Speaker 1: It's Night Side with Dan Ray w b Z Constance Radio.
Speaker 2: I thought we're getting a second newscast there. Thank you
Speaker 2: very much, almost did. You're right, no problem. I think
Speaker 2: all of us are aware of the fact that there
Speaker 2: is a titanic battle going on between the Trump administration
Speaker 2: really in the person of the president himself as well
Speaker 2: as the people who work for him at Harvard University,
Speaker 2: a lot of other really important universities around the country. Uh,
Speaker 2: there is a group that has combined from Columbia, Harvard, Princeton,
Speaker 2: and others, one of whom has been a guest on
Speaker 2: this program before, Professor Stephen Pinker, Professor of psychology at
Speaker 2: Harvard University. Professor Pinker, welcome to Nights Out. I know
Speaker 2: you have limited time, and I hope that the signal
Speaker 2: holds for us here. If I were to characterize you
Speaker 2: as someone who is not has not been happy with
Speaker 2: some of the recent trends at Harvard University in terms
Speaker 2: of intellectual diversity. You have been critical of the administration
Speaker 2: on some of these issues, and yet you are just
Speaker 2: as critical now of Donald Trump's administration as he threatens
Speaker 2: to potentially even go as far as to take away
Speaker 2: the tax exempt status of the university. Some people might
Speaker 2: see those as inconsistent. I do not. I'd like you
Speaker 2: to explain them.
Speaker 3: Sure. Well.
Speaker 4: I've been a pretty vocal critic of Harvard. I wrote
Speaker 4: a viral article a few years ago called the Trouble
Speaker 4: with Harvard. I wrote an article for The Boston Globe
Speaker 4: last year called a five point plan for Harvard to
Speaker 4: save itself. I formed the Council on Academic Freedom at Harvard,
Speaker 4: with where two hundred faculty are pushing back against what
Speaker 4: we thought of as not enough a commitment to academic freedom,
Speaker 4: to intellectual diversity. But we've been pushing Harvard to reform.
Speaker 4: I think we've had a number of successes. Harvard scrapped
Speaker 4: the diversity statements that we did out out job applicants
Speaker 4: who weren't woke ideologues. We got them to stop issuing pronouncements.
Speaker 4: We've got them to just public commit to the idea
Speaker 4: that diversity of viewpoints is a good thing and that
Speaker 4: has to be fostered. Lots of stuff has been happening.
Speaker 4: The latest list of demands the ultimatum from the Trump
Speaker 4: administration on Friday night is it's just platently ridiculous, as
Speaker 4: one of my colleagues said, it's an offer that Harvard
Speaker 4: could not refuse. They would put government bureaucrats in charge
Speaker 4: of maintaining viewpoint diversity in every department without saying what
Speaker 4: viewpoint diversity means. Does this mean that government bureaucrats could
Speaker 4: put creation in the biology department and anti factors?
Speaker 3: And the.
Speaker 4: It says that we've got to vet students, not in
Speaker 4: any students who don't endorse American values. Well, you know,
Speaker 4: I come from Canada, and I'm here to tell you
Speaker 4: that a lot of Canadians say that the US has
Speaker 4: too many guns and engages in stupid wars and that
Speaker 4: doesn't have a good healthcare system. Are we supposed to
Speaker 4: keep them out? The thing is, if the whole point
Speaker 4: of the Trump pressure was to enhance freedom of thought,
Speaker 4: academic freedom, viewpoint diversity. But if you've got a bunch
Speaker 4: of government bureaucrats telling us who our professors have to be,
Speaker 4: what kind of students we admit, setting up a by
Speaker 4: the way, massive bureaucracy to audit every unit and file
Speaker 4: reports with the government every three months, you know, I
Speaker 4: don't even know if they were serious that Harvard could
Speaker 4: ever accept this, because it really means handing over Harvard
Speaker 4: to a hostile takeover. I suspect that they were kind
Speaker 4: of setting up a confrontation.
Speaker 2: Well, the other thing is that, you know, Trump obviously
Speaker 2: overstating what he hopes to accomplish, so called art of
Speaker 2: the deal. A lot of we talked about this last night,
Speaker 2: and a lot of the demands on Harvard, by the way,
Speaker 2: demands that Columbia in many ways acquiesced to another Ivy
Speaker 2: League college, a lot of them, lawyers would say would
Speaker 2: be vague, arbitrary and capricious. Again, and you've highlighted some
Speaker 2: of those as to who would set up how what
Speaker 2: standard would be used. And you know when they talk
Speaker 2: about American values, well, different people have different explanations of
Speaker 2: American values, Professor Pinker. We're joined by a mutual friend
Speaker 2: of ours, Harvey Silverwade, and they just I know that
Speaker 2: you're limited on time, and I want to make sure
Speaker 2: Harvey has a chance to say hello. He says he
Speaker 2: has a bit of a surprise, and Harvey always has
Speaker 2: good surprises. So let's say, let's let's just bring Harvey
Speaker 2: into the conversation. Harvey, welcome back. As always, you're on
Speaker 2: with someone who needs no introduction to you, A colleague
Speaker 2: and a friend, Professor Steve Pinker of Harvard University. Go ahead, Harvey.
