The Cover
I was so pleased to see that on your cover for July-August, Harvard “is not pulling its punches” against Trump’s illegal, unconstitutional, and corrupt actions. Veritas will win this boxing match!
James Berkman ’77, J.D. ’82
Boston
When the August issue of Harvard Magazine arrived in my mailbox, I did a second take when I saw the cover and shook my head. I don’t know if framing the fight Harvard is involved in with the Trump administration in this manner is arrogant, blind to what’s at stake here, or just plain stupid. But I hope you understand that if Harvard views itself as being in the ring with Trump, it’s a fight you are going to lose, however many times you block him in the lower courts. I gather there are discussions in process to try and figure out a way through this other than in the ring. That’s smart, as smart as your cover is dumb, because as many have learned to their cost, Trump doesn’t play by the Queensberry Rules.
David McDonald, LL.M. ’80
Great Barrington, Mass.
The opposing boxing gloves on the July-August cover seem to give credibility to Trump’s position, with his glove in red-and-white stripes and with a solid blue wrist. I am sure Trump would be happy with his glove in all gold. That represents his values. Veritas should be across Harvard’s glove to remind everyone that “Truth” is the foundation of all knowledge.
David Souers, M.Arch. ’82
Friendship, Me.
Portraying the Trump administration’s attacks on Harvard University as a boxing match between Harvard and the United States demonstrates a possibly fatal misunderstanding of cultural and political divisions in the United States. Harvard is not fighting the “United States of America.” Its struggle is with MAGA—a political entity working to destroy or pervert education in our country. Harvard is rightly leading the fight for education free of political influence. Most Americans support that. Don’t wrap MAGA in the American flag.
Ivar Nelson ’63
Moscow, Idaho
Just wanted to say we absolutely love the cover of this month’s Harvard Magazine! We stand by you!
Barbara Karp
My compliments to the authors and editors responsible for the letters and obituaries. I marvel at the intelligence and accomplishments set out in both. Also, I enjoyed the cover of the July-August issue. Hubris has never been rationed at Harvard and is on full display on the cover. It caused a robust laugh.
Kathleen Heirich Casey ’59
Pearland, Tex.
Harvard’s Standoff
The latest issue of Harvard Magazine could not have arrived at a more fitting moment. The article subtitled “Your guide to Harvard’s standoff with the government” (page 22) is outstanding—clear, principled, and deeply resonant with this political moment. The Washington Post has published an op-ed by Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, which appears to formalize the Trump administration’s campaign against Harvard under the guise of immigration enforcement. Given the coordinated nature of this public relations offensive, it is crucial that readers have easy access to your article, which frames the stakes far more accurately and thoughtfully than the administration’s talking points.
Ethan S. Burger ’81
Washington, D.C.
Harvard informs us of the cancellation of 1,000 grants and contracts, which threatens to halt progress in causes as worthy as sudden infant death. But the consequences, even if unfortunate, are irrelevant. When a hospital’s failure to meet the appropriate standard of medical care leads to poor patient outcomes, it may be required to pay significant judgments or settlements, and it is inevitable that the expenditure will lower the standard of care for other patients, but this is not a valid defense of malpractice lawsuits.
Nancy Helene Elizabeth Diamond ’82
Free Union, Va.
I was an international student at Harvard over a decade ago, as were a big chunk of my section mates, representing the whole world from China to Ghana and Mauritius. Harvard is one of the world’s top brands and top American cultural exports, at the same level as Nike or Coca-Cola. It’s idiotic for an administration to handicap one of America’s most iconic brands. I’m proud of President Garber, and for the first time in years, I’m proud to be seen in Harvard swag. The name used to connote privilege, but now it’s become a beautiful symbol of freedom, resistance, and TRUTH.
Lisa Kostova, M.B.A. ’09
Portland, Oreg.
Many of your articles in your July-August issue remind me of Maslow’s law: if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. Harvard is trying only intellectual tools to “fix Harvard.” The problem is not reducing conflict or hatred. Nor is it to engender kumbaya moments between Hamas supporters and Zionists—that is close to impossible. What is needed, and can be immediately applied, is more robust enforcement of rules of behavior regarding free speech.
Charles Block, A.M. ’51
Aventura, Fla.
At my 45th reunion at Harvard Business School in June, Goldston professor of business administration Deepak Malhotra gave a fascinating talk, titled “Your Personal All-Purpose AI Negotiation Adviser.” At the end, he invited us to test-drive a new AI negotiation agent he is working on. I told the AI that as “an advisor to President Garber,” I wanted to help Harvard settle its argument.
The agent’s conclusion? “Harvard faces a critical strategic challenge where the institution’s preferred approach of litigation to preserve the status quo may not align with the legal and political realities of the situation. The strategy should acknowledge that Harvard is operating from a position where its underlying legal compliance is questionable, while seeking to preserve its institutional integrity and financial stability.”
