In part 1 of this series, we had a look at the Trump family’s academic achievements, and in part 2, we discussed the concerted measures Trump is currently taking against US academia. In the last part of the series, I ask:
Why does he do it?
It would be easy but simplistic, I think, to claim his actions are just petty revenge. Trump’s war on academia rather seems to stem from a mix of ideological, political, and personal motivations:
- Trump and his supporters often view universities as strongholds of liberal or “woke” ideologies, promoting ideas like diversity, equity, and inclusion, critical race theory, or gender studies. They argue that such concepts foster an anti-conservative indoctrination.
- Trump’s actions tap into a general distrust of intellectuals, experts and elites. This populist anti-intellectualism is powerful in American life. Trumps attacks on universities, especially the Ivy League, portray them as out-of-touch, hostile to conservative principles and detached from the real world of the average US citizen.
- Trump promotes the misunderstanding that the campus protests over the Israel-Hamas conflict constitute evidence of antisemitism. In reality, these moves are less about antisemitism and more a protest against war crimes.
- Having himself graduated from the University of Pennsylvania, Trump seems to have both reverence and resentment towards the US top universities. On the one hand, he highlights the prestige of Ivy League credentials (e.g., praising Dr. Mehmet Oz’s Harvard degree). On the other hand, he attacks these institutions as symbols of an elite that never accepted and continue to ridicule him. This personal dynamic fuels his targeting of institutions like Harvard, Yale, and Columbia.
- Trump aims at revoking visas for international students, particularly those involved in protests, and at declaring DEI programs as discriminatory. This, I think, highlights his wish to fascilitate the alignment of universities with his own fascistoid ideology.
- By framing colleges as centers of “communist” or “terrorist” indoctrination, Trump wants to appeal to his often uneducated voters who are dismissive of academia.
Trump’s actions can best be understood as being part of a broader authoritarian strategy to control intellectual discourse and suppress dissent, echoing historical efforts by figures like Hitler, Mussolini or Orbán to align universities with his own ideology. His focus on issues like “woke” or anti-semitism are merely a distraction from his ambition of ‘Gleichschaltung‘. His war on academia combines ideological opposition, populist appeal, petty personal grievances, and the perceived need to control institutions, free speech and academic freedom.
One key question in all this must be: what might be the consequences of Trump’s behavior? I am afraid they are not nice:
- Cutting funds will slow down innovation, delay breakthroughs, and weaken industries dependent on academic research, like tech or medicine. This is bound to have long-term economic ripple effects.
- Trump’s restrictions on international students, faculty, and specific academic programs will lead to a brain drain similar to the McCarthy-era purges. In turn, the US will lose global competitiveness.
- Trump’s ‘Gleichschaltung’ of academia must stifle free inquiry. This will weaken the US’s role as a hub for open intellectual exchange and impact on everything from policy debates to cultural influence.
- Funding freezes and visa restrictions will strain university budgets. If they persist, this could lead to closures or reduced access for underrepresented students, exacerbating inequality.
- Targeting specific disciplines will deepen cultural divides. Painting universities as “the enemy” will further erode public trust in academia. This might reduce enrollment and thus exacerbate existing funding difficulties.
- Making studying in the US less attractive will further shift talent to other countries. In turn, this will diminish America’s worldwide cultural and intellectual influence.
I sincerely hope, therefore, that Trump soon comes to his senses. His war on academia is certain to cause a lot of harm. And it is a war that he cannot win. Academia will be thriving long after the nightmare of Trump, his family and his sycophants is over. Academia and everything that is connected to it might suffer for a while, but it will always recover – and when it does, US universities will teach the history of Trump for what it was: an autocratic takeover of academia and democracy.
13 Responses to Trump’s bewildering relationship with academia (PART 3)
Leave a Reply
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
There’s probably no actual connection but I can’t help noticing that the reverence and resentment relationship towards academia parallels that which many SCAM proponents have towards science – bashing it as not knowing everything/getting it wrong/expert focused whilst simultaneously wanting the imprimatur that science conveys by claiming their approach is scientific/proven by scientific studies etc.
I think the connection is the demonstrations of resentment.
QUOTE Contempt, Wikipedia [my reformatting for clarity]
Robert C. Solomon places contempt on the same emotional continuum as resentment and anger, and he argues that the differences between the three are that
1. resentment is anger directed towards a higher-status individual;
2. anger is directed towards an equal-status individual;
3. contempt is anger directed towards a lower-status individual.
END OF QUOTE
Especially if we substitute “expertise” for “status” in the above. Some of the commentators on this blog frequently display resentment towards those having considerably greater expertise in the subject being discussed.
Anti war protests should focus on both governments of the conflict and not only Israel.
Anti war protests should not generalize statements against Zionism as a whole or against all Israelis or all IDF soldiers and should focus on the governments that make the decisions.
The same way as the Israeli side should not generalize blame on all Palestinians or Gazans and focus on Hamas.