Speaker 3: By coincidence, I wrote a letter two hours ago. I
Speaker 3: dated in April eighteenth, because I planned to mail her
Speaker 3: tomorrow morning a postal letter. It reads as follows, Alan
Speaker 3: Garbe President, John Manning, Provost Harvard University. Dear Allan and John,
Speaker 3: as you can well understand, I'm very pleased that Harvard
Speaker 3: is standing up to Donald Trump. In my view, Trump
Speaker 3: is associopath, a person with no moral compass. I realize
Speaker 3: that taking this stand will be financially painful for Harvard
Speaker 3: in the short term, but Trump will be gone in
Speaker 3: a bid under four years. Parenthesis has claimed that he
Speaker 3: can win the third term is legal and constitutional. Monson's
Speaker 3: close parentheses. Harvard, on the other hand, is older than
Speaker 3: our nation itself. It shall prevail. Congratulations for showing some backbone.
Speaker 2: Harvey Silverglade and Harvey Silverglade, someone who's been critical of Harvard.
Speaker 2: We seem to have lost Steve Pinker. Rob See if
Speaker 2: you can bring Professor Pinker back, please, I think that
Speaker 2: he just got into a bad cell zone. If you
Speaker 2: can try to re establish that connection with him. I
Speaker 2: know that he never would have hung up on us
Speaker 2: or on Harvey. From a legal point of view, Harvey,
Speaker 2: obviously you probably have the same view of I do
Speaker 2: as I do, and as Professor Pinker described, you know, vague, arbitrary,
Speaker 2: capricious demands. I look at it as if Donald Trump
Speaker 2: is looking at this as a negotiation of real estate negotiation.
Speaker 3: That's how he looks at all these situations.
Speaker 2: I know you had some personal dealings with him over
Speaker 2: the years, Professor Pinker back with us, rob Okay, Professor Pinker,
Speaker 2: thank you. I think we lost you there for a
Speaker 2: couple of minutes. Harvey has just written a letter to
Speaker 2: the President of Harvard, President Garber, in which he commends
Speaker 2: him for all of this. We were just to bring
Speaker 2: you back into the conversation. We were just talking, Harvey
Speaker 2: and I about this. Is Donald Trump unrestrained, who was
Speaker 2: looking at this more as a real estate deal, saying, look,
Speaker 2: you know, I want to buy this building, but I
Speaker 2: also want to have to buy these other two buildings,
Speaker 2: and that he's not looking at it as as a
Speaker 2: as a leak. From a legal perspective, I think he's
Speaker 2: just he's overreaching as he would in any so called
Speaker 2: art of the deal. Are we far off on that,
Speaker 2: Professor Pinker feel free again? Harvey's still with us on
Speaker 2: the line.
Speaker 5: Yes, I don't think it's that, just because I.
Speaker 4: Don't think this is good faith negotiation. When it came
Speaker 4: to Columbia, the ultimatum was you've got to do the
Speaker 4: following things, and even if you do, we don't promise
Speaker 4: to restore funding. And again with Harvard, where the demands
Speaker 4: are far more extreme than what he usould with Columbia.
Speaker 4: They're so over the top it's not good that Harvard
Speaker 4: could could accept any of them. They're just not a
Speaker 4: reasonable starting point for negotiations. Nor is there a promise
Speaker 4: that if Harvard did them, then the universe that the
Speaker 4: Trump administration we're back off as opposed to pocketing the
Speaker 4: conceptions and concessions and upping the ante. So we're dealing
Speaker 4: with someone, I think, who just wants to dominate, to
Speaker 4: fully to humiliate. You know, we've seen that in his
Speaker 4: other negotiating so called negotiations with Canada, with Denmark, with Ukraine.
Speaker 4: So it doesn't seem like just real estate deal where
Speaker 4: two parties try to hammer out an agreement and meet
Speaker 4: somewhere in the middle.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Well, I just think that his style is to
Speaker 2: is to ask for more and then accept what he can.
Speaker 2: Maybe there's nothing that Harvard would acquiesce to has anyone
Speaker 2: from the administration recognizing that there are people who should
Speaker 2: be aligned with them, not necessarily philosophically, but at least
Speaker 2: on the broader issue of what was going on on
Speaker 2: campuses a year and a year and a half ago
Speaker 2: post October seventh. You know, some of the issuance I
Speaker 2: know with Columbia was students no longer could be masked
Speaker 2: to hide their identities. There was there was more, I thought,
Speaker 2: outrageous behavior at Harvard at Columbia than at Harvard. I
Speaker 2: know Harvard had some incidents. They seemed to me to
Speaker 2: be less organized. If you if you understand what I'm
Speaker 2: trying to suggest.
Speaker 4: Oh, absolutely, yeah, Columbia. Harvard was bad, Columbia was worse.
