Carol Platt Liebau: Summers Should Stay

Tuesday, February 21, 2006

Summers Should Stay

Update: If this is true, it's a real loss for Harvard.

Once again, apparently some at Harvard are pressing for the dismissal of President Larry Summers.

Why? Nominally because he's too "blunt," apparently, and the eggshell egos can't deal with opinions with which they disagree -- especially if those opinions aren't couched in honeyed words.

Larry Summers is a smart man who is preventing Harvard from blowing away into some far-left solar system. Harvard needs him. And, as Professor Harvey Mansfield points out in the linked piece, if he is dismissed, it will be tantamount to allowing a small radical leftist faction to have de facto control of the university.


Blogger HouseOfSin said...

An absolute, horrible shame. What a waste of a good president.

Anyone here remember Scrabble? I won't go into the rules, but: If I put down a word that you think I made up/doesn't exist, you can challenge me. If you are right, I lose a turn. BUT: If you are wrong, you lose a turn.

We all talk about the "moonbats" on the left of Sheehan and Dean and Moore and what-not. But these are mere amateurs. The real pros at stifling dissent and promoting leftist inanity as fact are university faculty.

They are tenured for life - as close to a socialist welfare state as we get in this nation - and from their cushy offices, they can take potshots at anyone they want, for no reason other than they don't like the guy.

All accountability is on the president. Zero is on the faculty who can take shots.

I propose a Scrabble-like reform.

The governing board at Harvard Corporation should ask for a finding of alleged wrongdoings by the president (Summers or anyone else). If the findings hold up, the president is out.

If the board finds no wrongdoings, then *all* faculty who have expressed no-confidence must then agree to be un-tenured for 10 years. (They can still be retained - or they can be terminated.)

Faculty who do not agree to this condition cannot express any binding no confidence (i.e. they can express it, but it doesn't mean anything for purposes of the governing board).

If a president is that horrible, awful, outrageous, and evidence exists to back it up, then faculty should have no worries in "pushing" Harvard Corp to oust the president.

The era of free potshots should be O-V-E-R. Scrabble-style.

Never before have I been so ashamed of Harvard.

11:12 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home