December 10, 2023

Hello gopherland,

I hope this finds you well! Winter is here and my golly it's cold! It's a 
very new adjustment along with the darkness but it isn't as bad as I 
thought. The true test will be in the new year.

There are exciting progressions at work, although it seems likely that I 
will be going back to school next academic year so my time is cut short. 
No compaints from me, I am definitely ready to go back for another degree!

On the topic of education, the recent US congressional hearing with the 
university presidents has been a fascinating progression of events. 
Sincerely, what a wreck! When it came to the actual hearing, I don't 
believe the presidents said a single incorrect thing. For universities 
with strong committment to free speech, it 100% depends on the context 
where it crosses the line past free speech and expression. The fact that 
terms like "infitada" are claimed to have different meanings on each side 
only exacerbates the complication from an administrative standpoint.

The thing is, the three universities present at the hearing have not 
demonstrated a strong committment to free speech. All three have a 
documented past of censoring specific content in the name of student 
sensitivity. This creates the situation of protecting some 
groups but not others, here being Jewish students and 
faculty. For me, this is the problem I have with these 
universities and their leaderships. They have stifled speech on 
their campuses and pull out the free expression card when it 
benefits them. This is not beneficial to anyone and injures 
education - all coming from Ivy Leagues nontheless. 

Please do not misconstrue this as me advocating for universities to 
fully take hands-off approaches. It's important to note that like 
the individual students in attendance, the university itself has 
its own right to free speech. This should be used to advocate and 
advance the institution's vision and values alongside using their 
internal resources. Those who disagree with my point of view likely 
think this is not enough or is going in the wrong direction. While 
I am not going into that much detail here, I welcome any 
communication through my email on my gopher page. I just believe 
that universities need to reestablish their committments to free 
speech, need to do so consistently, and need to protect the rights 
of expression on campuses to the fullest extent. This transition 
will not be easy but will be for the benefit of all.  

Continuing the topic, Harvard sits last in the Foundation for 
Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE)'s 2024 College Free Speech
Rankings. Generally, private institutions rank lower on FIRE's 
rankings because they are able to be more restrictive on speech 
even though they receive federal funds. This brings up the 
question, should some students have less rights in their education 
than others solely based upon their institution? Obviously there 
are circumstances, like religious universities, where this would 
not be the case. I think it is an important question we should be 
asking after seeing this hearing.

I believe that universities should serve the public good and be 
bastions of free expression and ideas. This hearing will either 
have universities double down on accommodating student 
sensitivities or reverse course and recommit to the free expression 
and trade of ideas. I surely hope they choose the latter.

I apologize for such a political post, it is just in an area I am 
passionate about and has been on my mind.

Best,
yeehaw