher education.
-
Bernard E Harcourt is a professor of law and political science at Columbia University in New York City and a directeur d’études at the École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales in Paris. He is the author most recently of “A Modern Counterrevolution” in The Ideas Letter
AI is transforming the way we work but without a clear policy in place, even the smartest technology can lead to costly mistakes, ethical missteps and serious security risks
CREDIT: This is an edited version of an article that originally appeared in All Business
Artificial Intelligence is no longer a futuristic concept. It’s here, and it’s everywhere. From streamlining operations to powering chatbots, AI is helping organisations work smarter, faster and more efficiently.
According to G-P’s AI at Work Report, a staggering 91% of executives are planning to scale up their AI initiatives. But while AI offers undeniable advantages, it also comes with significant risks that organisations cannot afford to ignore. As AI continues to evolve, it’s crucial to implement a well-structured AI policy to guide its use within your school.
Understanding the Real-World Challenges of AI
While AI offers exciting opportunities for streamlining admin, personalising learning and improving decision-making in schools, the reality of implementation is more complex. The upfront costs of adopting AI tools be high. Many schools, especially those with legacy systems, find it difficult to integrate new technologies smoothly without creating further inefficiencies or administrative headaches.
There’s also a human impact to consider. As AI automates tasks once handled by staff, concerns about job displacement and deskilling begin to surface. In an environment built on relationships and pastoral care, it’s important to question how AI complements rather than replaces the human touch.
Data security is another significant concern. AI in schools often relies on sensitive pupil data to function effectively. If these systems are compromised the consequences can be serious. From safeguarding breaches to trust erosion among parents and staff, schools must be vigilant about privacy and protection.
And finally, there’s the environmental angle. AI requires substantial computing power and infrastructure, which comes with a carbon cost. As schools strive to meet sustainability targets and educate students on climate responsibility, it’s worth considering AI’s footprint and the long-term environmental impact of widespread adoption.
The Role of an AI Policy in Modern School
To navigate these issues responsibly, schools must adopt a comprehensive AI policy. This isn’t just a box-ticking exercise, it’s a roadmap for how your school will use AI ethically, securely and sustainably. A good AI policy doesn’t just address technology; it reflects your values, goals and responsibilities. The first step in building your policy is to create a dedicated AI policy committee. This group should consist of senior leaders, board members, department heads and technical stakeholders. Their mission? To guide the safe and strategic use of AI across your school. This group should be cross-functional so they can represent all school areas and raise practical concerns around how AI may affect people, processes and performance.
Protecting Privacy: A Top Priority
One of the most important responsibilities when implementing AI is protecting personal and corporate data. Any AI system that collects, stores, or processes sensitive data must be governed by robust security measures. Your AI policy should establish strict rules for what data can be collected, how long it can be stored and who has access. Use end-to-end encryption and multi-factor authentication wherever possible. And always ask: is this data essential? If not, don’t collect it.
Ethics Matter: Keep AI Aligned With Your Values
When creating an AI policy, you must consider how your principles translate to digital behaviour. Unfortunately, AI models can unintentionally amplify bias, especially when trained on datasets that lack diversity or were built without appropriate oversight. Plagiarism, misattribution and theft of intellectual property are also common concerns. Ensure your policy includes regular audits and bias detection protocols. Consult ethical frameworks such as those provided by the EU AI Act or OECD principles to ensure you’re building in fairness, transparency and accountability from day one.
The Bottom Line: Use AI to Support, Not Replace, Your Strengths
AI is powerful. But like any tool, its value depends on how you use it. With a strong, ethical policy in place, you can harness the benefits of AI without compromising your people, principles, or privacy.
Artificial intelligence can become a tool in the development of education, in particular, to help create individual learning paths for Ukrainian students, but it is important to be aware of the risks of its incorrect use. Yevhen Kudriavets, First Deputy Minister of Education and Science, told UNN correspondent about this.
Details
“I think that first of all, we should say that any technology definitely contributes to the development of systems, including the educational system. But the question is how we will use it, positively or negatively. Positively, artificial intelligence can definitely help analyze a lot of information and get exactly what you need at the moment to acquire knowledge. But at the same time, the advantage that intelligence gives is that it can help build individual educational trajectories faster than a teacher would do it separately. Because we understand that, for example, for 3.5 million students in Ukraine, an individual trajectory is needed for everyone,” Kudriavets said.
According to him, today it is difficult to build with human efforts, but artificial intelligence can help with this.
Most employees in Ukraine regularly use AI in their work
06.06.25, 18:17 • 2947 views
“Of course, there are downsides, negative aspects. This includes the issue of ethical use of artificial intelligence, so that it does not directly replace the educational process. And here we just need to look for ways to combat and resolve this,” Kudriavets added.
He emphasized that schoolchildren themselves must understand why they need to use artificial intelligence.