The agent’s remarkably cogent advice convinced me of AI’s exciting potential. May our beloved, beleaguered Harvard heed its homegrown AI agent’s advice—and convince anew both us alumni and the nation that it is still worthy of our support.
Thomas H. Pyle, M.B.A.’80
Princeton, N.J.
During my time at Harvard, I had classmates from all over the world. The wide-ranging perspectives and lived experiences reflected within my classes helped shape the incredible experience I enjoyed as a member of the Harvard community. Which is why the Trump administration’s latest attacks on Harvard are so disheartening. The attorney in me can’t help but be gripped by the current legal battle, which hinges on core constitutional concepts. The student part of me is also watching the Harvard litigation, though. As a [lifelong] learner and a recent graduate, I believe in Harvard’s mission, and I care deeply about the Harvard community. Truth is not just a value to which I subscribe, it is an imperative.
Lindsay Bennett, A.L.M. ’25
Sacramento, Cal.
Antisemitism
Harvard is wrong to fight the U.S. government’s efforts to root out antisemitism on campus and beyond. Harvard was unable and unwilling to do so from October 7, 2023, onward and for as far back as one can look before then. Harvard must acknowledge its shortcomings and cooperate fully with the government on these important reforms. The future of the institution is at stake.
Howard M. Sipzner, M.B.A. ’87
Lido Beach, N.Y.
I have just completed reading the University’s final report on antisemitism and I find it pathetically unconvincing in demonstrating that Harvard intends to do anything to end the antisemitism prevalent on campus.
The University report continually falls back on “free speech” to justify taking no direct action against anti-Jewish elements on campus. The U.S. Constitution prohibits the government from impairing the free speech of Americans—it most certainly does not require private institutions (like Harvard) to protect the free speech of students or anyone else. Harvard can adopt whatever restrictions on free speech it feels are necessary to enhance students’ educational experience. The University can—and MUST—immediately ban the use of phrases threatening, directly or indirectly, the life of any Jew anywhere in the world (like “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free”) and ban hostile and aggressive language (or conduct) toward any Jewish student. Adopt a 100 percent expulsion rule for speech violations—with no exceptions. Abandon the University’s unconvincing attempt to find equivalency between anti-Jewish prejudice and anti-Muslim prejudice. The pablum of equivalency simply provides another excuse for doing nothing. For Harvard, that time has passed.
Mark Rutzick, J.D. ’73
Reston, Va.
Intergenerational Disagreement in the Age of Social Media
I appreciated the conciliatory efforts of Serena Jampel in “Agree to Disagree” (page 14). But there is more to this difficult story than matters of rhetoric and politesse. The Trump administration has just allocated $93 million to Jewish groups in an effort to combat antisemitism, which has been defined by some as protesting the American taxpayer-financed deaths of Palestinians in Gaza. The baby boomers’ mainstream narrative is bolstered by the political and financial power structures to which they cling. But it may be slowly decomposing in the face of the younger generation’s embrace of less fettered social media reporting. Perhaps it’s time to recognize that this moment of intergenerational transition will not be stopped nor even soothed by more mannered conversations.
Constance B. Hilliard ’71, Ph.D. ’77
Hickory Creek, Tex.
The International Nature of Science Research
Across multiple conversations with alumni, friends, and neighbors, it’s clear that most people don’t understand how universities serve government. Research grants to faculty are not entitlements. Such grants are what the U.S. government wants smart people to do to advance national security and prosperity. And they do this work at a fraction of the cost the government would incur if it had to undertake creating the laboratories and searching all over the world for experts to work on its priorities.
International students are part of an ecosystem that makes this possible because fewer Americans opt to seek degrees in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Total foreign student enrollment today is 6 percent nationwide, compared to 25 and 30 percent in other English-speaking countries. Yet, more than half of all degrees in science and engineering are earned by international students.
So, the next time you read a news story about a U.S. advance in medicine, science, or technology, note the surnames of the team members responsible. And do, indeed, ask not what our country is doing for them but what international students are doing for us.
Allan E. Goodman, M.P.A. ’68, Ph.D. ’71
President Emeritus, Institute of International Education
Washington, D.C.
Veritas and Unitatis
In the latest issue of Harvard Magazine, Catherine Snow, a professor at the Graduate School of Education, is quoted as saying, “I’ve come to realize now how naive we’ve been to assume that the values Harvard stands for are widely shared.” And she’s absolutely right.
Any number of recent media pieces on Harvard portray an unflattering image of a seemingly arrogant, elitist institution. I did my graduate work at the Kennedy School and the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences. I also served as the founding director of the Kennedy School’s executive education program in national security. My impression of the University and its values is captured well in the following excerpt from President Larry Bacow’s remarks to the graduating class of 2022:
“Today I want to challenge you…to ensure that the opportunities afforded by your education do not enrich your life alone…Please be known at least as much for your humility, kindness, and concern for others as for your professional accomplishments. Recognize the role that good fortune and circumstances have played in your life, and please work to extend opportunity to others just as it has been extended to you. That is how you will sustain the pride and joy you feel today. And that’s the truth.”