Speaker 4: And you know, it was just a question of follow
Speaker 4: your own rules, your own procedures of due process. If
Speaker 4: students clearly cross the line from peaceful process protests to
Speaker 4: intimidation and occupation, then apply the rules consistently. And neither
Speaker 4: Harvard nor Columbia has done that, and if that was
Speaker 4: the demand Harvard could easily have I've said yes, But
Speaker 4: turning over the keys to hiring, admissions promotion to the
Speaker 4: Trump administration in effect goes way beyond just enforcing rules
Speaker 4: that are on the book that Harvard could easily have
Speaker 4: lived with.
Speaker 2: Okay, I want to ask a question when I come
Speaker 2: back that I know is in the minds of some
Speaker 2: of my listeners, and Professor Pinker, I know what We've
Speaker 2: cut it at ten minutes. I'm just going to ask
Speaker 2: the one question to both you and Harvey when we
Speaker 2: come back. If that's okay, and that is you can
Speaker 2: think about the answer. But I had people last night
Speaker 2: who were saying to me, well, Harvard has a fifty
Speaker 2: three billion dollar in doman, why do they need taxpayer money? Anyway,
Speaker 2: I'd like to get a response from both both of you.
Speaker 2: Do that, and then Professor Pinker, I will let you
Speaker 2: get home with the rest of your evening, and Harvey,
Speaker 2: I will I will thank you for your participation as well.
Speaker 2: Could you both just give me a couple of minutes,
Speaker 2: get through a couple of commercial messages, and respond to
Speaker 2: that point, because that was a point that folks continued
Speaker 2: to raise with me last night on the show. They
Speaker 2: have fifty feet three billion, why do they need taxpayer money?
Speaker 2: Fair enough, that's the question you'll ask. And okay, we'll
Speaker 2: be back with Harvey Silverglate and Professor Stephen Pinker of
Speaker 2: the Psychology Department at Harvard University. And if you'd like
Speaker 2: to jump on board. They will be leaving us, but
Speaker 2: I want to open up to your your thoughts as well.
Speaker 2: Harvey may stay with us a little while, if that's possible,
Speaker 2: six months, seven two thirty, six months, seven nine thirty
Speaker 2: back right after this with a concluding segment with Professor
Speaker 2: Stephen Pinker, and may or may not be a concluding
Speaker 2: segment with Harvey Silverglate back on Nightside.
Speaker 1: Right after this, It's Night Side with Dan Ray on
Speaker 1: w Boston's News.
Speaker 2: We're joined by Professor Stephen Pinker of the Psychology Department
Speaker 2: at Harvard University. In Harvey Silverglade, who is a frequent
Speaker 2: guest and contributed to this program. So I want to
Speaker 2: ask the question that I think in your absence a
Speaker 2: lot of people would be thinking, that is, why does
Speaker 2: Harvard needs need federal money when they have fifty three
Speaker 2: billion dollars in endowments. Professor pinkerm, I'd like to start
Speaker 2: with you, if that's okay.
Speaker 4: Sure, well, it's not just a piggy bank that it
Speaker 4: can break open, and I use to support research indefinitely.
Speaker 4: For one thing, a lot of those funds are earmarked
Speaker 4: for buy their donors, for chairs, for professors, for scholarships,
Speaker 4: for student athletic facilities. Without that money, Harvard could no
Speaker 4: longer have the policy of not turning away any student
Speaker 4: for lack of funds. No one has turned away.
Speaker 3: From Harvard because they can't afford.
Speaker 2: It, all right, Harvey, you common welfare.
Speaker 4: It's not kind of welfare. Harvard is giving the country
Speaker 4: something in return, namely research on how the brain works
Speaker 4: and how kids develop and cures for cancer. So without
Speaker 4: that money, the Harvard couldn't support that research definitely. I
Speaker 4: mean if it ate at seed Corn, at some point
Speaker 4: it would be gone. And it's not just support again,
Speaker 4: it is paying for research that benefits the entire population.
Speaker 2: All right, Harvey, let me get your response. I'm sure
Speaker 2: you agree with Professor Pinker generally.
Speaker 3: I do, but I would go further. I don't care
Speaker 3: what the money went for. I wouldn't care if Harvard
Speaker 3: was throwing it down a sinkhole. You lose it under
Speaker 3: a threat. That is the problem. If the White House
Speaker 3: can threaten Harvard and this, they can virtually take over
Speaker 3: and run the university. I don't agree with the Palestinian
Speaker 3: point of view, but I believe that they be allowed
Speaker 3: to demonstrate it's got nothing to do with what the
Speaker 3: money was for.
Speaker 2: All right, gentlemen, I thank both of you. Professor Pinker,
Speaker 2: you've stayed with us longer. I really do appreciate it.
Speaker 2: Some night, when we get you in a room and
Speaker 2: a chair, well we'll see if we get you for
Speaker 2: an entire hour. But thank you very much. And again,
Speaker 2: your scholarship is important. But your position here. The White
Speaker 2: House would have been very smart, professor, to have reached
Speaker 2: out to the leadership of this group that you have formed.