Anti war protests should not include Hamas and Hizballah flags, should not chant “from the river to the sea”, should not call for Intifada as the only solution(this is very pro-war).
Anti war protests should not justify the 7th oct attack and should not glorify “martyrs” from known terrorist organizations.
If its focused on war crimes, how about the war crimes of Hamas? why is it not even mentioned in the same breath in those protests? how about Hamas punishing Gazans for protesting against them? how about Hamas stealing the humanitarian aid and selling it to maintain their power? Not letting the red cross to visit hostages, abusing and starving them? Operating out of schools and hospitals? etc.
The Israeli government is definitely not innocent and has a lot to be blamed for, but the other side of the conflict is much worse regarding war crimes.
So no, those protests are not largely against war crimes as they target Israelis and Zionists(without understanding the term) in general and do not focus on the Israeli government, which many Israelis are protesting against them themselves and the majority(also among IDF soldiers) are in favor of ending the war to free the hostages as the hostages are the people’s priority. The Israeli government has other priorities, mainly remaining in power, Hamas’s priority is similar and they are willing to sacrifice as many civilians as possible to win the world’s public opinion.
How are those one sided protests with such generalizations not antisemitic?
You laid out some superb rules for anti-war protests. Too bad your are posting your ideas on a blog dedicated to SCAM. Otherwise you ideas would be very popular and every anti-Israel protester would be itching to follow them.
Yes, anti-Israel protesters should protest both sides, doing so will avoid getting them labeled as antisemitic. All in all, I LOVE the idea, but I wonder how that works. Should protesters divide in two groups and one side protests Israel and the other side Hamas? Do they shout at each other? Or shout at someone or something else? I suggest both groups switch sides next day, otherwise they’d get bored of shouting the same thing.
I’m not trying to teach anyone how to protest, just making the point that those protests are indeed full of antisemitism and hate generalizing against anyone that support Israel as a state(not the government or the war), calling for more violence, intifada revolution means terror attacks directed at Israeli civilians as it was in the first and second intifadas, from the river to the sea means ethnic cleansing or genocide of Israelis living there.
Attacking students with yamakas, a lot of Jewish students in those campuses feel unsafe and experience antisemitism on campuses.
Justifying terrorist organizations and martyrs related to them, including the Houthis that commit far worse war crimes in Yemen and their flag literally says death to America, death to Israel, curse on the Jews, you don’t see any large protest against the Houthis though.
This is all antisemitic and pro war crimes, cherry picking on Israel’s wrongdoings and ignoring or justifying the rest.
If I were to decide the protest strategy, it would be simple, Hamas Sign!, Bibi Sign!, Trump make them Sign! Qatar make them Sign! no hate, no any support to any side, maybe add Hamas Out! because it is also in favor of Gazans as they get silenced when trying to protest against Hamas.
But the hate towards Israel is too strong so this kind of protest will never be that popular.
Perhaps a democratically elected government should not try to outdo a terrorist organization. No one likes terrorism, regardless of who perpetrates it. It is even worse when a democratic nation does it, the people and the govt they voted for won’t be winning any popularity contests any time soon.
@Aviv
Trump’s war on academia has nothing to do with war protests (or with DEI policies, for that matter).
Universities and other academic entities are places where smart people learn to think independently. Trump, being a deeply stupid person as well as a malignant narcissist, hates smart people, and he hates independent thinking. In his world, everyone should do and even think whatever he tells them to do and think, period.
This is also why he goes after law firms that have worked for his political opponents: the mere fact that a law firm once represented a party that opposed him in any way is, to Trump, reason enough to demand that this firm now not only pledge unconditional allegiance to him, but even pay him a kind of feudal duty to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars.
Any organization that doesn’t fully surrender to his authority is, in Trump’s sick mind, a legitimate target for retribution and annihilation. QED.
yes, in other words: GLEICHSCHALTUNG!
@Edzard
Yup, and the message can’t be repeated often enough: an extremely stupid man, a pathological liar, a malignant narcissist, an irredeemable sociopath wants to force the world to do his bidding, and to cater to his every whim. No dissent is tolerated.
I find it incomprehensible that there are literally millions of Americans that fail to see the danger that this poses.
hear, hear!
I agree with that and most of the post except this:
“Trump promotes the misunderstanding that the campus protests over the Israel-Hamas conflict constitute evidence of antisemitism. In reality, these moves are less about antisemitism and more a protest against war crimes.”
I don’t see any misunderstanding, antisemitism and hate are very common in those protests and they are against any supporter of the existence of Israel and not focused on alleged war crimes.
Maybe we just live in different realities.
More here: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-01668-x?utm_source=Live+Audience&utm_campaign=5498f5dfeb-nature-briefing-daily-20250529&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_b27a691814-5498f5dfeb-52397892
Dr. Ernst: “I sincerely hope, therefore, that Trump soon comes to his senses.”
Yes, that will happen simultaneously with the leopard changing his spots!