Douglas Johnston, M.P.A. ’67, Ph.D. ’82
Alexandria, Va.
I enjoyed your excellent coverage of the 374th Commencement, which in the table of contents was summarized as “A University united.” As an Extension School graduate present that day, I can attest to that feeling of unity. In reflecting on the day, I wonder whether Harvard might benefit from more actively sharing the mission and impact of the Extension School with policymakers and the wider public. My fellow graduates balanced studies with significant work and family commitments, and on Commencement Day I learned that nearly 10 percent of this year’s 1,300 Extension School graduates are active-duty or veteran service members, and that we come from all 50 states.
We live in a time when the public’s understanding of Harvard’s mission, makeup, and impact is being tested. Alongside all the important research and scholarship undertaken within the University, the Extension School stands as an important further example of the contribution Harvard makes to our fellow citizens. Perhaps sharing this lesser-known aspect of our University may help Harvard prevail and flourish.
Victor P. Seidel, A.L.M. ’25
Needham, Mass.
Democracy and Authoritarianism
I was both fascinated and uplifted by Lydialyle Gibson’s article on Erica Chenoweth (page 32). I had vaguely heard of something called the “3.5 percent rule” but had little idea of the context or who came up with it. To me, the recent mass demonstrations against Trump and other autocrats are an encouraging sign. People exhausted from opposing just the first five months of “Trump administration redux” should not give up or give in to complete despair. Yes, Trump and his cronies will likely commit further damage (or certainly try) to the U.S. democratic institutions and traditions, but we can almost see the end of that tunnel now. Reading about Professor Chenoweth and their work was truly a halogen-bright spot in what has been a bleak year.
Curtis Krechevsky, J.D. ’82
Westborough, Mass.
The article on Professor Erica Chenoweth’s work documenting whether violence or nonviolence has been more successful in overthrowing “oppressive regimes” was fascinating. But I was surprised that the author stressed that this analysis can be useful for those opposing democratically elected governments. It would appear that Chenoweth’s research can be used to make democratic elections worthless, since if the losers claim the winner is “oppressive,” they can cancel the election by mobbing streets and highways, engaging in boycotts, etc., and overturn this “oppressive” regime. The favorable presentation of this hijacking of Chenoweth’s research is so obvious, one must assume the article’s author seems quite pleased with its anti-democratic utility. I hope Professor Chenoweth is not so pleased.
Paul M. Meo ’61
Lottsburg, Va.
My stomach turned when I read the gratuitous and sexist physical description of Professor Chenoweth. Their hairstyle and clothing choices are not relevant to the content of the article. I am livid on their behalf and appalled at the sloppy journalism of Harvard Magazine.
Renee Kaufman, M.L.A. ’05
San Francisco
Franklin Stove R&D
Regarding Joyce Chaplin’s article, “Ben Franklin’s Project,” in the May-June issue (page 37), the author missed the opportunity to expound on Franklin’s ingenious application of the scientific method—starting with a hypothesis—and research and development, by testing models in his own home. In this way, he advanced each stove’s design toward the most efficient outcome. Franklin sought to create an efficient heating solution during a time of decreasing natural resources.
Sheryl Manganaro, A.L.B. ’07, A.L.M ’15
Newton Center, Mass.
An Orange a Day
An interesting article about citrus, the microbiome, and depression (“Can an Orange a Day Stave Off Depression?”, page 9). Here’s my concern: I think the average daily serving of oranges during the time frame in question was a glass of orange juice at breakfast. As I recall, a smallish glass of orange juice is the result of squeezing three or more oranges. If my recollection is correct, then one orange a day will not equal the amounts that were probably actually consumed by the study subjects. On the other hand, if we consume an orange “pulp and all” instead of squeezing three, we will derive certain other benefits. Happy breakfasting! (Maybe eating breakfast reduces depression.)
Anne Vohl, J.D. ’71
Reno, Nev.
Pony Plunges
Regarding the article “Pony Plunges” (page 64), I recommend that your readers view The Cowboy and the Queen (2023), a documentary available on Amazon Prime. The program features the equestrian rider and trainer Monty Roberts and the “nonviolent,” clearly effective horse training methods he has employed and promoted over the course of several decades in both the United States and abroad. This brief segment and other material chronicling man’s historically inhumane treatment of horses begs the question of how the horses in the Atlantic City diving horses act fared, a subject that wasn’t addressed in the article.
Howard Chatterton ’69
Bruce, Wis.
Errata
In “The Professor Who Quantified Democracy” (page 32), the Serbian group mentioned in the last paragraph is “Otpor,” not “Optor.” The article about “International Students” (page 30) includes a pie chart that incorrectly shows that 37 percent of the students at the T. H. Chan School of Public Health are international. The accompanying text gives the correct percentage: 42. And in “Harvard Cambridge Scholars” (page 42), Van Tran ’25 of Kirkland House is incorrectly identified as Van C. Tran. There should be no middle initial. We regret the errors.