Speaker 2: No one reached out to you and said, hey, gee,
Speaker 2: we actually have people on college campuses who we can
Speaker 2: form an alliance with on the issue of academic freedom
Speaker 2: and a and some changes that might be necessary and acceptable.
Speaker 4: No, no, they did not. They don't have us on
Speaker 4: speak dial unfortunately.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Well I think it's there. I think it's their loss, professor, think.
Speaker 2: Thank you so much. We'll look forward to having you
Speaker 2: back soon.
Speaker 4: Okay, thanks so much having me back, happy to speak
Speaker 4: to you.
Speaker 2: Thank you very much, Harvey Silver Glad. I'm gonna hold you.
Speaker 2: We're gonna get some phone calls coming in here. Uh
Speaker 2: as the as the as the evening goes on. Uh
Speaker 2: and uh and I do appreciate uh you. I knew
Speaker 2: this would be your reaction. It you know, you you
Speaker 2: The line is pretty clear. The line is pretty clear
Speaker 2: on all of these demands, and some of them. I
Speaker 2: just wonder who wrote who wrote up this letter?
Speaker 3: Was it?
Speaker 2: Do you think it was Stephen Miller or someone like that.
Speaker 2: I mean, it's just the letter goes way over what
Speaker 2: I think any university would ever be able to commit to.
Speaker 2: Your quick comment on the demands, Did we lose Harvey
Speaker 2: some administration? Yes, towards towards Harvard. There are really there
Speaker 2: are about eight of them, or I think you know,
Speaker 2: they pulled them out of the letter. Uh. And they
Speaker 2: they are very specific, and they're very broad, and they're
Speaker 2: very far. They're very you know, they're they're such asks over.
Speaker 3: They wanted to take over. It was a non violent
Speaker 3: takeover of Harvard University. They wanted to run the place.
Speaker 2: Yeah, how is it that they that someone didn't look
Speaker 2: at that? I mean, everybody there are people in the
Speaker 2: White House are still smart people. How did not someone
Speaker 2: look at the place and look that isn't ask that
Speaker 2: is way beyond what we should be asking for.
Speaker 3: Maybe they did. Trump doesn't listen to anybody. He thinks
Speaker 3: he's God's gifts to humanity.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Well, I mean, I know you've had personal dealings
Speaker 2: with him across the table, and they can speak from
Speaker 2: the can speak from some experience.
Speaker 3: You know.
Speaker 2: I'm going to be honest with your Harvey. I think
Speaker 2: he's done some good things in his first eighty four
Speaker 2: or five days whatever it is, including finally tightening up
Speaker 2: the border. And I do think there have been some
Speaker 2: things some of the executive orders were necessary, but this
Speaker 2: to me seems like an overreach. I mean, the first
Speaker 2: one has changed the government.
Speaker 3: Go ahead, even a clock that's not working is right
Speaker 3: twice a day.
Speaker 2: Fair enough. I'm just going to read a couple of
Speaker 2: these change the governance of the leadership to reduce the
Speaker 2: power of students, faculty, and administrations more committed to activism
Speaker 2: than scholarship. I for the life of me, don't understand
Speaker 2: what he means by that.
Speaker 3: Is why.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, and it's impossible for me just gonna
Speaker 2: respond to it. It is, it's unclear, it's it's beyond arbitrary,
Speaker 2: vague and capricious. We'll be back with Harvey Silverglate in
Speaker 2: phone calls. I only have one line open six, one, seven, two, five, four, ten, thirty.
Speaker 2: All points of view are welcomed here, Okay. Do I
Speaker 2: think that HARVD was adequate at the hearings in Washington,
Speaker 2: d C. Fifteen months ago which resulted in the resignation
Speaker 2: of the then president Claudion Gay, Absolutely not. Do I
Speaker 2: think that they were responsive to the demonstrations that went
Speaker 2: on on their campus, Absolutely not. Those those demonstrations never
Speaker 2: rose to what went on at Columbia, and Harvey would
Speaker 2: probably disagree with me on this one. But I was
Speaker 2: appalled when I heard a Columbia professor say in the
Speaker 2: wake of October seventh that the events of October seventh
Speaker 2: left him with a feeling of exhilaration. When I come back,
Speaker 2: I'm going to ask Harvey to comment on that stage.
Speaker 2: Harvey is the ultimate free speech advocate here, I guess
Speaker 2: have a right to be appalled. I'll see if Harvey
Speaker 2: agrees or disagrees. Here comes the news. We'll be right
Speaker 2: back with phone calls and Harvey Silverglade on Nightside.
Speaker 1: Night Side. Dan Ray on WBZ Boston's news radio.
Speaker 2: All right, Harvey Silverglade, you're familiar, I think with the
Speaker 2: professor at Columbia who, in the wake of October seventh,
Speaker 2: I think, used the phrase that he had never been
Speaker 2: so exhilarated than when he watched that. That's a pretty
Speaker 2: sick statement for anyone to make, never mind a college
Speaker 2: professor that's molding the minds of young people. Does he
Speaker 2: have a right to make that statement? Yeah, But I
Speaker 2: think you also have to be responsible for what you say.