“It seems to me that they can still give us advice on how to use artificial intelligence correctly. But the key is to answer the question of why and for what purpose I am using it. That is, it is not about prohibiting or giving some rules on how to use it. It is about why, because if you have a goal, and you do not use this research after that for this goal, you achieve your goal, great. If you cheat and deceive, and as a result your goal is to get a grade and not get knowledge, then of course, you will not achieve your goal in getting an education,” Kudriavets emphasized.
AI assistant launched on Diia portal in Ukraine01.09.25, 16:37 • 2337 views
Introduce yourself in three words or phrases.
Innovative, empathetic, determined
What do you like most about your job?
Every day brings a new experience with a language or language community in the US or somewhere else in the world for the 150 languages we assess. It never gets old exploring creative ways to expand opportunities for learners, teachers, and test-takers through innovative assessment, learning technologies, and pedagogies.
Best work trip/Worst work trip?
Best: This June, I attended EdTech Week in London – a full week of thought-provoking sessions on how entrepreneurs are reshaping learning and teaching. Conversations with fellow innovators from all over the world, including The PIE’s own CEO Amy Baker, sparked countless ideas for growing our services. The weather was glorious, and staying on London’s vibrant East Side showed me a whole new incredibly rich and diverse face of the city.
Worst: I’ve had a few challenging trips, but I genuinely love travel. Even the tough ones offer valuable lessons.
If you could learn a language instantly, which would you pick and why?
Brazilian Portuguese – it feels like the voice is dancing with every word. It’s such a contrast to my second language, Japanese, which I deeply love. It would be wonderful to have the ability to speak two such different and beautiful languages. Brazil’s fast-growing economy and strong demand for both English and Spanish learning and assessment make Portuguese not only beautiful, but strategically valuable for business.
What makes you get up in the morning?
Our remarkable global team. They amaze and inspire me every day.
Champion/cheerleader which we should all follow and why?
In a world without many inspiring political leaders, I admire the courage, determination, and leadership of Volodymyr Zelensky. As far as a leader in reporting on technology and how it impacts global society, business, and education: Azeem Azhar consistently provides the most insightful analysis I have found.
Worst conference food/beverage experience
I won’t comment on the worst, but if I could humbly say, the best was the spread of Polish food our company put on for our party at the Polish Museum of America in Chicago during the US national language conference in 2023.
Book or podcast recommendation for others in the sector?
AI is the biggest topic out there everywhere, including EdTech. Although it was written before ChatGPT exploded on the scene, I found this book incredibly helpful in understanding both the fundamental principles of AI, and the history of how it has evolved since it was first discussed in 1954 at Dartmouth College. ‘Artificial Intelligence: A Guide for Thinking Humans’ by Melanie Mitchell. As a history major in college learning the context of where it started to where it is today gave me a good feel for the trajectory of this powerful technology.
A classic book on EdTech I would recommend is Clayton Christensen’s 2008 book ‘Disrupting Class: How Disruptive Innovation Will Change the Way the World Learns’. A personal lesson for me from the book: even proven technologies take years to gain traction in education, and that the change will only come from around the margins. As the developer of ELPA in 2004, the first online test of English for English Language Learners for the Oregon Department of Education, we assumed that departments across the US would quickly adopt online testing given the many advantages that it provided. Instead, it took the Covid crisis to finally push online testing to be used throughout the US education system.
Describe a project or initiative you’re currently working on that excites you.
In 2022 we created Mira, our AI-powered language learning and assessment platform. This summer we launched Mira Stride, a formative assessment that uses AI to instantly analyae English Language learners’ use of language, provide individualised reports on the strengths and challenges for the learners, and identify concrete measures that teachers can use to address each learner’s challenges. I am constantly amazed by the power of properly harnessed AI technologies to personalise and accelerate language learning.
-
Business2 weeks agoThe Guardian view on Trump and the Fed: independence is no substitute for accountability | Editorial
-
Tools & Platforms1 month ago
Building Trust in Military AI Starts with Opening the Black Box – War on the Rocks
-
Ethics & Policy2 months agoSDAIA Supports Saudi Arabia’s Leadership in Shaping Global AI Ethics, Policy, and Research – وكالة الأنباء السعودية
-
Events & Conferences4 months agoJourney to 1000 models: Scaling Instagram’s recommendation system
-
Jobs & Careers2 months agoMumbai-based Perplexity Alternative Has 60k+ Users Without Funding
-
Podcasts & Talks2 months agoHappy 4th of July! 🎆 Made with Veo 3 in Gemini
-
Education2 months agoMacron says UK and France have duty to tackle illegal migration ‘with humanity, solidarity and firmness’ – UK politics live | Politics
-
Education2 months agoVEX Robotics launches AI-powered classroom robotics system
-
Funding & Business2 months agoKayak and Expedia race to build AI travel agents that turn social posts into itineraries
-
Podcasts & Talks2 months agoOpenAI 🤝 @teamganassi