What will happen in academia – what about Watt?

Francis Menton

It's only two weeks into the new Trump administration and we're seeing unbelievable changes in the federal government's oceans. In his first campaign, Trump promised to “drain the swamp” and then when he took office, he barely started the project throughout the four years. Perhaps his constant investigation of the constant investigation distracted him: “Russia! Russia! Russia!” and so on. But this time it's a big difference.

The big news for the past day or two was at the beginning of the FBI and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). These totally corrupt institutions are a great place to start in these early weeks. But they are hardly the tip of the iceberg of corrupt institutions mature.

Academics are the place to be hit by a whirlwind. In the next few years, the entire industry across academia is likely to undergo revolution and transformation. It should be. And if Trump, as I thought, would follow his will, he had the tools he could use to do the job.

With academia, multiple issues come together to put the industry in a highly vulnerable position. Of course, first of all, the academic community is almost universally linked to the distant political left, the most distant people who wake up. Academics are almost alone, opposing Trump in everything he has raised and represented, and doing his best to attack him.

Second, almost all academic institutions receive huge amounts of money from the federal government every year. Most of this is used in real research, such as finding new medical treatments, but a lot of aid (no one knows how much) can fund every left-wing course and program.

The third problem that makes academic institutions particularly vulnerable is that they have participated in illegal racial and gender discrimination for decades with little exception. Some of these discriminations are in the field of admissions, just as exposed in famous cases Sffa v. Harvard The Supreme Court ruled in 2023. But this is only part of the illegal act. There are many other illegal acts in almost every academic institution and even in every aspect of its operations, under the overall title of “Diverency, Equity and Inclusion” or DEI: in addition to enrollment, in teacher and administrative recruitment; Create DEI bureaucracy and law enforcement procedures; in establishing various academic programs, majors and departments (e.g., so-called “research” departments and majors); in funding “cultural centers”; constantly.

Now, President Trump has filed an opposition to the executive order. There are two themes, one on January 20 and the other on January 21. The first order ended all DEI programs in the federal government itself and had received more publicity. But the second one is more important in academia. This is one of the DEI practices dealing with private sectors. The early part of this EO sounds relatively bland. For example, this is the text in Section 2, titled “Strategies”:

The U.S. policy is to protect the civil rights of all Americans and to promote individual initiatives, excellence and efforts. Therefore, I order all executive departments and agencies (organizations) to terminate all discriminatory and illegal preferences, authorizations, policies, plans, activities, guidance, regulations, enforcement litigation, consent orders and requirements. I further order all agencies to enforce our long-standing civil rights laws and to combat the preferences, mandates, policies, plans and activities of the illicit private sector.

But as we go through the details, we will get some serious explosive items. For example, here is the text of Section 3(a)(iv):

(iv) The person in charge of each institution shall include each contract or grant ruling:
(a) A requirement that a contract opponent or grant recipient agrees to its compliance with all applicable federal anti-discrimination laws, which is the importance of government payment decisions, whose purpose is 3729(b)(4) United States regulations; and
(b) A term that requires such an adversary or recipient to prove that it has not operated any program that promotes a violation of any applicable federal anti-discrimination law.

Presumably, most for-profit private businesses have little trouble dealing with these regulations. They will end any DEI program that they may still have and move on. But what about academic institutions? They received huge government grants and were therefore ordered “contractors”. How exactly should they comply? Their corruption has invaded every corner and crack in their place.

The university is huge and foolishly dependent on federal funding. I just thought I would look up the funding status of several institutions I am most familiar with. At Yale, I found that the Yale Daily News reported starting January 29 that “the federal aid freeze threatens nearly $1 billion in Yale funding.” The article reported that Yale University received $899 million in grants and contracts in its most recent fiscal year. (Yale’s total annual budget is about $6 billion.). At Harvard, this is roughly the same story: the federal grant reported in 2023 is $676 million, with a budget of about $6.4 billion. I suspect other elite schools’ reliance on federal funds is comparable.

Now, to keep money flowing, they will have to “prove” They are notOperate any program that promotes a DEI that violates any applicable federal anti-discrimination laws. ” People who get these certifications will not just accept the obvious lies of the fraudsters. It would be fun to watch that play.

We will then get Trump’s Assistant Attorney General, Assistant Attorney General of Civil Rights. In addition to serving as chairman of the California Republican Party, Dhillon is known in his private practice for speaking to conservatives in his civil rights cases. For example, according to Wikipedia Bio here, she represents a Republican at the University of California, Berkeley (in a case that accuses UCB, prevents conservatives from speaking on campus), Google programmer James Damore (in this case, Damore His opinion was wrongly dismissed for expressing his opinion. Regarding women's ability to be programmers), conservative journalist Andy NGO (in NGO in Portland, Oregon, by Antifa · Cases arising from the street attacks of the thugs), and so on.

You'll get the idea – Dhillon's idea of ​​civil rights law is roughly the opposite, contrary to the current resident of the Department of Justice's civil rights division, and she'll move forward soon. She will enter a civil rights department that has just concluded its activities and then kidnapped the hands of the police departments in Minneapolis and Louisville through a consent ordinance during Biden's tenure, which was in Biden Lost during term of office. (It seems they have failed in these efforts, and I suspect the cases against these police departments will be withdrawn soon.)

I checked the status of Dalilong’s nomination and, as far as I know, no hearing from the committee has been arranged. Maybe Senate Democrats will do their best to try to stop her confirmation. On the other hand, they have so far had obvious success in blocking Trump’s nominees, not the last in 2017.

I highly expect Dhillon to be the top project on its agenda to start some high-profile investigations into university violations of civil rights laws, especially in DEI policies. In any such investigation, it is not just an end to the DEI program that will be controversial; the defendants also need to fight for their lives to keep their federal funds flowing.

The depth of corruption in the academic world today is indeed profound. Perhaps, some of them can be reversed. Even many.

Related