Speaker 3: Well, Columbia has been a disgrace. My son is an
Speaker 3: alum of Columbia. He's very unhappy. What more can I say?
Speaker 2: So, I mean, you know, I guess what I'm what
Speaker 2: I'm trying to say is I'm not asking that the
Speaker 2: professor be fired for making that statement, because that obviously
Speaker 2: because approachment in the First Amendment. But when you think
Speaker 2: that somehow someone of that mentality, I'm not sure if
Speaker 2: he's tenured or he's on tenure track or whatever, that Columbia.
Speaker 2: That shows to me, within the administration of Columbia, you know,
Speaker 2: a perversity that I don't quite understand how anyone. I mean,
Speaker 2: I wonder what his reaction to seeing pictures of the
Speaker 2: Holocaust would be.
Speaker 3: Well, all I could say is Colombia's standing in the
Speaker 3: university world has fallen dramatically. They are going to have
Speaker 3: a loss of donations. They're going to have a loss
Speaker 3: of applications. It's going to destroy a previously great institute.
Speaker 3: One decision is enough to destroy this great institution. It
Speaker 3: shows how fragile reputation is.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I guess, I guess. Let's let's get to some
Speaker 2: phone calls here and again, folks, you have Harvey and me.
Speaker 2: Professor Peaker had promised me ten minutes. He stay with
Speaker 2: us longer than that. Let me go to Paul in
Speaker 2: South Hamilton. Paul, thanks for getting the conversation going. You're
Speaker 2: on with Harvey Silverglke right ahead.
Speaker 6: Okay, Dan and Harvey. I wish Stephen was on the phone. Also,
Speaker 6: I'm just asking all of you to check your biases
Speaker 6: at the door now. Harvey, do you know the arguments
Speaker 6: of Noam Chomsky regarding what free speech is I do.
Speaker 6: And in principle, it's if you're not for the right
Speaker 6: of the speech that you despise, whether it's the speech
Speaker 6: or the right of the person who you despise to speak,
Speaker 6: then you're not for free speech at all. And I
Speaker 6: think it's important that we remember this just two days
Speaker 6: before the Revolution, in light of what the Bill of
Speaker 6: Rights means and what an open society is. So I
Speaker 6: do appreciate when Harvey you do discuss these issues in
Speaker 6: a mature and responsible way. Dan, you're trying to go
Speaker 6: to them with rather weak arguments, Lindsey Grahama the Senate.
Speaker 2: Do mean, don't accuse me of something that's inaccurate. I
Speaker 2: think that the most interesting and probably the strongest argument
Speaker 2: that the other point of view could raise, and was
Speaker 2: raised last night in a couple of other context is,
Speaker 2: and this is the way to sharpen the argument is
Speaker 2: you're going to take taxpayer money from individuals who have
Speaker 2: never been to Harvard, never had a chance to going
Speaker 2: to Harvard, maybe never even drove by Harvard, and who
Speaker 2: themselves have worked blue collar jobs and paid a lot
Speaker 2: of taxes in their lives, and we're asking them to
Speaker 2: support universities with which they disagree. It's one I don't
Speaker 2: know that everyone in America is a is a disciple
Speaker 2: of Noam Chomsky's positions on free speech, so I wasn't
Speaker 2: trying to go to him. I knew that Harvey and
Speaker 2: Steve Pinker would give very adequate answers, and I attempted
Speaker 2: to give them that opportunity.
Speaker 6: Dan If I may just as a quick follow up,
Speaker 6: on the floor of the Senate, Lindsey Graham spoke about
Speaker 6: turning Gaza into a parking lot. It's the same principle
Speaker 6: he exercises his free speech right to the floor of
Speaker 6: the Senate.
Speaker 2: I get.
Speaker 6: It's the taxpayers pay for it, yep, just as a
Speaker 6: college professor or foreign national student does when they're yelling
Speaker 6: out at Harvard Square or on the.
Speaker 2: I think, well, again, I think when you get to
Speaker 2: foreign nationals, you're you're in a different category here. And
Speaker 2: Harvey may disagree with me on this, but if we're
Speaker 2: accepting people who to come to this country to be
Speaker 2: educated here and are foreign nationals, they're not US citizens,
Speaker 2: they have certain rights. I'm not suggesting that they should
Speaker 2: be summarily deported. No. But at the same time, I
Speaker 2: do think that depending. I'm very troubled by the arrest
Speaker 2: of the Turkish woman because I have seen no evidence
Speaker 2: of her doing anything that was directly supportive of Hamas.
Speaker 2: If all of a sudden you can show me evidence
Speaker 2: that she was funneling money to Hamas, I'm going to
Speaker 2: I'm going to be mightily convinced that I'd like to
Speaker 2: see turn turned out of the country.
