The author argues that decades of openly left‑leaning hiring, DEI bureaucracy, and activist teaching alienated half the country and stripped universities of legitimacy. In that climate, a Republican administration can gut DEI, cut indirect grant costs, and freeze new awards with little public sympathy. The point is not just policy disagreement but a predictable backlash to one‑sided institutional politics.
— It reframes current federal actions against universities as a consequence of institutional politicization, not merely a one‑sided assault, influencing how stakeholders respond and reform.
Arnold Kling
2026.01.06
64% relevant
By noting the tiny, concentrated set of conservatives (GMU, Claremont, Hillsdale) and Field’s left‑of‑center framing, Kling illustrates how perceived academic homogeneity produces mutual suspicion and political backlash—the dynamic discussed in the existing idea about how campus partisanship changes public trust and invites counter‑measures.
2026.01.05
57% relevant
The piece frames Trump’s administration as an external actor that intensified internal splits and argues some reformers now endorse 'severe consequences' for bad actors inside universities—this resonates with the existing idea that politicization of campuses invites government intervention and retaliatory tactics.
2025.10.07
100% relevant
Cites Trump‑era moves to 'extirpate DEI,' slash indirect costs, and pause most new grants, alongside a partisan Rutgers AAUP email as emblematic.
← Back to All Ideas