Speaker 6: Harvey follow up on speech versus materials support for terrorism
Speaker 6: and also Harvey, please explain why when you're on United
Speaker 6: States soil the Bill of Rights should apply to you
Speaker 6: regards wardless of citizenship. Please speak about that jurisprudence, and
Speaker 6: I'll take the answer off there.
Speaker 2: Stay right, stay right there, Paul, because the Bill of
Speaker 2: Rights does apply. However, people you would would you're not
Speaker 2: going to take someone who commits a crime in the
Speaker 2: US and who is a US citizen and say to them,
Speaker 2: we're gonna we're going to deport you to El Salvador
Speaker 2: and you're going to serve your prison in in Al Salvador. If,
Speaker 2: on the other hand, someone has come here illegally and
Speaker 2: they are they have committed a crime in this country illegally,
Speaker 2: while here illegally, they become very deportable, Harvey, go right ahead.
Speaker 7: Yeah, I agree with you. I mean it is this
Speaker 7: is a simple, a simple issue. It really is quite simple.
Speaker 7: It doesn't matter what the ideological perspective of the person is,
Speaker 7: and it's is as simple as that. Let me tell
Speaker 7: you something. I had a.
Speaker 3: Client who has to be unnamed, who is a faculty
Speaker 3: member of Columbia, and his free speech was This was
Speaker 3: about twenty years ago. And I wrote to the General Council,
Speaker 3: which is what lawyers have to do. They can't write
Speaker 3: to the president directly ethically, and complained about this and
Speaker 3: I got nowhere, and then I decided to write to
Speaker 3: the Board of Columbia, and I wrote a letter to
Speaker 3: the Board about this. General Council threatened to file a
Speaker 3: ethics complaint against me. I told him to go right
Speaker 3: ahead and do so. The next day, the chairman of
Speaker 3: the Board contacted the President and instructed him to not
Speaker 3: go after this professor, and the General Council never filed
Speaker 3: an ethics complaint against me.
Speaker 2: That's a good result on all points. Let me ask
Speaker 2: you this, Paul, if if if you were living here
Speaker 2: in World War two and there was a German citizen
Speaker 2: living in America uh and was funneling money back to
Speaker 2: uh TO to the German army during World War Two.
Speaker 2: Would they be deportable or or would you keep would
Speaker 2: you keep them here?
Speaker 6: This is how I'll evaluate your hypothetical. First, is I
Speaker 6: spoke about speech versus what's called material support.
Speaker 2: Dan right now, And I was just clarifying that that
Speaker 2: I was appalled when the argument was made. I just
Speaker 2: don't want you to mischaracterize my position. I was appalled
Speaker 2: when when she was arrested on the streets for what
Speaker 2: appears to have been an op ed piece in the
Speaker 2: Toughs newspaper, a student newspaper. I'd like to see before
Speaker 2: any action is taken against her, even the action that
Speaker 2: has been taken, I'd like to see some proof. But
Speaker 2: if the proof rises to a certain level, her due
Speaker 2: process rights are not going to rise to the same
Speaker 2: level as a US citizen.
Speaker 6: You know, Dan, and don't want a monopolis. But I
Speaker 6: appreciate this back and forth. And we are so lucky
Speaker 6: to live in a society where we can talk over
Speaker 6: the radio freely about these issues.
Speaker 2: You're very lucky to have a program, I gotta tell
Speaker 2: you're very lucky to have a program the quality of
Speaker 2: Nightside where people like Harvey Silverglade are regular guests at
Speaker 2: people like Stephen Pinker and last hour of the dean
Speaker 2: of the University of Michigan Medical School. And we're lucky
Speaker 2: to have listeners like you and calls like you, Paul, and.
Speaker 6: So if that made us follow up due process habeas
Speaker 6: corpus the student from Columbia who are sent to the
Speaker 6: detention center in Louisiana, can Harvey tell us if he
Speaker 6: was charged with the crime.
Speaker 2: I don't know that he's been charged with the crime,
Speaker 2: but I don't know what evidence they have at this point.
Speaker 6: Of course, are they over here to produce that evidence
Speaker 6: to a judge.
Speaker 3: It's irrelevant because he would be presumed innocent.
Speaker 6: Right who convinces reminding? Thank you for reminding the audience
Speaker 6: of the presumption of innocence and what a written constitution means,
Speaker 6: particularly here in Massachusetts, which has the oldest living constitution,
Speaker 6: in effect, the.
Speaker 3: Bill of Rights, the Bill of Rights of the the
Speaker 3: Bill of Rights of the US Constitution was actually patterned
Speaker 3: entered the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights, because the Declaration of
Speaker 3: Rights is older than the Bill of Rights. Yes, thanks,
Speaker 3: that's good.
Speaker 6: To remind me.
Speaker 2: Well, thank you very much, appreciate you call. Have a
Speaker 2: great night. We will be back on nightside after this
Speaker 2: very quick break. The only line of six, one, seven,
Speaker 2: ten thirty. Let's have at it. Coming back on nightside.
Speaker 1: You're on night Side with on Easy Boston's news radio.
Speaker 2: Back to the phones we go, going to go to
Speaker 2: Paul in Chicago. Paul, you were next on the night
Speaker 2: Side with Harvey Silver. Go ahead, Paul, Phil. Excuse me, Phil,
Speaker 2: I misreaded Phil in Chicago.
Speaker 3: Okay, here I am.
Speaker 5: I just want to say that I watched TV tonight
Speaker 5: and Larry O'donnald with the Harvard and by the way
Speaker 5: I found it, went to Boston, call it the Harvard.
Speaker 5: That's a great show on the sky down. I'll sell
Speaker 5: the GOP at the other Hi, Harvard grads that that's
Speaker 5: on TV. Evan so well does Lawren. She called the
Speaker 5: other day about this president, saying it will.
Speaker 2: Do me a favor. I have no idea if you're
Speaker 2: talking into your cell phone, but I'm having trouble hearing you,
Speaker 2: and I suspect Harvey might be having trouble in my audience.
Speaker 2: So I want Rob to walk you through this and
Speaker 2: get a better audio connection. Rob, just just get him
Speaker 2: cleaned up for us a little bit. Let me go
Speaker 2: to Sandra in Boston in the meantime.
Speaker 8: Go ahead, Sandra, Hi, Dan, thank you very much for
Speaker 8: this topic, and I am.
Speaker 7: Glad that we can discuss it.
Speaker 8: And I too share your concerns about the Turkish students
Speaker 8: from TOTS. This is such a complex issue. I think
Speaker 8: a lot of these protests that are taking place on
Speaker 8: our university campuses are not fully being operated by students
Speaker 8: who are registered there. I think there are a lot
Speaker 8: of outside vectors, you know, maybe some George source money
Speaker 8: and other things.
Speaker 2: I think one of the.
Speaker 8: And some of what I think Trumps group may be
Speaker 8: doing may be provocative to try to get some discussion
Speaker 8: on the subject. I'm hoping that's kind of where what
Speaker 8: it's about, okay. And part of that may be because
Speaker 8: people like Peter Navarro went to prison. I mean, Peter
Speaker 8: Navarro is a graduate of TOUGH and has a PhD
Speaker 8: from Harvard. So I think this is a very complex issue,
Speaker 8: and we look at the power structure in a place
Speaker 8: like Boston. We have people paying property tax who have
Speaker 8: virtually no power in electing their representatives. Anymore because the
Speaker 8: university platforms are so powerful. I mean, look at we
Speaker 8: have a senator from Oklahoma who was affiliated with Harvard.
Speaker 3: We have a.
Speaker 8: Harvard grad in the governor's seat. We have a law
Speaker 8: student who came from Chicago, you know, via Harvard and
Speaker 8: is the mayor, and my city councilor is affiliated with Harvard.
Speaker 8: I mean, this is a very powerful platform that they
Speaker 8: have to operate from. And if there's money coming from outside,
Speaker 8: and if they're you know, perhaps some people who want
Speaker 8: a certain agenda presented, it's complex.
Speaker 2: It's very it's very complex, and you've you've identified it
Speaker 2: very well in my in my opinion, Sandra, where does
Speaker 2: it take you at the end of the day on
Speaker 2: the demands which what we're talking about, and the threats
Speaker 2: by President Trumpell by the administration to take away Harvard's
Speaker 2: tax exempt status.
Speaker 8: Well, you know how he does these things with tariffs.
Speaker 8: You know, he kind of gets everybody edgy. It seems
Speaker 8: to be he has this provocative style and then he
Speaker 8: kind of reins it back in. I mean, the fact
Speaker 8: is that Harvard has fifty three billion dollar endowment and
Speaker 8: they can operate like a that's a that's the GDP
Speaker 8: of a small country.
Speaker 2: Right, right. But you heard the question, and I asked,
Speaker 2: I asked that that. I asked that question of professor Pinker,
Speaker 2: who who is no fan of what has been going
Speaker 2: on at Harvard for the last few years. Nor is
Speaker 2: Harvey Silverglade a fan of what is going on at Harvard,
Speaker 2: and he would identify with a lot of what you
Speaker 2: just said. But they both responded, and Harvey can can
Speaker 2: repeat his response if he wants that the fifty three
Speaker 2: billion dollar endowment should be irrelevant to whether or not
Speaker 2: it continues to receive a tax exemp status. It's one thing,
Speaker 2: I guess to take money away from Harvard in terms
Speaker 2: of holding back grants, et cetera. But then the next
Speaker 2: step is to withdraw the tax exempt status, which means
Speaker 2: Harvard then would have to pay tax rates. Harvey, do
Speaker 2: you want to restate your position for Sandra in case
Speaker 2: she missed it on that issue?
Speaker 3: My position is it right or wrong? Harvard state Harvard
Speaker 3: has done the right thing. It's got nothing to do
Speaker 3: with whether Trump is right or Harvard is right. It's
Speaker 3: got to do with academic freedom and Harvard. Harvard will
Speaker 3: be digging into its endowment it's taken a large loan,
Speaker 3: and that's to get through this and to keep its
Speaker 3: integrity and protect its academic freedom.
Speaker 8: At As a taxpayer, I've been paying taxes on a
Speaker 8: property for forty years in the city of Boston, and
Speaker 8: I am fully aware that over fifty percent of the
Speaker 8: land in Boston is nonprofit and that my property taxes
Speaker 8: have to have to make up that. And right now
Speaker 8: I'm on the waiting list for a doctor. You know,
Speaker 8: a primary care doctor that.
Speaker 2: Brings out last hour, that brings our last hour into
Speaker 2: the conversation. I hope you listened to our last because
Speaker 2: that's exactly what we were talking about. Harvey. Let me
Speaker 2: give you final word with Sandra, and then I want
Speaker 2: to go back and try to get Phil back in
Speaker 2: the air hold on Sandra, Go ahead, Harvey.
Speaker 3: You can debate all you want whether or not universities
Speaker 3: should have tax exemption. That is not the issue. The
Speaker 3: issue is whether the tax exemption should be taken away
Speaker 3: for a position that the university has taken. It's as
Speaker 3: simple as that. To me, this is a very simple issue.
Speaker 2: All right, Fair enough, Sandra, thank you for your call
Speaker 2: in your comments. I really do appreciate it. And I
Speaker 2: hope you continue to call the show.
Speaker 8: Okay, thank you, thank you much.
Speaker 2: Let me go back Rob. Hopefully we got Phil lines
Speaker 2: lying a little bit better. Phil, I hope we can
Speaker 2: hear you a little bit more clearly.
Speaker 5: Go ahead, Hey damn it's Phil.
Speaker 2: Yep, Go ahead, Phil. I hope that that Rob has
Speaker 2: approved your audio connection.
Speaker 5: Go right ahead. Their name is Bill. But anyway, I
Speaker 5: see Lawrence on Donald on TV and he's one of
Speaker 5: the best. On MSNBC. You don't see anybody like this
Speaker 5: on Fox number two. Uh uh missus uh uh. Senator
Speaker 5: was arguing with the dead president of doing away with
Speaker 5: the him uh, the the guy in charge of money
Speaker 5: for the fit of Reserve. How what foolish that would be.
Speaker 5: But that's the kind of comments you get from Harvard people.
Speaker 3: The chat.
Speaker 5: They're great and I really enjoy it. And the the
Speaker 5: other thing is that you know, uh, these other schools
Speaker 5: like University of Texas, Alabama, Mississippi judge, what did they
Speaker 5: do with their money? They got football teams and basketball teams,
Speaker 5: that's all they want. Look at the basketball teams they
Speaker 5: play they have, they're all black.
Speaker 3: They don't have U.
Speaker 5: I won't go into it, but it's it's it's it's
Speaker 5: it's discussing what they do with their money.
Speaker 2: But well, athletics is a big is a big part
Speaker 2: of the part of the university's bill. I think we're
Speaker 2: venturing off into a different area here. A lot of
Speaker 2: those schools get a great more support from their donors
Speaker 2: because of they got a football team. And down in
Speaker 2: Alabama football is bigger than the Red Sox and the Patriots,
Speaker 2: the Bruins and the Celtics combined, probably.
Speaker 5: Because football is about if the money that have, it's
Speaker 5: got habit's got money. They smack people gives to it.
Speaker 5: They have reasons for giving them money. How did have
Speaker 5: a hell of a football team, hockey, basketball, but they
Speaker 5: decide to give them money to good cars? Is now
Speaker 5: nothing done with that.
Speaker 2: They do have. They do have a good hockey team
Speaker 2: and their football team is pretty good as well. Bill,
Speaker 2: like I got a run.
Speaker 1: Part this year, I have no clue.
Speaker 2: I have no clue. I have no clue. I don't
Speaker 2: I know it was either BCBU, Harvard or Northeastern that
Speaker 2: I can tell you. One of those four teams won it.
Speaker 2: Thanks Bill, have a great night, Harvey Silverglade. As always,
Speaker 2: thank you, so much. I always appreciate your, uh, your participation,
Speaker 2: and I'm glad that I could get both you and
Speaker 2: Steve pinker On together because you're a couple of good guys.
Speaker 2: Thank you so much. Did we lose Harvey?
Speaker 5: Yeah?
Speaker 2: I think we I think we lost Harvey. No, okay, Harvey.
Speaker 2: I had to say. We're heading to the eleven o'clock news.
Speaker 2: We want to say thanks for joining us.
Speaker 3: It's my pleasure, my duty.
Speaker 2: Actually, all right, Paal, we'll talk soon, okay, thanks very much.
Speaker 2: All right, all right, just phone calls you and me
Speaker 2: between now and midnight. Join the conversation, your thoughts six one, seven, two, five,
Speaker 2: four ten thirty six one seven, nine three one ten thirty.
Speaker 2: I got some open lines. Let's fill them up.